52 replies to this topic

[TomRicardo]

At this point the question needs to be asked as it seems that Cherington does not have control of this team. Cherington has been lackluster at best outside the Cody Ross signing but the major decisions seem to have disseminated from Lucchino including:

1) Throwing Tito under the bus
2) Hiring Valentine but keeping the most of the Tito's staff leading to a toxic clubhouse
3) Firing the whole Medical and Training Staff except for Reimold who has circumvented his demotion to fill the power void left from firing Gill and has run the one of the worst Medical and Training Staff in baseball history.
4) A staunch refusal to trade away assets even with the team's .500 performance so far.

I think this team has gotten away from Lucchino and Cherington and unless they are ready to make the hard decisions they will not be able to right the ship. But even if you were to remove Lucchino from baseball operations, he is still an owner and you cannot still fire him. Also despite his Simpsonian effort to find the real leaks in the Hohler article, you have to figure any move by Henry or Werner would be followed by a Globe hack piece to end all Globe hack pieces.

Maybe I am a little bitter with my perceived notion that Lucchino was the leak in the Tito article as well as driving piece of the Crawford and Lackey signings. I still think Theo was more than culpable and I think he made the right decision by leaving however I feel that the ownership group that brought us two championships has let the game get away from them. To be fair I think they have grown their Sports Empire to the point that the Red Sox are not even plurality of their concern. I can see how the day to day of the Red Sox are no longer the concern of Henry and Werner however things have gotten so out of hand some sort of intervention should be in order.

I do not see things getting better in the direction this team has been going in since 2009. I believe that Luchhino is the driving force and needs to step back. Whether they hire a real GM or let Cherington take full reigns (which I find less than reassuring or likely), something needs to change because they have changed every piece besides Lucchino and the bleeding only continues to get worse.

I really don't want to end up like the Mets.

[StuckOnYouk]

Funny, I voted yes to all three and thought maybe I was crazy doing it, but that's been the case for all three votes so far.

[DLew On Roids]

The first question needs some unpacking. Is he competent at completing projects? Sure. Is he competent at managing an organization? Hell no. Unfortunately, he's been doing much more of the latter and less of the former lately, and the organization is paying for it in enormous ways. Since managing the organization is his main task right now, I can't see voting anything but No on #1.

The attack dog was let off the leash when Henry and Werner went off to fix Liverpool. They need to find someone to replace Lucchino and bring some sanity back to the FO.

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

Larry Lucchino isn't just going to leave the Red Sox because this is just about the top of the baseball mountain. What we need is for Bud Selig to leave the Commissioner's Office and for LL to be elevated to that office. Because like DLew said, he's not a complete boob; he's just has lousy baseball management instincts and a tin ear for what the fans want.

And he would probably take the Dentist with him.

[trekfan55]

I am not 100% sure where the blame lies for everything that's happened since 2009.

First, you cannot exempt Theo. All the stories about him leaving town because of the mess that is coming may be true, but he made the mess himself. The whole gorilla suit episode at least made him more accountable and less dependent on Lucky, and I think that the the Adrian Gonzalez, Carl Crawford, and John Lackey contracts are mostly his responsibility. Not to mention Mike Cameron, Julio Lugo, Edgar Renteria, etc. In other words, whatever mess the team is in right, which has to be fixed somehow, is not 100% (and who know what the percentage is but I bet it's low) on Lucky.

Second, they did not do the cleanup they needed to do at the end of last year. The majority (not to say all) of the coaching staff should have been let go at the end of 2011 the moment Tito was "fired". Then all the training staff and all the medical staff. At that moment you can certainly start looking for a whole new staff, or hore a manager early enough so he can gather his own staff. So what we have now is a whole mess of things and a dysfucntional clubhouse.

Third, if any player were to be sold for pennies on the dollar, last offseason was the time to do it.

And finally, was naming Ben Cherington GM a good idea?

All of this comes around to Larry Lucchino at the end of the day. If he is truly in charge, he should do something radical this offseason, even if it means firing Bobby and starting from scratch with the staff (the lackluster play of this year's Sox is not his fault). BTW, he is part owner, so letting him go would be either a huge scandal or involve a huge payout, IMO, and I don't think anyone wants that.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Larry owns 10% of the Sox from what I've read, so any departure would mean buying him out, which would be a minimum of around $80 million. Not happening.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Second, they did not do the cleanup they needed to do at the end of last year. The majority (not to say all) of the coaching staff should have been let go at the end of 2011 the moment Tito was "fired". Then all the training staff and all the medical staff. At that moment you can certainly start looking for a whole new staff, or hore a manager early enough so he can gather his own staff. So what we have now is a whole mess of things and a dysfucntional clubhouse.

The Sox haven't had a manager hire all of their own staff in forever. Valentine didn't, Tito inherited Wallace, Gump inherited most of his guys, Jimy didn't hire all his coaches, etc. It's just not the case in general in baseball. The idea that a manager has to hire all his own staff is misplaced and it's not the reason the team sucks this year and why there's dysfunction throughout every level of the club.

[JimBoSox9]

In terms of revenue and growth, he's got a pretty good track record. As far as baseball is concerned, there's a lot of media noise about what he is or isn't involved with. Personally, it feels like Lucky is excellent at running the business entity that is a baseball team, but his success in that arena is inverse to the extent that he is involved in day-to-day baseball operations. I do not want him making baseball decisions because he's not a baseball guy. Hire a GM, set a budget, be a last sanity check against major franchise-altering baseball decisions, and spend his days growing the business. I fully admit that a lot of secondhand crap goes into that perception.

[trekfan55]

The Sox haven't had a manager hire all of their own staff in forever. Valentine didn't, Tito inherited Wallace, Gump inherited most of his guys, Jimy didn't hire all his coaches, etc. It's just not the case in general in baseball. The idea that a manager has to hire all his own staff is misplaced and it's not the reason the team sucks this year and why there's dysfunction throughout every level of the club.

Agreed in part and disagreed in part.
My point was that the entire coaching and training staff shared much of the blame for what happened in in Sept 2011. Cleaning house looked like the logical move. Whether BobbyV would hire his own staff himself, participate in the hiring or anywhere in between, would only have helped.

[Rudy Pemberton]

I will agree that the manager not having coaches who are loyal to him (or even want to be here, in Tuck's case) is not THE reason there's dysfunction....but it certainly isn't helping. The organization did not put either Cherington or Valentine in a position to succeed. Firing one guy because he had lost the clubhouse; and then hiring a nerw guy and sticking him with coaches who aren't supportive (for a variety of reasons) seems less than ideal to me, but they waited so damn long to hire a manager that they didn't have much choice.

Regarding the actual question, it's hard to answer without knowing what Lucchino is and isn't really responsible for. The Larry = bad, Theo / Ben = good logic dosen't work for me. That being said, Larry is in charge so removing him from his position (as well as Ben and Bobby) and giving someone like Friedman a blank check to rebuild the entire thing works for me. A new voice seems to be needed.

Edited by Rudy Pemberton, 25 July 2012 - 10:41 AM.

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Larry owns 10% of the Sox from what I've read, so any departure would mean buying him out, which would be a minimum of around $80 million. Not happening.

Why would it necessarily require a buy-out? I get that to completely remove Lucchino from the organization would require a buy-out, but owning 10% of the club doesn't entitle him to the Team President title forever, does it? Couldn't the rest of the ownership partners vote, or Henry as controlling partner simply decide to remove Lucchino's title and with it, his power? Just make him like the rest of the minority stockholders and remove him from the day-to-day operations?

[Otis Foster]

I'm glad TomR framed this question. It's been an undercurrent in a lot of the other discussions.

Overall, I think LL is a very competent executive in other contexts, although I wouldn't want him to have my back. That does not inexorably lead to the conclusion that he's a competent baseball executive, at least at the granular level he seems to have penetrated. In fact, given the high priority he seems to lend to marketing, it probably requires an extra buffer between him and the baseball people.

That said, I think it's impossible to extricate him from the Henry ownership group, so the question is, can he isolate himself/be isolated from these considerations. Theo seemed to do it, at least for a while, but in retrospect one of the things that may have precipitated the move for Theo was that LL was slipping the leash again, and JH - with some new toys in the toy chest - wasn't inclined to step into this.

I see no indication that Ben C can or is willing to deal with LL on that basis, or that he has the status with JH to prevent this from happening. More broadly, I am concerned that this ownership group is not properly configured to deal with challenges it faces.

[glennhoffmania]

People keep pointing to Lugo and Renteria. While they were bad deals, how are they impacting the team today? Are people suggesting that if they had that money back they'd be willing to spend over the threshold this year?

[Lupe Whalewatch]

Larry owns 10% of the Sox from what I've read, so any departure would mean buying him out, which would be a minimum of around $80 million. Not happening.

Didn't the New York Times sell their 17% stake in the team just last summer?

[dcmissle]

People keep pointing to Lugo and Renteria. While they were bad deals, how are they impacting the team today? Are people suggesting that if they had that money back they'd be willing to spend over the threshold this year?

They are symptomatic. Lackey and Crawford are impacting the team today.

It's not just Lucky. If Theo were still here, he'd deserve to be clipped as well.

[glennhoffmania]

They are symptomatic. Lackey and Crawford are impacting the team today.

It's not just Lucky. If Theo were still here, he'd deserve to be clipped as well.

If we're talking about track records I totally agree. If we're talking about where the team stands today, I think they're irrelevant.

[OttoC]

He is more than competent in many areas but I don't think trying to play GM is one of them. I think he could take Allard Baird with him, too.

Edited by OttoC, 25 July 2012 - 10:57 AM.

[zenter]

I have a lot of ambivalence WRT Lucchino. On the one hand, he's an ass, something of a control-freak (not like Steinbrenner, but still), and that tin ear is pretty true. On the other...

Lucchino is a good evaluator of baseball minds. Between lusting after Beane, grooming Theo, hiring the Dentist (more on this in a sec), getting Janet Marie Smith, and pushing Valentine, he clearly knows who is knowledgeable, intelligent, and competent at the core function of their job. As I said (and as the Valentine choice illustrates), the tin ear aspect rings true when it comes to managing the rabid Boston media... BUT, I think fan relations have been more success than failure. He engineered the reconstruction/beautification of Fenway, has strengthened relations with Sox greats who were shunned by the previous group, and has lowered the rate of ticket price growth. I bet he's also been a good glad-hander with important sponsors.

I wouldn't want to work for him without a gorilla suit, but the dude is smart and deservedly has his position. Is it time for a tone change? Maybe, but I think this mainly falls on some of the players consistently poisoning leadership's authority/legitimacy (like Beckett's recent comments about how great Francona was at managing him).

[Cellar-Door]

I find the hate for Lucky interesting, I think personality wise he is a dick and that colors perceptions. All of the best years this team has had until 2012 came when Lucky had more control. Even 2007 was set up by the trade that happened while Theo was on sabbatical trying to get more power taken from Lucky. For some reason people on this board like to blame all the post 2007 bad signings on Lucky, and the pre-2007 successful ones on Theo. However the information we have would make it seem more likely the reverse. I hate all, the pink hat projects and Red Sox nation saturation, but it is good business and brings in the money needed to have a high payroll team. The jobs he did both in Baltimore and San Diego as well make it pretty clear he knows how ro run a baseball team.

[JimD]

Bob Kraft looked like a boob after he forced Bill Parcells out of town - to the hated Jets, no less - and replecd him with Pete Carroll. Kraft wised up and didn't repeat that mistake. Henry, Werner and Lucchino are pretty smart guys and I trust they will soon realize that they need to stop playing GM (and stop forcing their GM to make moves simply to placate 'Red Sox Nation') and open the checkbook to entice Andrew Friedman or another rising star to relocate to Yawkey Way.

[yecul]

Kind if depends on what you are evaluating him on. The team exists as.an entertainment vehicle to generate revenue through ticket, concession, advertising and merch sales along with whatever else. He seems to be doing well on his role.

From a fans perspective we want a winner. Whole that contributes to the bottom line in terms of generating interest and this revenue I don't think that is remotely his mission. So on that light the baseball ops portion of his annual review is lower than we might want.

That said I think this cones down to his syle and desired reach. It sure seems that his hands are all over the place and not in good ways.

[wutang112878]

Maybe we need to think about the 'Should he step away from his role on the team?` question differently.

A great deal of what has made Larry an asset to the RedSox has been in the past. He has done a great job generating new revenue streams, growing the top and bottom lines and improving the park, but the reason I think he should go is because he cant do much more in these areas. The RedSox cant generate much more revenue, NESN isnt going to grow much more, so the main driver for improving the team and the teams finances is by improving the product on the field.

Personally, I dont think Larry is going to help improve the product on the field that much, hence it might be time to just get a regular CEO type who can keep the RedSox efficient at making money, and stay out of the way of baseball operations.

[TheoShmeo]

A well respected sportswriter in NYC told me that Larry is widely seen as being too divisive and strong to be Selig's successor. Take something anonymous like that for what it's worth, but it rings true with me.

I find the hate to be difficult to understand for three main reasons. One, it's really impossible for us to know who is responsible for what decisions. We can make educated guesses, but in the end any decision making process with multiple actors involved is complex and particularly hard to decipher from afar. Two, despite the current stink around the team, the man was the CEO in 2004 and 2007. WS Titles are good. And three, all the focus on the cash grab is bizarre to me. Unless people really believe it's about enriching the owners, then not wanting the Sox to find various ways to create revenue for salaries, development and infrastructure smacks of wanting it both ways. No one forces us to buy things like LL Bean bags, bricks and tix to soccer games and no one, I think, wants the Sox to be outside the top 25% in spending. Tix prices are high but Fenway is small and my assumption is that the Sox need to charge what they do to enable them to spend as they do.

Edited by TheoShmeo, 25 July 2012 - 12:02 PM.

[dcmissle]

A well respected sportswriter in NYC told me that Larry is widely seen as being too divisive and strong to be Selig's successor. Take something anonymous like that for what it's worth, but it rings true with me.

Me too. People poke a lot of fun at Selig's awkward midwestern sensibilities, but he's Don Corleone to Larry's "Sonny". Tough to imagine people like Reinsdorf putting up with the bs, especially with guys like Kasten around and 7 years younger than Larry, who turns 67 in a couple of months.

[drtooth]

My concern with LL is the inherent conflict of interest, given his ownership stake. Is he trying to drive baseball decisions on what will make this team a winner for the long term or is it marketing driven in order to keep the bogus sellout streak going, sell bricks, keep NESN ratings ups, etc etc etc.? My fear is that the driving force is the later.

[zenter]

My concern with LL is the inherent conflict of interest, given his ownership stake. Is he trying to drive baseball decisions on what will make this team a winner for the long term or is it marketing driven in order to keep the bogus sellout streak going, sell bricks, keep NESN ratings ups, etc etc etc.? My fear is that the driving force is the later.

I think you underestimate how much the former influences the latter, especially in Boston. Bob Kraft and the Grousbecks know this, as (hopefully) does Jocobs. It appears (looking at the entirety of the ownership group's history) that the trio knows this too.

[biollante]

It is very difficult (for me) to parse these items out and blame just 1 person.

I don't like where the team is headed and I don't like the way they squeeze a dollar out of every penny.

It might take more than getting rid of LL to right the ship or maybe it is just too late and we will become the Mets or some strange semblance thereof.

[Cellar-Door]

I can understand wanting Lucchino gone, but I can't understand the 29 people who think he isn't a competent baseball executive. He's been an exec for 3 teams, and his tenure has been among the most successful periods in the history of all 3 teams both on the field and off. He's clearly far more than merely competent.

[drtooth]

I think you underestimate how much the former influences the latter, especially in Boston. Bob Kraft and the Grousbecks know this, as (hopefully) does Jocobs. It appears (looking at the entirety of the ownership group's history) that the trio knows this too.

I would hope so. The signing of Lackey immediately after Theo's "bridge year" comment does raise some concern. Baseball ops should be baseball ops and not influenced in a major way by marketing the team and its ventures (aka "big splash" to keep interest up).

[zenter]

I would hope so. The signing of Lackey immediately after Theo's "bridge year" comment does raise some concern. Baseball ops should be baseball ops and not influenced in a major way by marketing the team and its ventures (aka "big splash" to keep interest up).

Wow. There's no evidence that Theo was forced into this by Lucchino/marketing objectives. Given that the gorilla suit incident gave Theo more direct control over baseball ops with less input from above, this rings particularly false. Also, consensus around here resolved around "bridge year" meaning the beginning of a dry period in the farm system and the need to "bridge" the gap with free agents.

[wutang112878]

I can understand wanting Lucchino gone, but I can't understand the 29 people who think he isn't a competent baseball executive. He's been an exec for 3 teams, and his tenure has been among the most successful periods in the history of all 3 teams both on the field and off. He's clearly far more than merely competent.

I am not suggesting that he is incompetent, and I am just guessing but my assumption is that those who think he is incompetent probably believe so because over the past maybe 3 years he has not seemed to be a net positive to the organization considering the assumed meddling with baseball ops. Its sort of a double-edged sword because he has basically made the RedSox as great as they can be from a financial perspective because revenues and profits are about as good as they are going to get. So anything he does from a baseball operation standpoint, unless it works out perfectly and he is ultimately proven to be correct, is going to reflect badly on him and brings up the meddling debate.

Another factor, from a PR perspective he could do a much, much better job and if he was better at that this poll might look different.

[Plympton91]

I find the hate for Lucky interesting, I think personality wise he is a dick and that colors perceptions. All of the best years this team has had until 2012 came when Lucky had more control. Even 2007 was set up by the trade that happened while Theo was on sabbatical trying to get more power taken from Lucky. For some reason people on this board like to blame all the post 2007 bad signings on Lucky, and the pre-2007 successful ones on Theo. However the information we have would make it seem more likely the reverse. I hate all, the pink hat projects and Red Sox nation saturation, but it is good business and brings in the money needed to have a high payroll team. The jobs he did both in Baltimore and San Diego as well make it pretty clear he knows how ro run a baseball team.

I completely endorse this view. If you look objectively at the evolution of the relationship between Theo and Lucchino over the past decade, you have to conclude that Theo's best moves, the ones that were Sabermetically sound and budget conscious, came when Lucchino was exercising heavy oversight. Theo left in the gorilla suit to secure a much more autonomous role for himself as GM, and promptly made one bad move after another. Given Theo's public pronouncement that he planned to leave after 2012 pretty much no matter what, why is anyone surprised at all that he was suddenly much more willing to overpay free agents for near-term improvements? Theo never intended to be around for the downside of those contracts, he only needed 2 or 3 good years out of them. So, it doesn't seem to me as if Lucchino reasserting his authority is a problem at all, it seems to me more likely it will be part of the solution. When making long-term commitments, you want a long-term decisionmaker (read:owner) in charge.

On the manager front, it seems to me they want Farrell. He's not available until 2014. They cannot fire BV and hire a placeholder for 2013. They need to make a strong statement of support, not in empty words that are often the kiss of death, but in deeds. Let Valentine replace two coaches, and ask him who he'd most like traded or perhaps reassigned from the roration to the bullpen or vice versa, then get that done.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Last offseason Lucky oversaw the brilliantly farcical managerial hire process that resulted in the public neutering of his own GM. That late hire has resulted in chaos between manager, coaches, and players, and coincidentally the results on the field have sucked this season.

So I very much doubt he's part of the solution. He is a brilliant baseball business man, but he's awful at actually figuring out good on-field talent. He can create all the business relationships and increase revenue steams he wants, but his attempts to meddle in on-field results are disappointing.

[Cellar-Door]

Last offseason Lucky oversaw the brilliantly farcical managerial hire process that resulted in the public neutering of his own GM. That late hire has resulted in chaos between manager, coaches, and players, and coincidentally the results on the field have sucked this season.

So I very much doubt he's part of the solution. He is a brilliant baseball business man, but he's awful at actually figuring out good on-field talent. He can create all the business relationships and increase revenue steams he wants, but his attempts to meddle in on-field results are disappointing.

Nonsense. He was by all accounts heavily involved in building the teams from his arrival until 2007. He was involved in the hiring of Francona, he was involved in onfield decisions in Baltimore and San Diego. You are basing your assessment of his on-field "meddling" on one decision this year, and ignoring decades of his history.
edit- I think there is a decent case to be made that he has overstayed his useful term, or that he needs a better baseball ops staff and GM to help him, but the evidence of his career makes it pretty clear that he can be very successful as the final decision maker at the top of the baseball ops pyramid.

Edited by Cellar-Door, 25 July 2012 - 02:56 PM.

[Buzzkill Pauley]

If you look objectively at the evolution of the relationship between Theo and Lucchino over the past decade, you have to conclude that Theo's best moves, the ones that were Sabermetically sound and budget conscious, came when Lucchino was exercising heavy oversight. Theo left in the gorilla suit to secure a much more autonomous role for himself as GM, and promptly made one bad move after another.

These are the MLB non-arb contract outlays made between Theo's return on January 24, 2006 and the hiring of Allard Baird as his Special Assistant on October 31, 2006:

• 1/31 - agreed to terms with Alex Gonzalez (1 year/$2.7MM)
• 4/10 - signed David Ortiz to contract extension (4 years/$52MM)
• 4/12 - signed Coco Crisp to contract extension (3 years/$15.5MM)
• 7/19 - signed Josh Beckett to contract extension (3 years/$30MM)
• 10/24-agreed to terms with Mike Timlin (1 year/$2.8MM)
• 10/26-picked up 2007 option for Tim Wakefield (1 year/$4MM)

There's absolutely nothing team-crippling in any of these moves, although the Mirabelli and Arroyo trades were stinkers, and Coco never really lived up to expectations at the plate after breaking his finger.

All -- and I mean ALL -- of Theo's team-crippling moves came after Baird was hired to be his "baseball man" instead of Bill LaJoie.

Garbage in, garbage out.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Nonsense. He was by all accounts heavily involved in building the teams from his arrival until 2007. He was involved in the hiring of Francona, he was involved in onfield decisions in Baltimore and San Diego. You are basing your assessment of his on-field "meddling" on one decision this year, and ignoring decades of his history.
edit- I think there is a decent case to be made that he has overstayed his useful term, or that he needs a better baseball ops staff and GM to help him, but the evidence of his career makes it pretty clear that he can be very successful as the final decision maker at the top of the baseball ops pyramid.

Recent results get more weight. When presented with an opportunity to throw his weight around with a new GM in house, he screwed it up in the most ham-handed, self-defeating way imaginable. If this is what the future's going to be like for this team then I want no part of it.

[86spike]

These are the MLB non-arb contract outlays made between Theo's return on January 24, 2006 and the hiring of Allard Baird as his Special Assistant on October 31, 2006:

• 1/31 - agreed to terms with Alex Gonzalez (1 year/$2.7MM)
• 4/10 - signed David Ortiz to contract extension (4 years/$52MM)
• 4/12 - signed Coco Crisp to contract extension (3 years/$15.5MM)
• 7/19 - signed Josh Beckett to contract extension (3 years/$30MM)
• 10/24-agreed to terms with Mike Timlin (1 year/$2.8MM)
• 10/26-picked up 2007 option for Tim Wakefield (1 year/$4MM)

There's absolutely nothing team-crippling in any of these moves, although the Mirabelli and Arroyo trades were stinkers, and Coco never really lived up to expectations at the plate after breaking his finger.

All -- and I mean ALL -- of Theo's team-crippling moves came after Baird was hired to be his "baseball man" instead of Bill LaJoie.

Garbage in, garbage out.

You're comparing nine months of deals to 5 years of deals.

[Buzzkill Pauley]

You're comparing nine months of deals to 5 years of deals.

No, I'm responding to DH3's assertion that Theo "promptly made one bad move after another" once he had autonomy from Lucchino.

I'm showing that he didn't. He promptly made a series of low-risk, high-reward moves that are directly cognate to other moves made by the team from 2002-05, including his questionable signings like Edgar Renteria, Matt Clement, and David Wells.

These aren't nearly the crippling contracts the Sox are now faced with. Every contract Theo made above Ortiz' $52MM or for longer than 4 guaranteed years was signed after Baird was made Theo's Special Assistant -- the guy in charge of recommending and valuing pro players from the scouting side.

[Eric Van]

Obviously he's not just competent but exceptionally good. Just as obviously he's not perfect. The actual question, therefore, is whether one of his weaknesses, in this particular set of circumstances (including whom he was working with), turned out to be a team-crippling fatal flaw.

For instance, as a strong-willed, strongly opinionated guy, he might not really understand the opposite decision-making style, where expertise and correctness is very much a matter of listening to, and integrating, as many different opinions as possible. A style where, in fact, just the very presence of that many opinions, that much data to consider, changes the whole thought process. It's not that by adding extra voices and more data you increase the chances that one of the opinions is the right one (although that is true), it's that the apparent surfeit of data and options is what leads the decision maker to see the big picture and realize what the best option is.

If you had a GM whose strength was just that and you understood it, you would never cut the number of voices contributing to that conversation just to save a relatively trifling sum of money. You wouldn't, IOW, ask the GM to give up all his consultants just because you feared revenues were going down, when the consultants' total compensation was maybe being paid for by 15 or 25 fans per game. If you simply didn't get the purpose of the consultants, if you were thinking, gee, my GM's brilliant, why does he need all this extra input, you might think that letting go all the consultants was a good idea. And maybe after that, the GM starts making a series of ill-advised moves, and you don't win a playoff game.

This is all purely hypothetical, of course.

[redsox13]

Competent? Is that what the Red Sox have agreed to accept at this point?

Lucchino is certainly competent, however I wouldn't go on record to say that he's done a good job, or that he exceeded my expectations. He is, just as you suggested, competent. Perhaps if he weren't such a meddling toll, and actually allowed Cherington et al to do their jobs, I'd say that he is above average.

[yecul]

It's going to be telling when the genius gm hires all his old consultants and analysts. Surely he knows that person... I mean those people are the secret to his success.

[baghdadjamie]

Is it just me or does LL remind you of a certain Dallas Cowboys owner?

[TomRicardo]

Obviously he's not just competent but exceptionally good. Just as obviously he's not perfect. The actual question, therefore, is whether one of his weaknesses, in this particular set of circumstances (including whom he was working with), turned out to be a team-crippling fatal flaw.

For instance, as a strong-willed, strongly opinionated guy, he might not really understand the opposite decision-making style, where expertise and correctness is very much a matter of listening to, and integrating, as many different opinions as possible. A style where, in fact, just the very presence of that many opinions, that much data to consider, changes the whole thought process. It's not that by adding extra voices and more data you increase the chances that one of the opinions is the right one (although that is true), it's that the apparent surfeit of data and options is what leads the decision maker to see the big picture and realize what the best option is.

If you had a GM whose strength was just that and you understood it, you would never cut the number of voices contributing to that conversation just to save a relatively trifling sum of money. You wouldn't, IOW, ask the GM to give up all his consultants just because you feared revenues were going down, when the consultants' total compensation was maybe being paid for by 15 or 25 fans per game. If you simply didn't get the purpose of the consultants, if you were thinking, gee, my GM's brilliant, why does he need all this extra input, you might think that letting go all the consultants was a good idea. And maybe after that, the GM starts making a series of ill-advised moves, and you don't win a playoff game.

This is all purely hypothetical, of course.

Of course, because if a hypothetical former consultant had an ax to grind after being "laid off" for having his own ideas instead of working on what was assigned to him, he would probably work in hypothetical scenarios.

I think Lucchino is a very competent business man. I also think he is a horrible baseball person who gets too personal and destroys any sort relationship building in the efforts to paint himself in glory. I am not sure if that equates to a competent business executive.

I do know he is a huge net negative in terms of the win - loss column of this team however I do think he is a net positive for the revenue of this team.

I am just not sure how I would define it.

[soxfan121]

I think 10 years as a chief executive of anything is a long time. LL is clearly competent but I also voted "Yes" three times because I think that he's past his prime. Compared to the Harrington Era, the team is still well managed. It's infinitely better today, because of LL & FSG than it was then. At the very least, sewage doesn't bubble up out of the concourse drainage grates during rain delays and not standing in flith is an improvement no one can deny.

Larry seems to excel in "new project management" and seems to be less excellent in steering an already-well-built operation. Put another way - Larry is not as good at managing an established business and excels in managing a start-up. These are very different skills and it is why many companies transition away from the start-up folks when the business becomes about incremental changes and improvements. Larry still seems to market this team like he did when he first got here...to the detriment of the current product.

I would be greatly encouraged if Larry were to announce his retirement from day-to-day operations and scaled back his role to oversight of department heads (Cherington & Kennedy) only. Let Kennedy take the forefront of PR operations on the business side (he's quite good, IM) and in the business planning & marketing. And taking a public step back would help Cherington immensely. It would also benefit management as well, because the presumption that Cherington is a puppet only hurts them. Letting Cherington "be his own man" would take heat off of ownership/management and probably benefit the on-field product.

[Average Reds]

Obviously he's not just competent but exceptionally good. Just as obviously he's not perfect. The actual question, therefore, is whether one of his weaknesses, in this particular set of circumstances (including whom he was working with), turned out to be a team-crippling fatal flaw.

For instance, as a strong-willed, strongly opinionated guy, he might not really understand the opposite decision-making style, where expertise and correctness is very much a matter of listening to, and integrating, as many different opinions as possible. A style where, in fact, just the very presence of that many opinions, that much data to consider, changes the whole thought process. It's not that by adding extra voices and more data you increase the chances that one of the opinions is the right one (although that is true), it's that the apparent surfeit of data and options is what leads the decision maker to see the big picture and realize what the best option is.

If you had a GM whose strength was just that and you understood it, you would never cut the number of voices contributing to that conversation just to save a relatively trifling sum of money. You wouldn't, IOW, ask the GM to give up all his consultants just because you feared revenues were going down, when the consultants' total compensation was maybe being paid for by 15 or 25 fans per game. If you simply didn't get the purpose of the consultants, if you were thinking, gee, my GM's brilliant, why does he need all this extra input, you might think that letting go all the consultants was a good idea. And maybe after that, the GM starts making a series of ill-advised moves, and you don't win a playoff game.

This is all purely hypothetical, of course.

Isn't there a humblebrag thread we can move this to?

Edit: Going to elaborate on the intent of my one-liner so as not to gamethread the topic.

Eric, you often add a lot of value, but the whole schtick where you try to use your prior employment with the Sox to bolster your credibility while at the same time denying that you're posting anything relating to your tenure is getting very tedious.

If you legitimately feel you can't talk about something because of your prior employment with the Red Sox, then try to resist the urge to talk about it. Playing coy so you can imply insider knowledge while maintaining plausible deniability is ridiculous. It's also insulting.

Edited by Average Reds, 26 July 2012 - 02:15 PM.

[TomRicardo]

LL: I hope fans understand players fully aprreciate their fundamental role in mediocre season they've had so far

[behindthepen]

LL was the perfect executive for this team in 2002.  The whole system needed a lot of work and investment, and as others have pointed out, he brought in some of the best in the business and they got the job done.

 

After 2007, they required a different type of manager, and while I'm sure financially the team has done well, it's pretty clear that without any changes, the next couple of years are going to be as challenging as the last couple.

 

The comparison above to Jerry Jones is chilling.

[BellhornsBiatch]

I can understand wanting Lucchino gone, but I can't understand the 29 people who think he isn't a competent baseball executive. He's been an exec for 3 teams, and his tenure has been among the most successful periods in the history of all 3 teams both on the field and off. He's clearly far more than merely competent.

There's a qualifying word that makes the answer to the question a resounding "No". That word is "baseball". If that word was "renovation" and not "baseball", you might be on to something. "Baseball" executives would have seen the problem within a bunch of players not respecting a potential manager who hasn't made a relevant "baseball" decision in a decade.


edit: I don't mean any disrespect, especially to someone that understands the most beautiful combination of two words in the English language.

Edited by BellhornsBiatch, 17 August 2012 - 05:27 PM.

[Buzzkill Pauley]

LL was the perfect executive for this team in 2002.

Conveniently, that's the last year BobbyV previously managed in MLB.

[Cellar-Door]

There's a qualifying word that makes the answer to the question a resounding "No". That word is "baseball". If that word was "renovation" and not "baseball", you might be on to something. "Baseball" executives would have seen the problem within a bunch of players not respecting a potential manager who hasn't made a relevant "baseball" decision in a decade.


edit: I don't mean any disrespect, especially to someone that understands the most beautiful combination of two words in the English language.

He's been a successful executive in the "baseball" field for decades and is one of the more respected guys in the profession, he's been a major part of the turn around of 3 clubs, the previous two of which promptly fell apart when he left.

People are confusing "baseball executive" with GM, the hiring of Bobby was probably a bad idea, but it was exacerbated by several factors. 1 the GM and owners promptly made it clear the manager had no support from them, and 2. his previous GM left him a roster of un-tradeable malcontents, so there wasn't much to be done.
He has shown a history of being great at driving revenue, and with choosing and mentoring good front office staff.

Perhaps it is time for him to leave Boston, but nothing he did has brought the team to this, he doesn't make player decisions (the GM does). There seems to be a disconnect between him and the other owners on some issues, and his power has waned, which makes me think he'd probably be better off and the team as well if he moved on and the team brought in new blood to make a more stable chain of command.