Organizational shakeup

Dave · October 6, 2004 at 6:36 pm · Filed Under Mariners 

As the Times noted today, the organizational shakeup that I mentioned was coming Sunday night is beginning to become public. The “retirement” of Roger Jongewaard and the resignation of Charley Kerfeld continue to bring about the evolution of the Mariners from the Gillick regime to Bavasi’s crew. As I mentioned, Gillick himself is likely the next to officially leave the organization.

We’ve gotten some questions as to what the effects of these resignations will be and what it all means. I’ll try to answer those questions here.

The probably-temporary-retirement of Jongewaard isn’t a big surprise. He took a reduced workload for ’04, moving into more of a consulting role under Bavasi, rather than the day-to-day administrative role he held when Gillick was in charge. Even under Gillick, however, he had less to do with the state of the current farm system than most are giving him credit for. The current prospects in the system were mostly the work of Benny Looper, Frank Mattox, and to a smaller degree, Bob Fontaine and Jim Colborn. Jongewaard has a long history with the club, but he’s also a loyal guy, and he saw the writing on the wall. Bit by bit, the front office that was in place from 2000-2003 is going to be replaced, and Roger figured this was as good a time to go as any.

Kerfeld was a Gillick hire and left of his own accord. While the Mariners success in the independant leagues with Madritsch and Sherrill have made him a mini-celebrity among M’s scouts, the M’s aren’t losing the only guy on the planet capable of scouting the indy leagues, and he’s gotten a bit too much credit for having Mads/Sherrill make the show. The Mariners didn’t outscout everyone to get Madritsch; they outbid them. Eight teams made significant offers after he dominated the Northern League, but the Mariners offered more money than any other team. A $50,000 signing bonus for a player out of the Indy leagues is unheard of, but the price they paid for Madritsch reflected the fact that he was not a hidden gem. Sherrill got a recommendation from Mads, and the organization signed Sherrill more as organizational filler than an actual prospect. Sherrill’s signing looks tremendous now, but no one mentions the hoard of indy league guys the M’s brought into the organization over the past several years. Kerfeld is a good scout, but let’s not ring our hands too much over his loss. It isn’t a crippling defection.

When Gillick offiically leaves (and right now, he’s a big time favorite to get the Washington job, especially if MLB retains control of the club), expect more people to follow him out the door. There are a good number of people loyal to him in the organization, and Bavasi wouldn’t mind filling the front office with his own guys. While we certainly have been vocal critics of Bavasi’s moves since taking over, removing the factions that have existed in the front office the past year are a good thing.


44 Responses to “Organizational shakeup”

  1. eponymous coward on October 6th, 2004 6:48 pm

    You mean like Frank “first round draft picks suck” Mattox?

  2. Dave on October 6th, 2004 6:53 pm

    I’ve hammered Mattox more than anyone else on earth, but to be fair, the desire to rid the team of first round picks came from Gillick. Mattox would preferred to have those picks in order to take more untalented brothers of star players.

  3. Jeff Sullivan on October 6th, 2004 6:59 pm

    It was a tag-team effort. Gillick did all he could to lose every first-round pick, and Mattox would be there to screw up whichever picks the team couldn’t get rid of.

  4. Bela Txadux on October 6th, 2004 7:44 pm

    I hope that you are right regardig Jongewaard’s leave as a temporary one, although he had been talking seriously about retirement for awhile and his present departure does seem the volutary move of a loyalist, yes. And, yes, I agree that clearing out the FO factions is an unmitigated positive: there have been way too many voices on decisions in the last several years. If the talent acquision of this year past was largely the work of Fontaine (certainly the Chicago trade was all him and little Bavasi), then we may see some upside out of it all. My primary concern with all this is that Bavasi has seemed to have a history of preferring ‘aggressive hitters’ and is insufficiently sensitive to the importance of getting on base, particularly in the pitcher’s have which is Safeco. I’ve wondered whether this prediliction influenced the major league’s approach at the plate this year past, and colors their thinking about how and who they are going to develop out of the system. Recall that Bavasi signed Aurilia and Spezio, and traded for Cabrerea, his only deal of any note, and all are just this type of no-walk hack-o-matics. Jeremey Reed comes over in a trade—and stops walking. Greg Dobbs comes up to AAA—and stops walking. Randy Winn always hacked away, but never moreso than this year. I will certainly be looking in the next year+ to see if the new talent development set move the Ms organizational approach away (futher away??) from getting on base.

  5. Dave on October 6th, 2004 7:58 pm

    Let me clarify; Jongewaard won’t be returning to the M’s. I expect him to join Gillick in Washington if (when?) he gets that job. I don’t expect his retirement to last, but Jongewaard’s leave from the M’s organization is indeed permanent.

  6. Bartleby on October 6th, 2004 8:03 pm

    we need go get some sort of group of child fans writing letters to Ichiro saying please ichiro, play centerfield

  7. jc on October 6th, 2004 8:08 pm

    They paid 50,000 not 500,000 for mads and kerfeld knew about him 1st because he had pitched for him the year before!!!I played on the winnepeg team and kerfeld was in the stands scouting a very FAT george sherrill nobody else wanted except kerfeld !!!So yes you are losing a guy with a wicked good eye for pitching.Indyball has never been scouted much i played 5 years of it and this guy was a hero to us players because of his gambler mentallity and his ability to get the mariners to take chances on guys for 2nd chances.AKA Williams tommy john ,JACOBS EX PITCHER,MADRITCH TATTOOS EVERYWHERE SHERRILL PEARBODY SO I CANT WAIT TO SEE HOW THEY DO THE NEXT 5 YEARS I WOULD BET YOU KNOW WHERE NEAR WHAT THEY DID THE 2 YEARS THEY HAD KERFELD!!!!Remember you never know how good you had it until its gone.INDY PLAYER THAT CARES

  8. big chef terry on October 6th, 2004 9:29 pm

    There’s a sort of smarmy insider connection tone to the note…that jc exposes as filled with bs…

    without Ichiro, this is probably the worst team in the AL and absolutely nothing in any of this activity…from Melvin to Aurelia, to Spezio, Jongeward, Kerfeld, the idiotic Guillen trade, the equally idiotic Garcia trade should lead anyone to conclude that better days are ahead…None of the players now in the drama have any track record of success. Rather than Bavasi taking charge he looks like a bumbling idiot, e.g. Finnigan’s interview of Melvin and Thiel’s piece with Lincoln show’s how shallow and inept he is…

    This is not a time for oil on troubled waters…its more like the French Revolution…

  9. jwb on October 6th, 2004 9:40 pm

    We can always hope that Ken Williams wants to make more trades with us!!!!!!

  10. Brandon on October 6th, 2004 10:12 pm

    During my limited time in baseball (entry level jobs in four different indy leagues) I am proud to say that I have got to know two of the guys we are talking about. I was in Grays Harbor when Charley Kerfeld was the manager there and Bobby Madritsch pitched for us in Rio Grande Valley, so surprisingly to me, I actually have some firsthand knowledge of these two.

    I know Charley has an excellent eye for talent and loves to give guys second chances. He really knows how to connect with younger players who have been through a lot and need some guidance. That’s why you see Madritsch, who pitched briefly for Charley in Chico of the defunct WBL, having so much success. Charley, I’m sure put him on the right track after he had some issues with us (George “The Boomer” Scott was our manager and couldn’t deal with younger, immature players).

    It wouldn’t surprise me if Charley were headed back to the indy leagues to manage again somewhere. I think that is really his passion. I know Chico is going to be fielding a team in a new league again, it’s possible he would head back down there after a really successful run for the Heat. Wherever he goes he will probably be recommending players right and left for the M’s anyway.

  11. eponymous coward on October 6th, 2004 10:27 pm

    the equally idiotic Garcia trade


    Seriously, WTF?

    The M’s get 3 solid propsects for an inconsistent starting pitcher, and that’s as bad as trading Guillen for crap?

    Anyway, I thought Mattox had made the argument that he could find guys who would slide to lower rounds that could replace the first round draft picks Pat blew on Ye Olde veterans, so it really helped the team out- saved paying higher round money to draftees.

  12. tede on October 7th, 2004 2:16 am

    Maybe 2 solid prospects.

    I think some buyer’s remorse on Olivo has started to creep in ala Sterling Hitchcock /Scott Sanders. The guy can’t hit righthanders and the passed balls/wild pitches allowed are alarming. We looking having to look at Dan Wilson 2005 because Olivo can’t perform to Dan Wilson 1994 standards. (Add Pudge to list to items not accomplished in the past off season).

    The back and forth on Kerfeld in this thread is interesting. The amount of $500k seems a bit much….. As us avid Rick Rizz listeners know, Bobby signed with the M’s (instead of the A’s) because they allowed him to finish the season with his team before reporting. But Rick Rizz is never wrong…..

    There is one thing about the turnover in the FO that is worrying. If Bavasi and Melvin both believe Bavasi’s neck is next on the chopping block after the 2005 quick fix fails (my reading of Howard’s season ticket holders letter as well), wtf is going to be left after he gets chopped?

  13. Bela Txadux on October 7th, 2004 4:33 am

    Gillick to Washington: you know this sounds so _right_ that in my mind its a lock from the moment you say it, Dave. And I don’t think Roger is really ready to pack it in, so it makes total sense for Gillick to bring him on. I have the greatest respect for Jongewaard and have since I started following him when he was with Oakland. The amount of talent he has signed and developed over his career matches up favorably with ANYONE in the game, period. It’s just that the Ms did a miserable job of actually promoting and keeping the guys he acquired so that local folk in Seattle (been here 18 years myself, but) don’t really appreciate his track record. The major leagues are populated by guys Jongewaard brought along. Montreal/Washington could use a first-rate player development guy, and Roger has a track record in general and with Gillick in particular that makes sense there.

    And Gillick . . . if he gets the Washington job, I will be ve-err-ry interested to see what he does. He won’t have dollar one to work with, but he has a proven method for making teams competitive fast, and I’ll be interested to see if he does it again; it’s three times and counting now. If fact, Gillick’s method is, in a nutshell, the best method I know to get good quick from my admittedly imperfect understanding of baseball past and baseball present, it is not even terribly complicated, and conforms completely to what is understood from statistical analysis regarding why teams succeed. It goes like this, although most of you know it I’m sure:

    —build around veterans because, a) they have proven track records, and b) they know how to win [yes, I really believe this last, but that’s for another post]

    —build a rock solid defense

    —put together a hammer bullpen, and do so at once

    —get guys who get on base

    —make sure there’s a couple of RBI bats in the mix

    That’s it. The starting rotation is the trickiest, but it is also the hardest to build up because few teams will trade established quality starters, they’re just too important. But you can win over a season and even go deep in the post-season with an _adequate_ rotation, that’s the ticket. Look at Minnesota now. Look at St. Louis now. Hell, look at the ’01 Mariners, no one to scare you there just good enough to beat you, but the rest of the team was the pure Grecian Formula, and the group won 116.

    . . . Which is also why I’m distempered when I here the Ms building _down_ expectations for ’05, and most everyone writing the coming season off. The method for building a contender fast is known. Oh, I don’t have any confidence that Bavasi can do a one-season makeover until he proves me wrong, but in fact it is doable. Here. Now. The core here, especially the pitching staff, has much more to work with then we credit. This team needs a CF, 1B, and SS, and ideally a quality starter. All of these can be acquired. This offseason. What the team has to do is junk the ‘defense for offense’ idiocy, the ‘self-starters with _grit_’ blame-game head-tripping rot, the loyal good-guy organization-man here’s-a-cigar-son present roster padding, and make some cold, hard decisions about who WILL fill the roles of a team that will win at once. Then move OUT those not on the list, and move in 1st choice/2nd choice for evrey other slot on said list. It’s doable ad not just a function of spending money, but I have little conficence this organization will do it.

  14. big chef terry on October 7th, 2004 4:41 am

    wtf??? Olivo can’t play, reed’s another left fielder, a hitter mind you, but a left fielder(can’t throw to second base from the warning track) and the other guy Morse was mysteriously suspended to end the year for a top ten right handed starter that they have absolutely not replaced with their “great” stable of minor league pitching…
    they can’t play him and Winn at the same time and Ichiro…and they will play Winn and Ichiro at least next year…

    So how’s it not a mess…Olivo’s 27, can’t catch a lick as in receive or block the ball, Chicago couldn’t give him away…did you miss the 1-35 streak?

    They traded Garcia because he won his arbitration hearing and that angered Howard Lincoln and that was echo’d by Bavasi who repeatedly said that Garcia was the most overpaid pitcher in the AL…

  15. Dan on October 7th, 2004 7:25 am

    Garcia was a free agent at seasons end anyway. If we didn’t trade freddy we would have NOTHING right now. Reed, Olivo, Morse > Nothing.

    How that is anything remotely similar to the guillen trade i do not know.

  16. petec on October 7th, 2004 7:37 am

    Speaking of rebuilding, I’m waiting for the USSM crew to have a field day with these nuggets from Finnegan’s piece today:

    “Position players
    Locks: Ichiro, Raul Ibanez (DH or first base).
    Likely: Boone, Reed, Cabrera, Randy Winn, Willie Bloomquist, Scott Spiezio, Wilson.”
    Longshot: Lopez, Miguel Olivo, Bucky Jacobsen.

    So, the only decent catcher under contract in the organization is a longshot, and perhaps the worst hitter in the AL is likely. And, who does he propose fills the SS and DH positions?

    “If money gets tight, Seattle could go for: Minnesota’s Corey Koskie at third, a winner like Spiezio was until this year…”

    A “winner”??? Great. That’s what you look for in a player. A guy who contributes, on average, 4% toward your team’s success or failure. Add that to “self starters” and you have a foolproof blueprint for success.

  17. eponymous coward on October 7th, 2004 8:12 am

    Olivo can’t play< /I>

    And Davis was doing what, exactly? Olivo WAS hitting in Chicago. It’s a bit early to give up on a guy after 200 AB’s in your organization.

    Garcia’s final stats: 13-11, 3.86 ERA. In line with his career numbers, I guess…but that’s not a Cy Young year, is it? We got something comparable for Freddy what Montreal got for Colon in 2002, who WAS having a 20 win, 2.55 ERA Cy Young year.

  18. Dave on October 7th, 2004 8:48 am

    No we didn’t, E.C. The haul the Indians got for Colon was one of the great plunders in recent trading history. At the time, the perceptions of Phillips was greater than of Olivo, Lee greater than of Reed, and Sizemore was so far ahead of Morse that its not even comparable. Not to say the M’s didn’t do well in the Garcia trade, but they didn’t match Cleveland’s swindle.

  19. eponymous coward on October 7th, 2004 8:57 am

    Oh yeah, anyone notice that the FA money the M’s have in Finnigan’s piece went to $20-22 million- even though they dumped LOTS of cash? Do the words “three-card monte” come to mind? (I believe Finnigan is getting these numbers on deep cover from Mariner management as a way to, um, diminish expectations.)

    Let’s not forget- we NEVER SPENT the Sasaki money (plus there’d be some money left from Garcia going to Chicago). So them counting things like Wiki Gonazalez’s $2 million against 2005 is entirely management’s choice- they coould, if they wished, use Sasaki’s money to pay off the Cirillo/Jarvis mess (and as I recall, that was what they were going to do at one point, according to other news reports).

    Sound like the team is planning on “losing” money in 2005 by, in effect, retroactively cutting payroll in 2004 back from the original budget, minus Sasaki’s money and some of Garcia’s money.

    My question is- what’s the frigging point of spending $14-16 million (the last numbers Finnigan uses) if all it gets you Delgado, Koskie and Little O? Yay, now the Mariners can only lose 85 games?

  20. eponymous coward on October 7th, 2004 9:02 am

    The haul the Indians got for Colon was one of the great plunders in recent trading history.

    Fair enough. But Colon was having a better year, AND was under contract for 2003 (unlike Garcia), so you should get more in trade, no?

  21. PaulP on October 7th, 2004 9:25 am

    In response to #19, the numbers I came up with are perfectly in line with what Finnigan quotes. Yea, it’s questionable when you add in Gonzalez and Cirillo, but you do have to pay for them at some point. The one that shocked me was the $92,000,000 payroll. I expected the M’s to be above 100mil. I’m guessing 92mil will put them in the top 10, but not by much.

  22. Tim on October 7th, 2004 9:32 am

    It appears M. Morse is playing in the AFL this year (and hitting well so far*). Why was he suspended for the regular season but allowed to play in the AFL? Does anyone know? Is this still a really private matter between him and the organization?

    *Note: really small sample size

  23. Dave on October 7th, 2004 9:35 am

    The team wanted to punish Morse, not end his career. He’s being given another shot.

    And yes, I’m still not going to say anything about why he was suspended.

  24. Evan on October 7th, 2004 9:59 am

    The team suspended him?

    So it wasn’t a drug thing then. I thought it was a drug thing.

  25. Dave on October 7th, 2004 10:10 am

    He was suspended by the organization. That’s all I’m saying.

  26. Paul Molitor Cocktail on October 7th, 2004 10:32 am


    I assume you know the reason then.

    Given that, are you concerned about his ability to contribute to the Ms organization because of the underlying reason(s) for his suspension?

  27. Evan on October 7th, 2004 10:46 am

    I doubt Dave will answer that question.

    If Morse broke the law, we’d have heard about it (and given that legal proceedings are a matter of public record, Dave wouldn’t be reluctant to tell us). It’s got to be less severe than that – maybe Morse has a nasty temper, or he’s insubordinate or something (or both- he might have threatened a coach or a teammate).

  28. Paul Molitor Cocktail on October 7th, 2004 10:53 am

    Let me clarify; I wasn’t asking what the suspension was for. I’m just interested in Dave’s opinion on whether the reason for the suspension is enough to give him pause on whether he wants to see Morse in an M uniform.

  29. eponymous coward on October 7th, 2004 10:58 am

    So, what happened to THIS year’s money from the Sasaki trade? Oh, right, it didn’t get spent- and note that Garcia wasn’t on the payroll for half the season, so that’s 3 million+ on top of that.

    I repeat- if the team is only looking at spending 14-16 million for NEW players beyond guys who were on the 2004 roster, what is the point? That’s maybe one first-tier signing of 9 million and one or two second-tier signings totalling 5-7 million. That’s not going to turn a team that lost 99 games into a contender without a lot of wishful thinking (Boone and Moyer go back to where they were before this year, Piniero and Guardado come back healthy, etc.), and the players you’re likely to get at those prices are going to be the over-30 ones who are unlikely to contribute for more than a year.

    I simply don’t get it. It seems to me you either bump payroll to get a couple of outstanding young players (and if need be, prepare to dump Winn, Ibañez and whoever else you need to if you MUST stay within a budget), or say “screw it, let’s take 2005 as a down year and draw 2 million, lose 90 games while only having a 65 million payroll, and really bust loose in 2006 when Jamie and Bret come off the books for 40 million or so”.

  30. Dave on October 7th, 2004 11:04 am

    I’ve had my doubts about Mike Morse’s abilities to play at the major league level for two years now. The suspension doesn’t help relieve those. Is that vague enough for you?

  31. msb on October 7th, 2004 11:06 am

    #14-“Olivo’s 27, can’t catch a lick as in receive or block the ball”–Comment by big chef terry — 10/7/2004 @ 4:41 am

    I’m going to wait on writing off Olivo until he has a season with the team– coming over in an unexpected trade (not to mention kidney stones) and then trying to learn 15-20 new pitchers… let’s see what a session at Camp Hansen and spring training does for him.

  32. WsuMojo on October 7th, 2004 11:16 am

    The big question to me is, that if we are spending $12-18 Million this year on free agents, how the hell is that going to be enough to right the ship? Doesn’t Bavasi and FO realize with that kind of dough they can only sign 3 or 4 “speziocrap type” players? How are we suppose to sign a Delgado, Beltre, or Sexson with that small amount of cash??? It doesn’t seem right to me with all the players such as Olured 7M, Sasaki’s 7M, Edgar 6M, Aurilla 3.5M, McCrappy 2M, Wilsons 3.5M, Garcia’s 6.6M, and Villone’s 1M gone we should have a lot more. I realize some players are getting raises and others have backloaded contracts, but not $22Million dollars worth. The math just doesn’t add up to me at all, not to mention Lincoln saying he will spend more to get the right players?

  33. joebob on October 7th, 2004 11:22 am

    The front office is once again using finnigan to pass on bad news and lower expectations. By my math the mariners should have at least 28 million dollars to spend next year, but don’t forget that they have done this before. Remember after Sasaki left, and they came out and said, well, its really not 8 million, because we have to pay for this and that, and when all is said and done its only 5 million. Of course just a week before they were ready to spend 8 million on sasaki and pay for all of the other odds and ends. *sigh* after seeing the folks here at ussmariner hint at big moves this offseason I am once again crashing back to the reality that the Mariners are going to screw us again.

  34. Jerry on October 7th, 2004 11:23 am

    #32, we would also have to trade for players, not just attack the free agent market. What bothers me the most from that piece is Moyer is going to make 8 million next year. Even said Moyer did ok this year, a 42 years old gets paid 8 million? Gillick really piss me off on this one.

  35. Paul Molitor Cocktail on October 7th, 2004 12:09 pm

    lower expectations

    Remember the “Lowered Expectations” skit on MadTV?

  36. rd on October 7th, 2004 12:13 pm

    The only thing Howard likes about the “Moneyball” concept is Oakland’s payroll.

    I can see it now, as the FO staff reads Howard’s interview w/ Art T., dropped coffee cups, chairs laying on their backs as dazed staffers scurry for the phones. “Get Finnie on the line, we’ve got to stop these wild promises…”

  37. tede on October 7th, 2004 12:27 pm

    #36 – right on. And these annual Finnigan lowered expectations articles predate Bavasi.

    Any guesses on who Finnigan’s perennial source is? Lee Pelokoudas? Chuck Armstrong (I’m thinking not)?

  38. eponymous coward on October 7th, 2004 12:28 pm

    So, Jerry, I assume you would have let him walk after 2002, and wouldn’t have been bitching about cheap ownership in 2003 to see him go 20-6 with some other team like the Yankees instead of the Mariners?

    Hindsight’s 20-20, man. An incentive-laden contract was a reasonable risk at the time.

    I think Moyer may bounce back some (guys like Carlton and Spahn did come back some from awful year in their 40’s before they retired)…but he won’t be 20-6 with a low 3 ERA, likely. More like 10-12 wins with a low 4 if he comes back. Yeah, that’s not worth 8 million. OTOH, we got 20-6 for relatively cheap.

  39. Montresor on October 7th, 2004 1:42 pm

    The team you saw at the end of the year is the team you are going to get next year. FO and Bavasi will give Spiezio another shot to “right” himself. Ibanez will play first base. Reed will play CF. Platooning of Lopez, Leone, Spiezio, and Dobbs at SS and 3rd. Platoon of Ibanez and Bucky at 1B/DH. If they cannot resign Wilson, it will be Olivo and Wiki for catching duties. The BIG splash will be a pitcher and/or SS but do not expect top-tier. It will be the likes of Radke and Omar Visquel. There will be a top tier reliever, maybe, I doubt it. This next will be billed as giving the kids a chance to grow into their positions. I think this will get us at the payroll of around 75M. That is what I expect.

  40. joebob on October 7th, 2004 1:48 pm

    So here’s what I’m wondering, if the mariners are willing to take a loss by spending 20-22 million dollars on a team that might play .500 ball and draw 2 million fans, why the hell are they not willing to break even on a team that spends 30-40 million dollars, competes for the playoffs and draws 3 million fans?

    The stupidity is just staggerring.

  41. Rumpus on October 7th, 2004 3:55 pm

    Never worked in baseball, never met Kerfeld, but…
    He’s long struck me as an unknown talent – I was impressed with his work in the Western League. If he’s willing to leave his geographic region, I’d definitely interview him for a position with my organization.

  42. big chef terry on October 8th, 2004 8:46 am

    During the 50’s, 60’s, 70’s and 80’s people made a good living in the West by being Kremlinologists studying the official organs of the State such as Pravda and other less official signs such as chicken guts and tea leaves. When the Soviet Union collapsed most of them were proved to have been witch doctors. They completely missed the collapse coming and after sifting through Soviet and East German records, they were absolutely clueless as to what had happened.

    This post feels like that. Psuedo insider knowledge, in the know, wink wink, shake of the head…copier service-man reading thrown away paper.

    Its absolutely absurd to suggest that they hired a guy to replace a man who then became this Oz-like demon behind the scenes and the new guy is the one who was hired to take the arrows. Aurelia, Spezio fit the historical pattern of Bavasi’s acquisitions.

    Howard’s not going to spend a nickle of his operating budget to have a front man gm, because fifteen cents of every dollar spent comes out of his bonus.

    This fails the credibility test in so many ways and illustrates the difference in standards between journalism and blogism…

  43. DMZ on October 8th, 2004 10:06 am

    Its absolutely absurd to suggest that they hired a guy to replace a man who then became this Oz-like demon behind the scenes and the new guy is the one who was hired to take the arrows. Aurelia, Spezio fit the historical pattern of Bavasi’s acquisitions.

    No it isn’t. This happens all the time in sports. It’s like coming in to coach the 49ers with Bill Walsh hanging around. Even in situations where there isn’t a clear leader like that, managers in all industries frequently find themselves coming into jobs where entrenched interests and organizational philosophy stymie their own needs.

    But does anyone seriously think that Bavasi, knowing the circumstances of his hiring and of Gillick’s GM search, came into the job not knowing he’d at least initially be one voice among several?

    Where’s Jeff Angus when I need him? This is turning into a perfect post for Business of Baseball

  44. big chef terry on October 8th, 2004 11:09 am

    found it…how is being in Toronto and never being involved remotely like Bill Walsh who won’t leave the building…

    You guys are being spun at best…

    Why would Bavasi wait till now to say that he had nothing to do with Aurelia, Guillen, Spezio…

    They’re throwing everyone under the bus…and building this plausibly deniable thing to float through you at best…if not its chicken guts and made up…