Mets & Angels GMs canned

[Dan Wood]

I too would like to voice my opinion, and this really has nothing to do with anything but maybe a few nuggets of truth will slip out. The reason why Colby and I wanted to do this was to make two teams attractive to perspective owners. I wanted to do it, because I wanted to take over the Mets, but not in their current state. Some of you may feel that the talent distribution was lopsided if what was proposed went through. Even I argued that it would be difficult to get a talent match to accomplish what Colby and I had hoped, and keep the rest of the league happy. I backed out because really  it wasn't going to happen. Too many concessions were going to have to be made by myself and everyone in the league. Despite some of the arguments, I was leaving a lot of talent behind in Cincy, to head to Queens, even with the guys I wanted to take.

That being said, I think we can now see the importance of the TC, and that it isn't always collusion that should be considered when a deal is vetoed. The Mets have had 1 good GM out of 3 since I have been a part of this league. Many took advantage of a single poor GM (I won't name names, but it has something to do with a dude that was lazy), and that correlates to the current state of the team, and the better state of several other teams. I think sometimes the GM needs to be protected from themselves. Even the most recent GM, in his limited time, traded his best, closest to the majors prospect for a 30 something OF with an 18 million dollar salary.

In my opinion I think we need more explanation for some trades, I think we need to be more strict when evaluating trades, and I think we need an NL President and an AL President, to act as a police force in a way. The reason for that is because, we all know that the main people who watch this site in an authoritative manner are myself, Jake, Corey, and Colby... and all of us are busy with other things outside of this league.

If you look at Colby's or Jake's power rankings you have about 18 teams that are well constructed and several that are going to need creative GMs, because of the poor job the person before them did. I have also brought this up before, but several teams have/ had distinct advantages by being active when no one else was. What I am getting at is, if we want this league to succeed we are all going to need to be more involved, or it is going to be the same top teams year after year after year, and the same bottom dwellers cycling through owners over and over. It will then become a 15 team league and not a 30 team league. This is a difficult league, and it asks for a lot more knowledge from it's owner than your standard fare. And I think we need to make that clear to anyone that enters the league from this moment forward, or to anyone that some may think are half butting it currently.

Again, just my two cents, I could be completely wrong, my wife tells me this all the time, but what does she know? She married me.

[bravesfan4]

I agree with you Dan on many levels. More explanation on trades is needed and maybe a little stricter voting is a good idea. In my opinion the Mets arent in that bad of shape....Very good youth. the Pads and Angels are just rediculous awful. With that said those two teams have good gms who can turn it around. A good Mets GM and were gona be in business.

[Needle Juice]

As long as the league lays down the rules for the TC, it will get voted on that way.  There is always the option of each GM having to vote on a trade and a certain % to pass.

I do not believe that the Mets are very bad shape at all.  Two bad contracts and one I believe that Wells was acquired to get rid of Santana or Sabathia, not so great contracts, Lackey is not very good at all.  A little imagination and this team can set itself up for success, trade Carp to a contender, get several pieces.  Trade Harper for a big major league piece or keep him for the future.  Package a few specs for some key pieces.  Beltran, Castillo, and a few others come off the books this year.  Maybe Beltran could even have some value. 

Now the Angels, Dave has his work cut out for him.  Old team, no cap room and just not good contracts to trade.  No Farm.   

[Colby]

Lesson learned?  Perhaps we put some new guidelines for the TC to make sure a trade correlates with he direction of a franchise and its needs?

[Dan Wood]

Lesson learned?  Perhaps we put some new guidelines for the TC to make sure a trade correlates with he direction of a franchise and its needs?

 :iatp:

[h4cheng]

I am always leary of giving TC too much power. I think a better solution would be to make sure all new owners are knowledgable (this can be demonstrated by history in other ProFSL leagues, or a member of FGM actually knowing the person and his track record) and not just some random person off an ESPN message board.

Even if TC protects an owner from make stupid trades, a GM can still destroy a team quickly by signing bad players to long term contracts and not picking any good players in season (Baltimore anymore?)

[rcankosy]

I volunteer to be the AL President if Colby and/or the league decides that the position would be of benefit.  One thing I would propose in such a role is that all team have the ability to field a nearly full team roster.  That doesn't mean that you have to fill every possible pitching spot, but I wouldn't expect to see a team like the Mets where they have only 4-5 pitchers.  I understand that teams want to have cap flexibility in the future, but shit-canning the present for the hope of a brighter future would not be allowed.  I would expect all teams to at least make a good-hearted attempt to plug some holes in the present through free agency if trades did not materialize.  The Mets are sitting on 47M that could easily have been utilized this past off-season by signing some bargain free agents without jeopardizing their cap space in the future.

I could also weigh in on trades if the league wants to give the league Presidents a voice in such matters.

This is all up to you guys, but I wanted to throw it out there, because I really like this league and want it to thrive in the long-term.

Roy

[h4cheng]

I am thinking as I am typing, and this idea could totally not make sense, but what I act as the interim manager of the Mets? There could be an oversight committee to make sure I am acting in the best interest of the Mets (obviously I am not trading with myself) and I will disclose the rationale behind all Mets transactions. If I win this year with COL, I will relinquish COL and become a full time Mets Gm.

I am pretty qualified at working with bad teams - I took over the Pirates in a 16 team NL league 9 years ago, going for championship #4 this year.

[Needle Juice]

I volunteer to be the AL President if Colby and/or the league decides that the position would be of benefit.  One thing I would propose in such a role is that all team have the ability to field a nearly full team roster.  That doesn't mean that you have to fill every possible pitching spot, but I wouldn't expect to see a team like the Mets where they have only 4-5 pitchers.  I understand that teams want to have cap flexibility in the future, but crap-canning the present for the hope of a brighter future would not be allowed.  I would expect all teams to at least make a good-hearted attempt to plug some holes in the present through free agency if trades did not materialize.  The Mets are sitting on 47M that could easily have been utilized this past off-season by signing some bargain free agents without jeopardizing their cap space in the future.

I could also weigh in on trades if the league wants to give the league Presidents a voice in such matters.

This is all up to you guys, but I wanted to throw it out there, because I really like this league and want it to thrive in the long-term.

Roy

I do not like taking the power to control away from a GM.  The concept above is already being covered as well.  Since the GM of the Mets did not do anything over the offseason and had plenty of $ to fill holes, HE WAS FIRED.  We don't need more oversight than that. 

If more oversight is given and we start allowing and not allowing certain things, then GMs won't stay.  DME is a great example of this type of league.  There are new GMs every day it seems and most of the core managers on this site are not in that league.  Now there is very little action at all in that league, that is not the only issue, but it is a contributing issue. 

Once that occurs, FGM loses it's foundation, what it is built on., the Reason that it is the league that we all stay in and identify as the best league on the site. 

Please be careful with messing with something that is working.  We are addressing the rare case, maybe 3 or 4 franchises are in this situation, don't ruin a league over the minority.  If we get good GMs for the spots, it will resolve itself.   

[Needle Juice]

I am thinking as I am typing, and this idea could totally not make sense, but what I act as the interim manager of the Mets? There could be an oversight committee to make sure I am acting in the best interest of the Mets (obviously I am not trading with myself) and I will disclose the rationale behind all Mets transactions. If I win this year with COL, I will relinquish COL and become a full time Mets Gm.

I am pretty qualified at working with bad teams - I took over the Pirates in a 16 team NL league 9 years ago, going for championship #4 this year.

Can't have a GM for two teams, this is not functional and has as many problems with it as Dan taking his players to the Mets.  The solution is to find a good GM, the Mets are not in that bad of shape.