John Hart Turns Down GM Job

[Millwood1Hitter]

According to David O'Brien of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Braves president John Schuerholz shot down a report that John Hart turned down the team's offer to be their full-time general manager.

In addition to stating that Hart turned down the job, Jeff Passan of Yahoo Sports reported that the Braves were turning their focus to assistant GM John Coppolella and Royals GM Dayton Moore, with former Rockies GM Dan O'Dowd also potentially in the mix. "At best the article was not accurate with either the facts or the assumptions," said Schuerholz.

This coming from the guy that in July of 1993 told Skip Carey on TBS telecast that we have had no discussions involving acquiring Fred McGriff, only to acquire him 2 days later.

And the same guy that told Justice he wasn't gonna be traded and would bet his house on it, only to trade him a few days later.

 

[Bj1133]

Zito sez

I'm not shocked, the Braves have a tendency of kicking people on the way out of the door. It happened to Leo, it happened to others as well. Unlesss they want someone to come back.

Its a braves tradition at this point.

If some of your aren't veteran fans, it is a depressing list:

Leo Mazzone

Glenn Hubbard

Javy Lopez

Frank Wren

Jim Schultz (PR man)

Andruw Jones (arguably)

Pat Corrales

Stan Kasten

Sure I could think of more if I wanted to get really depressed

Maybe I missed something back then, but didn't Javy/Andruw both leave for more money/longer contracts than what the Braves offered?

 

[50PoundHead]

He may never. But trades cannot be evaluated in hindsight. Myers could have been used in a differnet trade, or could hav eproduced way more. You never know.

That's right. You never know. But what we do know is that KC needed pitching and the Royals are now going to the World Series and Tampa Bay is on the precipice of turning into a dumpster fire. That isn't Myers' fault, but I've always defended Moore's decision on this trade. Davis has simply been a bonus for them this season and Odorizzi will be a good pitcher for the Rays, so it may well turn into a classic now-for-later deal and the now part of the equation came through for Kansas City.

Moore has made a ton of decisions both good and bad in Kansas City. Moustakas and Hosmer haven't developed into who scouts thought they would turn into, but they were solid picks near the top of those drafts. He's made both good trades and bad and the Royals have come together slowly. Keeping his core together may be difficult given their market size/budget constraints.

I'm not advocating for Moore to take over in Atlanta. I'm not a deep stats guy and I know the deep stats guys love Coppolella, but I believe Coppolella may be the right guy right now. We have a set of good young players, but we're thin in the minors, so we are going to have to get really creative around the edges and that means we need to dig a little deeper for things than we have in the past.

 

[NYCBrave]

That's right. You never know. But what we do know is that KC needed pitching and the Royals are now going to the World Series and Tampa Bay is on the precipice of turning into a dumpster fire. That isn't Myers' fault, but I've always defended Moore's decision on this trade. Davis has simply been a bonus for them this season and Odorizzi will be a good pitcher for the Rays, so it may well turn into a classic now-for-later deal and the now part of the equation came through for Kansas City.

Moore has made a ton of decisions both good and bad in Kansas City. Moustakas and Hosmer haven't developed into who scouts thought they would turn into, but they were solid picks near the top of those drafts. He's made both good trades and bad and the Royals have come together slowly. Keeping his core together may be difficult given their market size/budget constraints.

I'm not advocating for Moore to take over in Atlanta. I'm not a deep stats guy and I know the deep stats guys love Coppolella, but I believe Coppolella may be the right guy right now. We have a set of good young players, but we're thin in the minors, so we are going to have to get really creative around the edges and that means we need to dig a little deeper for things than we have in the past.

People aren't even mentioning Odorizzi was in the deal, and he just had a pretty good season for Tampa, and looks to be a future #2 at worst. However, now that KC has made the world series, I think it provides validation to the trade. And this is coming from someone who hates the trade for KC.

 

[50PoundHead]

People aren't even mentioning Odorizzi was in the deal, and he just had a pretty good season for Tampa, and looks to be a future #2 at worst. However, now that KC has made the world series, I think it provides validation to the trade. And this is coming from someone who hates the trade for KC.

I think the second tier of that deal (Odorizzi for Davis) was far more questionable than the principal tier (Myers for Shields).

And the Rays got Patrick Leonard who could develop into a big league contributor as well.

 

[Millwood1Hitter]

People aren't even mentioning Odorizzi was in the deal, and he just had a pretty good season for Tampa, and looks to be a future #2 at worst. However, now that KC has made the world series, I think it provides validation to the trade. And this is coming from someone who hates the trade for KC.

Sometimes you have to go for it? In this case, for Kansas City, it was about acquiring a top of the rotation type starter to surround a young team and also change the attitude, and maybe get them into the playoffs, or at least contend, and get the fan base excited again for the first time since the 80's.

I wish we would have traded prospects (during our run in 90s) to fill an area of need to possibly win another championship or 2. What kind of difference would it have made say if JS would have pulled the trigger on a Chen, Rivera, Lombard deal to acquire Roberto Alomar in 1998? It was on the table. Another deal that was on the table that same year would have been a lesser deal for Johnny Damon.

What if JS would have upped the ante with his dealings with Philly and thrown in a Wilson Betemit along with Chen/Osting to get Schilling instead of Ashby?

We're talking impact players here, and all the while I wasn't a fan of the Royals-Rays trade from the Royals perspective, I understood why they took the chance and the risk to do it, and it just might pay off dearly for them.

 

[nsacpi]

Sometimes you have to go for it?

Not sure there is much to this. The A's went all in this season. The Tigers have been optimizing for several years now.

To me the better approach is to have a competitive team year in year out. Make some tweaks as necessary to plug areas of weakness around mid-season. But generally the idea of "going for it" gets you into trouble more often than not. The post-season is a lottery. I want a team with a ticket in the lottery as many seasons as possible. After that I'm willing to let the chips fall where they may.

 

[NYCBrave]

Not sure there is much to this. The A's went all in this season. The Tigers have been optimizing for several years now.

To me the better approach is to have a competitive team year in year out. Make some tweaks as necessary to plug areas of weakness around mid-season. But generally the idea of "going for it" gets you into trouble more often than not. The post-season is a lottery. I want a team with a ticket in the lottery as many seasons as possible. After that I'm willing to let the chips fall where they may.

I'm on board with this. Besides, it's not like the trade made the Royals heavy favorites for the World Series, they happened to sneak into the playoffs and are hot at the right time now. They were literally only 2 games better than Seattle for a wild card slot, imagine how close they were to this trade not meaning anything. In hindsight, they're in the world series, so it's great. But NOBODY could have imagined this.

 

[Millwood1Hitter]

Not sure there is much to this. The A's went all in this season. The Tigers have been optimizing for several years now.

To me the better approach is to have a competitive team year in year out. Make some tweaks as necessary to plug areas of weakness around mid-season. But generally the idea of "going for it" gets you into trouble more often than not. The post-season is a lottery. I want a team with a ticket in the lottery as many seasons as possible. After that I'm willing to let the chips fall where they may.

The A's went through a massive overhaul change in the middle of the season, not sure what exactly Beane was thinking. The trade with the Cubs for Samardja and Hammels should have been enough to improve the rotation, that would have been capable of matching up with others in the postseason. The biggest blunder Beane did is you can't take a key component of your current team (Cespedas) that already is suspect to improve another area of strength (starting pitching). And although Cespedas wasn't exactly a Beane moneyball type player, he was a huge bat in the lineup and they solely missed that and couldn't fill that void with role players (Gomes/Fuld) that already had a lineup filled with plenty of those types. The A's were the best team in baseball before the Lester trade, but struggled thereafter due to the points mentioned. After that, the pitching was great but the offense struggled to string together enough runs to be a consistant winner.

Same can be said with the Tigers, they really didn't need Price. Despite Verlander's struggles, they still had a rotation that could match up with anyone with Scherzer, Verlander, Sanchez, Porcello in the postseason. They traded away a key compenent in A Jackson and neglected the bullpen. How did that work out? The bullpen single handedly lost them that series, basically.

The key is to put together a balanced team with a good rotation, a great bullpen, depth in the lineup and a good bench. Just like the Braves didn't need to go out and get Neagle to be a 4th starter from 96-98 when that money could have been better spent or Schmidt used to acquire a much bigger need (2B, SS, bullpen, and leadoff hitter) at that time.

 

[nsacpi]

Royals came close to being blown out in the Wild Card game. If the A's pen does it job maybe they make the World Series and lots of people would be holding the A's up as examples of what we should be doing instead of the Royals. Post season play is a lottery.

 

[yeezus]

Royals came close to being blown out in the Wild Card game. If the A's pen does it job maybe they make the World Series and lots of people would be holding the A's up as examples of what we should be doing instead of the Royals. Post season play is a lottery.

Ryan Vogelsong had the 3rd best ERA in post season HISTORY.
Yep.

 

[50PoundHead]

Not sure there is much to this. The A's went all in this season. The Tigers have been optimizing for several years now.

To me the better approach is to have a competitive team year in year out. Make some tweaks as necessary to plug areas of weakness around mid-season. But generally the idea of "going for it" gets you into trouble more often than not. The post-season is a lottery. I want a team with a ticket in the lottery as many seasons as possible. After that I'm willing to let the chips fall where they may.

Chiming in, I think there's a difference between what Moore did in the Myers trade and what Beane did in his trades with the Cubs and Red Sox. Kansas City needed a top of the rotation starter to even have a chance at competing. Myers was a high price, but if you can't pitch, you can't win. Myers could become a superstar, but he wasn't going to carry that team as a rookie and the way the rest of the Royals' offense looks, one guy alone wasn't going to make them considerably better with the bats. Moore figured if he was going to win, he needed to get a couple of veteran arms. Shields is one of the more consistent pitchers in the game and Davis--after a miserable 2013--put together one of the best seasons a set-up guy has ever had. So you're right. It's about competing and getting in the conversation. I don't think the Royals get in that conversation without the Shields deal.

Beane will always have his defenders (and he is a very good GM so defense is in order on a vast majority of his moves), but the drool fest that went on at the MLB network after he made those two big deals was hilarious. You can only hit the nail so many times before you ruin the board. A's offense was vastly overrated for most of the year and although I don't Cespedes is a top drawer player, I think the Lester rental was ill considered seeing that the A's offense was Braves-like over the last month or so of the season. Same goes for the Tigers. Price was overkill. I'm curious to see how those teams approach the off-season.

So, in brief, you have to pitch to contend, but if you mess up the roster in strengthening a strength, that effort should probably be re-thought.

And, yes, the playoffs are a crapshoot. They always have been.

 

[50PoundHead]

Not sure there is much to this. The A's went all in this season. The Tigers have been optimizing for several years now.

To me the better approach is to have a competitive team year in year out. Make some tweaks as necessary to plug areas of weakness around mid-season. But generally the idea of "going for it" gets you into trouble more often than not. The post-season is a lottery. I want a team with a ticket in the lottery as many seasons as possible. After that I'm willing to let the chips fall where they may.

Agree, but the irony would be if the A's had made the World Series, suddenly all the Beane defenders would have to do a 180 and contend that the playoffs really aren't a crapshoot.

The Braves should look at their roster and make decisions that fit their long and short-term needs. There is no one way to build a successful baseball team other than recognizing the need for solid starting pitching.

 

[nsacpi]

The Braves should look at their roster and make decisions that fit their long and short-term needs. There is no one way to build a successful baseball team other than recognizing the need for solid starting pitching.

Yup. I think the particular challenge we face this off-season is the need to reduce the impact on payroll from the CJ/BJ contracts so we can keep Heyward and/or Justin Upton on a long-term basis. This is really an issue that reverberates well beyond the 2015 season. But our GM might be able to find a creative resolution to that issue that helps us in 2015. It won't be easy, but I think we've already seen some ideas floated that would accomplish this (pairing a prospect or two plus cash with BJ for a pitcher like Jackson, Buerhle or Dickey for example).

 

[goldfly]

So, Schuerholz and Bobby are liars for sure now

they are just looking for a puppet

 

[NYCBrave]

The A's went through a massive overhaul change in the middle of the season, not sure what exactly Beane was thinking. The trade with the Cubs for Samardja and Hammels should have been enough to improve the rotation, that would have been capable of matching up with others in the postseason. The biggest blunder Beane did is you can't take a key component of your current team (Cespedas) that already is suspect to improve another area of strength (starting pitching). And although Cespedas wasn't exactly a Beane moneyball type player, he was a huge bat in the lineup and they solely missed that and couldn't fill that void with role players (Gomes/Fuld) that already had a lineup filled with plenty of those types. The A's were the best team in baseball before the Lester trade, but struggled thereafter due to the points mentioned. After that, the pitching was great but the offense struggled to string together enough runs to be a consistant winner.

Same can be said with the Tigers, they really didn't need Price. Despite Verlander's struggles, they still had a rotation that could match up with anyone with Scherzer, Verlander, Sanchez, Porcello in the postseason. They traded away a key compenent in A Jackson and neglected the bullpen. How did that work out? The bullpen single handedly lost them that series, basically.

The key is to put together a balanced team with a good rotation, a great bullpen, depth in the lineup and a good bench. Just like the Braves didn't need to go out and get Neagle to be a 4th starter from 96-98 when that money could have been better spent or Schmidt used to acquire a much bigger need (2B, SS, bullpen, and leadoff hitter) at that time.

I'm sorry, but Austin Jackson, key component???? The guy ended the year with a .640 OPS!!! When he was leading off for the Tigers, his OBP was barely above .300. As for the A's deciding that Sam Fuld was a somehow capable starter, that was a major blunder.

 

[NYCBrave]

Chiming in, I think there's a difference between what Moore did in the Myers trade and what Beane did in his trades with the Cubs and Red Sox. Kansas City needed a top of the rotation starter to even have a chance at competing. Myers was a high price, but if you can't pitch, you can't win. Myers could become a superstar, but he wasn't going to carry that team as a rookie and the way the rest of the Royals' offense looks, one guy alone wasn't going to make them considerably better with the bats. Moore figured if he was going to win, he needed to get a couple of veteran arms. Shields is one of the more consistent pitchers in the game and Davis--after a miserable 2013--put together one of the best seasons a set-up guy has ever had. So you're right. It's about competing and getting in the conversation. I don't think the Royals get in that conversation without the Shields deal.

Beane will always have his defenders (and he is a very good GM so defense is in order on a vast majority of his moves), but the drool fest that went on at the MLB network after he made those two big deals was hilarious. You can only hit the nail so many times before you ruin the board. A's offense was vastly overrated for most of the year and although I don't Cespedes is a top drawer player, I think the Lester rental was ill considered seeing that the A's offense was Braves-like over the last month or so of the season. Same goes for the Tigers. Price was overkill. I'm curious to see how those teams approach the off-season.

So, in brief, you have to pitch to contend, but if you mess up the roster in strengthening a strength, that effort should probably be re-thought.

And, yes, the playoffs are a crapshoot. They always have been.

Just so we're clear, this is the same James Shields who gave up 4 runs and lasted only 5 innings in that wild card game this year.

 

[50PoundHead]

Just so we're clear, this is the same James Shields who gave up 4 runs and lasted only 5 innings in that wild card game this year.

Gee. Talk about small sample size.

He's also the same James Shields that hasn't missed a start in his big league career of 8+ seasons and has logged over 200 innings in each of his full seasons. The point I am making is that the Royals aren't in the playoffs without Shields or someone like him. Cinderella has to get to the ball before anything else can happen.

 

[cajunrevenge]

The playoffs is a crap shoot is just a short explanation for a long answer. Teams top out around 60% chance to win a series. You can have the best pitcher in recent memory in Kershaw and he has 2 bad starts in a row and your out in the division series. We went into a 1 game playoff having won 25 straight starts by Medlen and we lost.

The Royals might win the world series but I think we would have beat them if we played in a playoff series before September.

 

[Dalyn]

Apparently Chipper declined the hitting coach job. That just sucks.