Mark Shapiro sure gets a lot of credit for a guy whose teams consistently underperform.
Discussion at baseball think factory.
10 months ago
scripteye
84 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Posted simply because I thought people might enjoy reading the discussion — interesting to see how the slow start is impacting impressions of Shapiro and the organization.
by scripteye on Apr 15, 2009 3:54 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
SSS. SSS. SSS. SSS. SSS.
It’s not that difficult.
by Voltaire on Apr 15, 2009 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
On the other hand, 1 playoff appearance in 7 years. Just saying.
by NickFantana on Apr 15, 2009 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i agree with this sentiment
i don’t want to turn this into a stupid stats vs. scouts thing, but it does seem like the sabermetrics crowd loves shapiro more for his team building philosophy than the actual results he’s obtained on the field. sorry, but he has to shoulder at least part of the burden for last year’s bullpen collapse and he is certainly responsible for the state of our current rotation.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on Apr 15, 2009 6:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can’t turn it into a stats vs. scouts thing, because that’s not where the disparity lies. It’s not just PECOTA; look around at the old-school analysts – they also have voiced a lot of approval for the talent Shapiro has acquired: BA executive of the year, Sporting news executive of the year. BA’s organization talent rankings.
That’s fine to look at his results, I’m sure he wishes they were better.
by dgcambridge on Apr 15, 2009 7:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Context, context. The cameras didn’t start rolling on Shapiro until 2006, and even that would be remarkably early considering he was 4 years into a top-to-bottom re-build that started with only a handful of expensive, aging major-league assets. And we’re not even talking about his payroll limitations.
So basically, in 3 seasons on the record, we’ve had one reality check (2006) with a snappy finish, one pennant chase (2007), and one act-of-God-ish, injury-fueled collapse (2008) — a bad hand played very, very well, insofar as Shapiro used the opportunity to secure high-ceiling depth that will stave off another rebuild for years.
The outlier here is 2005, a rookie team that played well above expectations. Frankly I consider that a point in Shapiro’s favor, if it’s a point at all.
by fleerdon on Apr 15, 2009 7:29 PM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
I mostly agree with this, but “only a handful of expensive, aging major-league assets” isn’t really accurate. Sabathia, Westbrook, and Colon were all inherited and proved to be tremendously valuable to the team. Peralta, Victor Martinez, and even Fausto were also already in the system when he became the GM.
by ClarkM on Apr 15, 2009 7:58 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Grady Sizemore, Cliff Lee, Travis Hafner, Kelly Shoppach, Carlos Santana, Matt LaPorta, Casey Blake, Choo, Coco Crisp, etc.
by world dictator on Apr 15, 2009 8:33 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I misread the context of the post to mean “Shapiro hadn’t acquired most of the talent on the Indians”
by world dictator on Apr 16, 2009 1:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Granted, though there were lots of other players in the system that Shapiro didn’t sign to long-term deals with post-rebuild dollars. We treat those as obvious decisions now, but if we’re talking about how well Shapiro’s run the organization, he’s got to get some credit for whom he’s decided to keep, and at what price.
by fleerdon on Apr 16, 2009 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, you’re right. I got a little out over my skis on that one.
by NickFantana on Apr 15, 2009 9:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
John Hart, Director of Baseball Operations for the Cleveland Indians, from ’91 to ’00, nine years, two time Sporting News Executive of the Year. Team record 871-681 (.561) in his tenure, six American League Central Division Championships, two trips to the World Series.
Hank Greenberg General Manager of the Cleveland Indians from ’50 to ’57 before the advent of the SNEotY and the fractionated divisions. Indians record during his tenure: 738 and 493 (.600), one American League Pennant.
Mark Shapiro, GM from 01 to present – eight years, two time Sporting News Executive of the Year. Team record: 663 and 642 (.508), one American League Central Division Championship and one trip to the ALCS.
Shapiro’s had plenty of time to demonstrate his skills. I think we’ve got a pretty representative sample of his work.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Apr 16, 2009 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
John Hart, Director of Baseball Operations for the Cleveland Indians, from ’91 to ’00, nine years, two time Sporting News Executive of the Year. Team record 871-681 (.561) in his tenure, six American League Central Division Championships, two trips to the World Series.
Zero World Series Championships.
Hank Greenberg General Manager of the Cleveland Indians from ’50 to ’57 before the advent of the SNEotY and the fractionated divisions. Indians record during his tenure: 738 and 493 (.600), one American League Pennan
Zero World Series Championships.
Mark Shapiro, GM from 01 to present – eight years, two time Sporting News Executive of the Year. Team record: 663 and 642 (.508), one American League Central Division Championship and one trip to the ALCS.
Zero World Series Championships.
by woodsmeister on Apr 16, 2009 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
Still waiting on your CC piece there V.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Apr 17, 2009 12:05 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
The Tribe was tremendously successful during Hart’s years, no doubt about it. And if we are foolish enough to hold every GM to that standard, then we would be firing the man in charge every few years. Which is what plenty of teams do. No thanks.
by dgcambridge on Apr 16, 2009 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It wasn’t about “firing Shapiro” it’s about Voltaire’s claim of “SSS”. Ten years is a pretty good sample size, certainly enough to evaluate Hart and Greenberg – and Paul and Seghi too. As it stands now Shapiro’s a little bit better than a .500 GM.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Apr 17, 2009 12:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But championships are all that matter, eh, Chuck?
by Voltaire on Apr 17, 2009 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m using your criteria here – rates. His win rate is about average. Most GMs don’t get 8 years of mediocrity before they’re replaced. Shapiro’s running out of rope.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Apr 17, 2009 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Shapiro’s running out of rope.
Woah. Seriously?
by Voltaire on Apr 17, 2009 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Check how many GMs have kept their jobs after 11-12 years of .500 ball and two play-off appearances.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Apr 17, 2009 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Check also how many clubs are run stupidly and impulsively from the owner’s box.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Apr 17, 2009 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
10 years plus is hardly “impulsive”.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Apr 17, 2009 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not saying it is. I’m saying that the way officials are fired on most ballclubs has to do with childish impulsivity rather than sound management. The way the average owner fires officials is not any kind of yardstick for a well run organization.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Apr 18, 2009 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do we know Dolan is immune to this, or are we hoping?
Ben Francisco: An Outfielder only on baseball cards and roster sheets.
by westbrook on Apr 18, 2009 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They have a pretty well articulated philosophy that says that the best organizations have long-term stability in key leadership positions. It is part of the reason why Shapiro was anointed before Hart ever left, and Antonetti has been anointed before Shapiro has left.
Antonetti talked in the Annual about focusing on “controllables” in evaluating the medical staff, and I think this is part of the organizational culture all the way up to Dolan. I think they are realistic about their market position and the problems it creates. If they are the 10th most successful franchise given the 20th largest market, they may not be satisfied with that, but they won’t necessarily look at it as mediocrity, either.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Apr 18, 2009 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
are fired on most ballclubs has to do with childish impulsivity rather than sound management.
That’s the way it’s reported anyway. Steinbrenner’s the paradigm for this, but he’s hardly typical. Over in one of the other sports, football, Henry Ford III? IV? stayed with Matt Millan well past the point where most "impulsive" owners would have fired him. And I think that Mr. Ford knows something about managing a big firm. So, it can work both ways.
We focus on OPS, ERA+ etc. Here’s what Dolan’s looking at:
2,346,071 2001
2,207,891 2002
2,191,745 2003
2,340,422 2004
2,360,452 2005
2,458,741 2006
2,527,968 2007
2,464,986 2008
And what he’s seeing, so far, is a drop in attendance and a concurrent loss in revenue. Once he decides that he can’t keep putting money in the enterprise, he’ll either sell it, or change his upper management. And that decision will not be impulsive.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Apr 18, 2009 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are you saying that 2009 would represent the drop in attendance, because with the numbers above, there’s no significant trend in lower attendance.
Eric Wedge. The Adam LaRoche of managers.
by emd2k3 on Apr 20, 2009 10:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And oh yeah, GMs and owners work on different time lines. Ten years is hardly enough to judge a GM’s performance, but 10 years of losing money will bankrupt an owner – ask Chrysler.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Apr 17, 2009 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’d be eager to check payroll discrepancies for all of those years as well. Doesn’t explain away losing rather than winning, but it might illustrate rebuilding vs. reloading, etc/.
Eric Wedge. The Adam LaRoche of managers.
by emd2k3 on Apr 17, 2009 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You also need to check net profit – that’s what the owners do.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Apr 18, 2009 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Underperformance implies that the players are in place. Thus, not his fault.
Ben Francisco: An Outfielder only on baseball cards and roster sheets.
by westbrook on Apr 15, 2009 5:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
truth
The GM puts his team in a position to win. He doesn’t run, bat, or hit.
by world dictator on Apr 15, 2009 7:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It could also be a lame excuse. These guys maybe playing at their maximum level and just are not getting it done.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Apr 16, 2009 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You really think so? Sizemore for a .766 OPS at age 26, which would be his worst full season?
by Voltaire on Apr 16, 2009 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So far.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Apr 17, 2009 12:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well obviously so far. But do you really think that’s all he’s got? I’m wondering how much weight your “maybe” carries.
by Voltaire on Apr 17, 2009 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Check Hafner’s track record. Anyone of these guys can collapse overnight.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Apr 17, 2009 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hafner is a completely different type of athlete vs. Sizemore. Sizemore doesn’t have those “old player skills” that mark more rapid descent.
Eric Wedge. The Adam LaRoche of managers.
by emd2k3 on Apr 17, 2009 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
A distinction without a difference. Sizemore can only wish he had Ken Griffey Jr.‘s skills – his age 23 to 29 performance was outstanding. Check him out after age 23 til about 29, when the wheels started coming off. Now he’s the Mariner’s Dave Dellucci.
Sizemore won’t be 27 forever – and he’ll never, ever be the player Junior was at his peak.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Apr 17, 2009 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I propose we put Grady in cryogenic stasis for 20 hours a day so he only ages during games….
by Logodaedalus on Apr 17, 2009 6:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
His hands will always be cold. He’d have a tough time swinging the bat.
by odradek on Apr 18, 2009 1:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Chuck is stirring the pot, but Griffey was a better player than Grady. Not even close. Twelve straight seasons with an OPS+ above 122.
by odradek on Apr 18, 2009 12:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And then the slide into Delucci-hood. It happens to all of them.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Apr 18, 2009 1:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t really get your point in all of this — so you’re saying that some day Sizemore will get old and regress? Is that supposed to be news? And what does that have to do with Mark Shapiro?
by Buckeye Brad on Apr 18, 2009 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s kind of a stupid point, though (on Chuck’s part). It’s like saying Manny will never be Ted Williams.
Griffey has 600+ HR in addition to 10 Gold Gloves. He is arguably among the 10 best ever to play.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Apr 18, 2009 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Here’s what I’m saying: it’s next to impossible to predict when a player is going to collapse, regress what ever the hell you wanna call it. Some of the greatest 20-somethings disappear from view quickly, while others play well into their late 30’s.
Just because Sizemore’s a good player now doesn’t mean he’ll be worth a damn 3+ years out. If you go back to the Indians of the mid-90s I think it’s fair to say that predicting which of Belle, Manny, Thome, and both Alomars would still be putting up MVP type numbers would be impossible – old player skills, young player skills whatever.
Grady could be our fourth outfielder in 2012, or playing for someone else – maybe playing at a high level maybe not. And he’d only be what? 30? 31? But then again, he could be putting up MVP number – I doubt he ever will, but maybe – in 2020.
And here’s a little tip: I’d refrain from using the word stupid if I were you. It makes you come off as an arrogant jackass. Just a gratuitous nudge.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Apr 18, 2009 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, Grady could be washed up in 3 years, but it’s not very likely. Of course nobody knows for sure what any player will be like in 3 years or 5 years, but you can say with a certain confidence that Grady will still be a very good player in 3 years based on comparing his stats to similar players from the past. There’s a certain probability to anything, and when you sign a player to a long-term contract you’re analyzing the probability that he will still be productive over that term, and I’m sure the Indians FO knows all about that.
Grady is a easy player to predict because he’s a high-level player, and high-level players usually are very good in to their early-30’s at least, often longer. Most players have short peaks but guys like Grady usually have peaks that are much longer. Again, this isn’t a certainty and it never will be. But when you’re analyzing players you’re always going to deal with probability of various occurances. And the probability that Grady remains a great player for the next 4-5 years is very high. Many smart baseball people have predicted that Grady would win an MVP in the next few years, and I’m not sure why you think he can’t.
I know you like to bring up counterexamples to any kind of statistical analysis to “prove” that it’s wrong (such as saying PECOTA is “wrong” because it didn’t see Lee’s Cy Young season or Hafner’s decline) but there will always be outliers. As a guy who always talks about doing stats the “right way” I’m sure you realize that. But that doesn’t mean you still can’t make predictions with some degree of certainty. You can find a 90% confidence interval for Grady’s performance over the next 5 years, based on the performance of similar players over similar ages, and I’m sure that performance is still very good. Look at Grady’s most similar batters — Duke Snider and Barry Bonds. I’d say that’s indicative of a pretty good future.
by Buckeye Brad on Apr 18, 2009 5:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Grady is a easy player to predict because he’s a high-level player, and high-level players usually are very good in to their early-30’s at least, often longer. Most players have short peaks but guys like Grady usually have peaks that are much longer.
Grady isn’t especially “high level” — others have similar numbers but are unlikely to peak for as long. What distinguishes him is (a) his level of big-league achievement in his early 20’s, and (b) his tremendous all-around athleticism. Those are the two specific traits that make it quite likely that he’ll have a long and productive career.
I agree with your basic point, which I think is that while we can’t predict any one player with certainty, we actually have a very clear idea of the probabilities, in some cases strong probabilities.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Apr 20, 2009 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, that’s pretty much what I meant by “high level”. Not just his numbers — his hitting numbers alone, while impressive, aren’t that high compared to other top players in the league — but his consistant play since he was young and his great all-around play. Travis Hafner had better hitting numbers than Grady but he’s certainly not the all-around player that Grady is and not likely to have as long of a career (even before his injuries). What you said is what I meant by “guys like Grady”; I guess I should have described my thoughts better.
Rob Neyer said almost the exact same thing as the other day in a chat (or a blog, not sure) talking about Ryan Zimmerman (I think). He said that you can’t be sure what any individual player’s career is going to look like, as far as ups and downs, but we know what the general trend line looks like for all players, and most will fit in that line. The problem is, of course, finding the players who don’t.
by Buckeye Brad on Apr 21, 2009 7:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Someone is still bitter over Charboneau.
Eric Wedge. The Adam LaRoche of managers.
by emd2k3 on Apr 20, 2009 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And here’s a little tip: I’d refrain from using the word stupid if I were you.
And my little tip would be, I’d make an effort not say stupid things if I were you.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Apr 20, 2009 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes. This is what I meant by my “what the heck” comment.
by Voltaire on Apr 20, 2009 1:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fixed.
I wonder if that means most of the commenters didn’t bother to read it?
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Apr 15, 2009 8:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would like to jump in on the under-achieve side. However, the Indians exceeded projections in 2004, 2005, and 2007. 2003 was a push. They under-performed in 2006 and 2008, and although you could argue they exceeded expectations in the second half both years, that really would be cheating. I do think 2008 falls under the “act of God” column.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Apr 15, 2009 8:59 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Though logically I think this is pretty on point, I sort of think Cleveland sports from 1964 through 2009 fallus under “Act of God.”
Il faut d'abord durer.
by CU Adam on Apr 15, 2009 9:54 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Sinners in the hands of an angry God.
by odradek on Apr 15, 2009 11:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Another quote pulled from that site:
If you’re not going to spend money and you’re not going to draft anything useful, you’re not going to win. Simple as that. At some point, people are going to stop trading you guys like Grady Sizemore and Travis Hafner.
::looks at Matt LaPorta and Carlos Santana::
Also, the Indians have a payroll near 90 million dollars. I wouldn’t call that being cheap.
by Toxicadam on Apr 15, 2009 10:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Who woulda thunk that the problem with that sentence isn’t PRONK being spoken for on the same level is Grady…
Ben Francisco: An Outfielder only on baseball cards and roster sheets.
by westbrook on Apr 16, 2009 1:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t get the “people are going to stop” part of that quote. Isn’t that one of the primary roles of a savvy GM … to exploit other teams by identifying mis/underutilized talent?
Eric Wedge. The Adam LaRoche of managers.
by emd2k3 on Apr 16, 2009 10:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s one fallacy.
The other fallacy is that by judging him based on performance relative to expectations, you’re in essence blaming him for having made the moves that raised expectations in the first place.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Apr 16, 2009 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If performance against expectations is how we’re judging the front office, wouldn’t that mean the Mariners executives are, you know, good?
by FredOx on Apr 15, 2009 10:12 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
They are.
You know there was a regime change, right?
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Apr 15, 2009 10:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The fact that they respect Gutz and put him out there every day proves they’re not totally braindead.
Ben Francisco: An Outfielder only on baseball cards and roster sheets.
by westbrook on Apr 16, 2009 1:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No — weren’t the Ms supposed to contend for the AL West crown last year after trading for Bedard?
by JulioBernazard on Apr 16, 2009 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I couldn’t believe those prognostications. Carlos Silva, really?
Eric Wedge. The Adam LaRoche of managers.
by emd2k3 on Apr 16, 2009 10:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Shapiro is the best GM in baseball. The only other GM for whom there exists an argument is Billy Beane and Mark still wins out. The biggest knock on Shapiro I can make is that he has up until las year year avoided drafting high ceiling guys in the draft. Now that he went above slot money to get guys like Haley and House, there’s really no glaring faults. It certainly helps that he’s the best trading GM i have ever seen.
by Joe. on Apr 16, 2009 8:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
If only he was better at drafting players……………….
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Apr 16, 2009 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Theo Epstein, maybe. Bill Smith. Tony Reagins? And Billy Beane is better, no question.
Look at Mark’s W-L record. For all his enlightenment, he’s made some questionable moves.
by odradek on Apr 17, 2009 12:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
With Epstein, it’s really hard to compare him with their vastly different budgets. Agreed on Beane, though. I can’t really see an argument for Shapiro.
Smith and Reagans are also tough to evaluate as they are new to the job (October 2007 for both) and they walked into great situations.
by ClarkM on Apr 17, 2009 7:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
well than Terry Ryan
Fan in Texas
by fanintexas on Apr 18, 2009 11:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t know. He had a very nice run toward the end of his career, but people tend to forget that in his first 7 seasons with the Twins, they finished last or second to last in the division. On the other hand, the four playoff appearances for a team with such a small budget is quite impressive.
The thing is, he’s probably only the 3rd best recently retired GM.
by ClarkM on Apr 18, 2009 11:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
W-L record is a horrendous way to judge a GM.
by Joe. on Apr 19, 2009 9:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Sweet Baboo
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
