Top 5/Bottom 5: Current MLB General Managers

[Warner2BruceTD]

and what are their payrolls? (thanks woy)

Why does it matter? Some high (Cashman, Sabean) some mid level (Jocketty). None of them named, nobody complaining about it, all far more accomplished than Antonetti.

I have no strong opinion on Antonetti either way. Can he do a good job for longer than ten minutes before we crown him?

 

[Maynard]

Why does it matter? Some high (Cashman, Sabean) some mid level (Jocketty). None of them named, nobody complaining about it, all far more accomplished than Antonetti.

I have no strong opinion on Antonetti either way. Can he do a good job for longer than ten minutes before we crown him?

no need to be defensive. just talking baseball here. im not saying you are wrong or i am right. fundamentally we agree, but my point was simply that when dealing with a bottom payroll that you should get more credit than a gm dealing with a huge payroll. wouldnt you agree its easier to buy talented players then it is to find low priced talented players? teams like NY, Boston, Philly and LA should lose points for having such high salaries.

plus, doesnt a GM get credit for having a top farm system? you guys seem to be looking at it through a narrow glass in terms of MLB, titles and so on.

 

[spursup]

no need to be defensive. just talking baseball here. im not saying you are wrong or i am right. fundamentally we agree, but my point was simply that when dealing with a bottom payroll that you should get more credit than a gm dealing with a huge payroll. wouldnt you agree its easier to buy talented players then it is to find low priced talented players? teams like NY, Boston, Philly and LA should lose points for having such high salaries.

plus, doesnt a GM get credit for having a top farm system? you guys seem to be looking at it through a narrow glass in terms of MLB, titles and so on.

Your farm system means absolutely nothing until they accomplish something for you at the major league level. In which case...they wouldn't be in the farm system anymore. So no, having a deep farm system means nothing for GM accomplishments.

Didn't Boston just win the World Series? Didn't LA make the playoffs? Both of those teams are far more accomplished than the Indians. In my opinion, if you need to pay to win games and you pay and win games, you have done better than someone who has a low payroll and misses the playoffs for the better part of a decade.

 

[MVPete]

no need to be defensive. just talking baseball here. im not saying you are wrong or i am right. fundamentally we agree, but my point was simply that when dealing with a bottom payroll that you should get more credit than a gm dealing with a huge payroll. wouldnt you agree its easier to buy talented players then it is to find low priced talented players? teams like NY, Boston, Philly and LA should lose points for having such high salaries.

plus, doesnt a GM get credit for having a top farm system? you guys seem to be looking at it through a narrow glass in terms of MLB, titles and so on.

The top 5 listed in the OP are small to medium markets.

 

[MVPete]

Your farm system means absolutely nothing until they accomplish something for you at the major league level. In which case...they wouldn't be in the farm system anymore. So no, having a deep farm system means nothing for GM accomplishments.

Didn't Boston just win the World Series? Didn't LA make the playoffs? Both of those teams are far more accomplished than the Indians. In my opinion, if you need to pay to win games and you pay and win games, you have done better than someone who has a low payroll and misses the playoffs for the better part of a decade.

You still want a strong farm system even if your team has very few holes or your team can print money. The best way to acquire the talent you want that won't cost you a ton on the open market requires prospects. Otherwise you're going to get stuck trying to offer the most money and a ton of years for guys that are 29/30/31 on the open market.

 

[spursup]

You still want a strong farm system even if your team has very few holes or your team can print money. The best way to acquire the talent you want that won't cost you a ton on the open market requires prospects. Otherwise you're going to get stuck trying to offer the most money and a ton of years for guys that are 29/30/31 on the open market.

I'm not saying its a bad thing to have a good farm system. What I'm saying is that having a good farm system while missing the playoffs doesn't make you a good GM just because your payroll is low.

 

[RyanLeaf16]

Close the thread! It's Andrew Fucking Friedman and the field.

 

[MVPete]

I'm not saying its a bad thing to have a good farm system. What I'm saying is that having a good farm system while missing the playoffs doesn't make you a good GM just because your payroll is low.

 

[moneyman255]

How is Doug Melvin in the bottom 5? I think he's in the middle of the road, def. should not be in the bottom 5.

He took the Brewers from one of the worst teams in baseball to at least pretty decent. He traded for CC in 2008 which was a steal and CC led the Brewers to a postseason birth. He traded for Greinke in 2011 and gave up pretty much no one. Greinke led the Brewers to the NLCS. He signed numerous players to very team-friendly extensions (Lucroy, Gomez, Braun) He had a couple poor FA signings (Jeff Suppan, Randy Wolf) but also signed Matt Garza to a pretty decent deal this past off-season.

How is he in the bottom 5?

 

[SethMode]

How is Doug Melvin in the bottom 5? I think he's in the middle of the road, def. should not be in the bottom 5.

He took the Brewers from one of the worst teams in baseball to at least pretty decent. He traded for CC in 2008 which was a steal and CC led the Brewers to a postseason birth. He traded for Greinke in 2011 and gave up pretty much no one. Greinke led the Brewers to the NLCS. He signed numerous players to very team-friendly extensions (Lucroy, Gomez, Braun) He had a couple poor FA signings (Jeff Suppan, Randy Wolf) but also signed Matt Garza to a pretty decent deal this past off-season.

How is he in the bottom 5?

 

[EmpireWF]

How is Doug Melvin in the bottom 5? I think he's in the middle of the road, def. should not be in the bottom 5.

He took the Brewers from one of the worst teams in baseball to at least pretty decent. He traded for CC in 2008 which was a steal and CC led the Brewers to a postseason birth. He traded for Greinke in 2011 and gave up pretty much no one. Greinke led the Brewers to the NLCS. He signed numerous players to very team-friendly extensions (Lucroy, Gomez, Braun) He had a couple poor FA signings (Jeff Suppan, Randy Wolf) but also signed Matt Garza to a pretty decent deal this past off-season.

How is he in the bottom 5?

Made playoffs twice in 11 seasons.

That's how.

 

[moneyman255]

Doug Melvin Era:

2013 Milwaukee Brewers National League 74 88 .457 23.0 4 2,531,115
2012 Milwaukee Brewers National League 83 79 .512 14.0 3 2,831,385
2011 Milwaukee Brewers National League 96 66 .593 - 1 3,071,373
2010 Milwaukee Brewers National League 77 85 .475 14.0 3 2,776,531
2009 Milwaukee Brewers National League 80 82 .494 11.0 3 3,037,451
2008 Milwaukee Brewers National League 90 72 .556 7.5 2 3,068,458
2007 Milwaukee Brewers National League 83 79 .512 2.0 2 2,869,144
2006 Milwaukee Brewers National League 75 87 .463 8.5 4 2,335,643
2005 Milwaukee Brewers National League 81 81 .500 19.0 3 2,211,023
2004 Milwaukee Brewers National League 67 94 .416 37.5 6 2,062,382
2003 Milwaukee Brewers National League 68 94 .420 20.0 6 1,700,354

Pre-Doug Melvin Era:

2002 Milwaukee Brewers National League 56 106 .346 41.0 6 1,969,153
2001 Milwaukee Brewers National League 68 94 .420 25.0 4 2,811,041
2000 Milwaukee Brewers National League 73 89 .451 22.0 3 1,573,601
1999 Milwaukee Brewers National League 74 87 .460 22.5 5 1,701,790
1998 Milwaukee Brewers National League 74 88 .457 28.0 5 1,811,548
1997 Milwaukee Brewers American League 78 83 .484 8.0 3 1,444,027
1996 Milwaukee Brewers American League 80 82 .494 19.5 3 1,327,155
1995 Milwaukee Brewers American League 65 79 .451 35.0 4 1,087,560
1994 Milwaukee Brewers American League 53 62 .461 15.0 5 1,268,399
1993 Milwaukee Brewers American League 69 93 .426 26.0 7 1,688,080

1993-2002: 0 winning seasons, 0 playoff appearances
2003-2013: 5 winning seasons, 2 playoff appearances

 

[MVPete]

 

[Pitty]

no need to be defensive. just talking baseball here. im not saying you are wrong or i am right. fundamentally we agree, but my point was simply that when dealing with a bottom payroll that you should get more credit than a gm dealing with a huge payroll. wouldnt you agree its easier to buy talented players then it is to find low priced talented players? teams like NY, Boston, Philly and LA should lose points for having such high salaries.

plus, doesnt a GM get credit for having a top farm system? you guys seem to be looking at it through a narrow glass in terms of MLB, titles and so on.

 

[ThomasTomasz]

under shapiro...Antonetti has been the GM for 2 years...one of which was a 92 win season. but you keep trying pete

Everyone on that list I did has proven themselves for multiple years, with the exception of Huntington. He gets on my list for the slow build he's had to work with through the draft and some very good pickups on the FA market like Liriano and Grilli for next to nothing.

I wanted to put Duquette on it instead, but I decided not to be a homer. Huntington is also working with about $30 million less in payroll, so he got the edge over Duquette.

 

[Glenbino]

Why does VSN constantly dismiss Dombrowski?

Dombrowski reading this thread every day before his morning workout for motivation.

Dude might be the best GM of anything... Ever.

Sent from my HTC6500LVW using Tapatalk