Dombrowski

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,853
Dave Dombrowski seems like the antithesis of the thinking man’s general manager. That isn’t to say that Dombrowski is not viewed highly by people in MLB, obviously he keeps landing good jobs as an executive, but he is rarely held up on a pedestal despite his resume indicating that he is one of the best modern executives in the history of baseball.

Not only has he won two World Series with two different teams, something only a small handful of executives can ever claim, he has managed to take four different teams to the World Series, and has a very real shot of winning a third World Series with a different team if the Phillies win this year. No other baseball executive in history can claim such success with different franchises, he’s even done it in different leagues, taking two AL franchises and two NL franchises to the World Series.

Dombrowski has done it with different ownership groups, with different managers, with different players, and over vastly different periods of time, as the game and player evaluation has evolved in various ways. He has managed to stay ahead of the curve in a lot of regards, and consistently identifies good players to target and acquire that turn into winning baseball games.

Dombrowski doesn’t seem to be recognized for these achievements at the rate almost anyone else would. Instead it seems to be assumed that of course Dombrowski was successful with teams–his strategy is to merely trade away prospects for proven MLB players, and to spend big in free agency. He then quickly leaves or gets fired, saddling the team he leaves with overpaid fading stars and no prospects in the farm system. Dombrowski operates over the short-term and it’s believed that many executives would be capable of similar success if they were given that kind of backing from ownership to go for it.

In a baseball world that idolizes Billy Beane and Andrew Friedman, guys who made the most of limited resources and continued to find ways to win on the margins to remain competitive, Dombrowski feels like a brute. He’s the hare racing against the tortoise–sprinting ahead of everyone without any thought of sustainability, only to be caught in the end by the cerebral executives who truly understand how to build a proper baseball franchise.

In fact, one could argue that Dombrowski’s achievements with multiple franchises is only made possible because his methods are so unsustainable. He can’t stick around with the same franchise and be successful, because all of his teams need a hard reset after a few years. So Dombrowski moves on and finds the next ambitious owner who is looking to win now.

The brilliance of Dombrowski though is that many teams try to “win now” and make aggressive moves and trades, driving the payroll up in the hopes of grabbing some momentary relevance. None of them are as successful as Dombrowski, who over time has consistently shown the ability to assemble a major league roster and coaching staff that is capable of getting the job done in October. The Marlins asked him to assemble a winner in 1997 and he did just that. Ownership immediately balked at paying the bill the next year and orchestrated a fire sale. Dombrowski would actually be responsible for acquiring a huge part of the 2003 Marlins team (including Mike Lowell, Miguel Cabrera, Derek Lee, Josh Beckett and Brad Penny).

He went to Detroit and actually didn’t jump right in with a winner. Instead his teams lost a lot, and he slowly rebuilt the team for a few seasons. But by 2006 they were one of the most formidable teams in the AL, advancing to the World Series a year after losing 91 games. Despite claims that Dombrowski could never build something sustainable, he would be in Detroit for 14 years, making the World Series twice and at one point making three straight ALCS appearances.

Then he was on to Boston. We all know what happened there. He took a listless team that had finished last in back-to-back years and got them into the playoffs his first year in charge. He signed Craig Kimbrel, he signed David Price. He traded for Chris Sale and signed JD Martinez. He hired Alex Cora as manager. After back-to-back 90+ win seasons his first two years, he had an 108-win juggernaut, the best team in Red Sox history, that demolished opponents on his way to the World Series.

He was fired ten months later–not unlike in his first stint with the Marlins, ownership was balking at the high cost of doing business with Dombrowski and a rebuild was deemed necessary.

He landed on his feet of course, going to Philadelphia, making trades and signing free agents and again correctly identifying the right players to succeed. They made the World Series last year and look poised to do it again this year.

Yet, it still feels like people view Dombrowski as a bit of a carnival trick. A guy who rashly trades away top prospects and spends recklessly, providing brief windows of contention followed by years of needed rebuild. People may remember the winning, but they certainly talked for years later about the Miguel Cabrera contract, or the Chris Sale contract.

However, Dombrowski probably deserves a lot more credit in terms of sustainability. The Marlins should have been competitive for longer if not for a rash fire sale, and after a few years Dombrowski had adequately restocked the team with young talent that would go on to win another World Series (only to be quickly sold off again). Detroit had a ten-year window of contention. When he left Boston, yes there was the Price contract and the Sale contract, but there was still a strong young core of talent, and the team’s subsequent underachievement is hard to be pinned on Dombrowski.

Perhaps more important than all of that, Dombrowski’s teams are fun. Squads full of big name players, sluggers that hit mammoth home runs and pitchers that struck tons of guys out. The kind of teams that get young kids invested in the team, and provide lifelong memories for fanbases desperate to see a winner. Yes, there is the inevitable rebuild, but if you brought Dombrowski in, you got a high-quality team that was a blast to watch and were almost guaranteed you would be playing deep into October. If you want to win, if you really, really want to win, your best bet is to hire Dave Dombrowski.
 

czar

fanboy
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
4,317
Ann Arbor
If you want to win, if you really, really want to win, your best bet is to hire Dave Dombrowski.
Not quite sure I buy that.

Anecdotally, a lot of my friends from Michigan (I lived there 2010-2015) really dislike him and shoulder him (fairly or unfairly) with a lot of blame for their performance over the past decade. I would think if your last paragraph were to be universally true ("i.e., Dombrowski teams are fun, bring in new fans, and are memorable even if you suck afterwards), a lot more folks would view him with rose-colored glasses. Although, I'll admit it's an unscientific sample.

Flags do fly forever, but if the Red Sox *hadn't* won in 2018, I think the view of DD on this board would go from polarizing to "one of the worst GMs in Boston history." My two cents, of course.
 

NYCSox

chris hansen of goats
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 19, 2004
10,492
Some fancy town in CT
He's the ultimate high-risk high-reward GM. There's a good chance you'll be competitive and a decent chance of a title but the aftermath will always be ugly.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,962
Unreal America
Great opening post for a thread.

I may regret this analogy, but Dombrowski strikes me as the AC/DC of baseball executives. No critical acclaim. But you know what you're going to get, and very few have ever done that thing better.

Personally, I like him a lot and look back on his tenure here quite fondly. I loathed the Sale extension the moment it was announced, but that's really the only big gripe I had with him.
 

jezza1918

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
2,701
South Dartmouth, MA
Not quite sure I buy that.

Anecdotally, a lot of my friends from Michigan (I lived there 2010-2015) really dislike him and shoulder him (fairly or unfairly) with a lot of blame for their performance over the past decade. I would think if your last paragraph were to be universally true ("i.e., Dombrowski teams are fun, bring in new fans, and are memorable even if you suck afterwards), a lot more folks would view him with rose-colored glasses. Although, I'll admit it's an unscientific sample.

Flags do fly forever, but if the Red Sox *hadn't* won in 2018, I think the view of DD on this board would go from polarizing to "one of the worst GMs in Boston history." My two cents, of course.
What's kind of ironic is that in some ways I think the success he had in Detroit was BETTER than anywhere else. He took the worst franchise of the 90s and had them playing in a world series in 4 years, then fell back to earth (but mostly around .500, not what they were in the 90s), before dominating the division for half a decade. Building that is a HUGE accomplishment I think. But, as you say, Flags Fly Forever.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
12,324
The idea that he can’t stick around because his methods don’t work for long term success seems kind of silly; he was with the Marlins for 11 years and Detroit for 14.

The Tigers have been pretty bad since he left, but is it because of him? IIRC, they had a pretty highly ranked farm system at one point since.

He’s probably headed to the HOF; he’s great at identifying teams flaws and aggressively fixing them. I don’t know why he’s not more well thought of by fans; I guess the allure of winning in the future is more romantic than actually doing it in the present- but the methodical nature in which he built up several contenders / champions is pretty impressive, to me.
 

Sandwich Pick

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2017
713
He's the ultimate high-risk high-reward GM. There's a good chance you'll be competitive and a decent chance of a title but the aftermath will always be ugly.
In other words, he's Pat Gillick.

Every single team Gillick has built has had a major playoff drought after he left.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
12,324
Flags do fly forever, but if the Red Sox *hadn't* won in 2018, I think the view of DD on this board would go from polarizing to "one of the worst GMs in Boston history." My two cents, of course.
Isn’t that, like, kind of a big if*? They had the best season in franchise history!!!

What exactly, would have made him one of the worst GM’s in Boston history? Other than the Sale extension, what moves were bad? I’m really baffled here.

The org has had some pretty terrible GM’s…
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2001
24,644
Flags do fly forever, but if the Red Sox *hadn't* won in 2018, I think the view of DD on this board would go from polarizing to "one of the worst GMs in Boston history." My two cents, of course.
You can say that about just about any GM. If Ben Cherington didn't win in 2013, he'd be in the loser's bracket as one of the worst Sox GMs too. If Theo didn't win, same thing; I can hear the laments of fans/writers saying that "nerdy" Epstein falls in love with high-cost players who can win in the regular season but didn't have the intestinal fortitude to do it "when it mattered", "Would Nomar have helped that 2004 team more than OCab?" and "How's that bullpen by committee thing going".

I've been a big DD fan since he started with the Expos in the early 90s and I genuinely like his style. I think that his reputation of trading away the farm is hugely overblown though he's not infallible. I think his signing of players to big money contracts has as much to do with ownership. There's no way he can give that much money out without alerting someone, but they need a punching bag and it's usually DD who's responsible. I also don't think that his drafting is anything to write home about either--which is where he probably gets his grim reaper of the minor leagues reputation from. Judging from his deals with the Sox, he was able to separate the wheat from the chaff.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
71,221
Someone who follows the Phillies more closely than me can elaborate on this, but I was thinking last night that PHI is very lucky that Rhys Hoskins has been out all season, as it's allowed them to move Harper to first and let Schwarber DH. If Hoskins was healthy, Schwarber would presumably be in LF everyday, and he was the single worst defensive player in MLB this year (https://fieldingbible.com/DRSLeaderboard).

DD is interesting from the perspective that we've been talking recently about how the regular season and the playoffs are different things. DD is not especially good at building regular season teams, but if they get into the postseason, look out.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,231
Portland
DD has this perception around here as a deadly assassin throwing money and prospects around with little regard for anything else. He drafted, Crawford, Houck, Casas, Duran, and signed Bello and Rafaela as IFA. 6 more of his draftees are in the the Sox top 20 prospects. The guys he moved in deals were almost all misses for their new teams.

I wouldn't want him anywhere near massive contracts for guys in their 30's, but he is a really, really good GM that is criminally underrated around here.
 

jezza1918

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
2,701
South Dartmouth, MA
Someone who follows the Phillies more closely than me can elaborate on this, but I was thinking last night that PHI is very lucky that Rhys Hoskins has been out all season, as it's allowed them to move Harper to first and let Schwarber DH. If Hoskins was healthy, Schwarber would presumably be in LF everyday, and he was the single worst defensive player in MLB this year (https://fieldingbible.com/DRSLeaderboard).

DD is interesting from the perspective that we've been talking recently about how the regular season and the playoffs are different things. DD is not especially good at building regular season teams, but if they get into the postseason, look out.
Ha, a buddy of mine who is a diehard Phillies fan made the Hoskins point to me this morning. It's great insight. He is one of 3 phillies fans I talk to regularly, might be worth noting in this thread that all 3 wanted him fired around the trade deadline last year.
 

LogansDad

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
29,806
Alamogordo
Great opening post for a thread.

I may regret this analogy, but Dombrowski strikes me as the AC/DC of baseball executives. No critical acclaim. But you know what you're going to get, and very few have ever done that thing better.

Personally, I like him a lot and look back on his tenure here quite fondly. I loathed the Sale extension the moment it was announced, but that's really the only big gripe I had with him.
This is my thought almost exactly (though I wouldn't have been able to come up with the AC/DC comp).

The Sale one is a big one, since it is at least believed to be one of the main reasons that we have to watch Mookie Betts play for the Dodgers, so it's a pretty big knock (though, I think if ownership wanted to keep Mookie anyway, they could have found other ways of getting under the luxury tax), but he oversaw a time that was one of the best runs of my lifetime. Even the two teams that lost in the DS were a lot of fun, and 2018 speaks for itself.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2001
24,644
DD is not especially good at building regular season teams, but if they get into the postseason, look out.
Wha? Since 2006, he's finished no lower than third in his division once (fifth in 08) and has a .500 or better record every year except two (08 and 15). He's also won seven division flags since 2011. He's pretty good in the regular season too.
 

johnnywayback

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2004
1,422
Yet, it still feels like people view Dombrowski as a bit of a carnival trick. A guy who rashly trades away top prospects and spends recklessly, providing brief windows of contention followed by years of needed rebuild. People may remember the winning, but they certainly talked for years later about the Miguel Cabrera contract, or the Chris Sale contract.
I know that's the easy characterization of Dombrowski's approach, but I think people get it wrong. I didn't like Dombrowski at all, but I wouldn't say he was rash or reckless.

What he does, in my view, is 1) pick the guys he wants and 2) go get them regardless of the value proposition. It can be a really effective approach if you get part 1 right -- if you correctly identify the right players to target. It can be a disastrous approach if you get that part wrong. Chris Sale is a perfect example: Dombrowski identified him as The Guy to push the team over the top in 2017-2018, and I don't mind that he probably overpaid a little to get him. Dombrowski then identified him as The Guy to keep leading the staff for the next five years, and he was wrong to the tune of a crippling $150 million extension.

If the goal of building a baseball team was to build the best team in the league, I'd probably agree with Dombrowski's approach. The only way you can be dominant is to take some risks and have them pay off, and you can't successfully take those risks if you're overly worried about winning trades or getting good value for free agents. You'll never be #1 if you're afraid of potentially being #30.

But I don't think dominance should be the goal in a sport where the playoffs are such a crapshoot. The 2018 Red Sox were incredibly fun, but the 108 wins during the regular season would have meant squat if a couple of playoff games had gone the other way. Rather, I think the goal should be to build a team that is consistently and reliably in the top, say, 25% of teams (in other words, to get into the postseason as often as possible). And doing so requires more attention to building and maintaining value than Dombrowski has historically paid -- it's not just about trading prospects or signing huge contracts, but about the bottom end of the 26- and 40-man rosters, which he largely ignored (and which Bloom did a much better job of cultivating).

The downside of my preferred approach, of course, is that if you're too focused on value around the margins, you can get paralyzed, fail to take any meaningful risks at all, and wind up consistently but moderately underperforming, which is what did Bloom in. The truth is, execution matters. And even though I don't like Dombrowski's approach, I will give him credit for successfully executing it more than once.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,579
Hingham, MA
I can't take anyone who didn't like Dombrowski seriously. They won 93, 93, 108, and 84 games; they won a World Series; they won 3 consecutive division titles for the first time in any of our lifetimes; they gave us the single greatest season in Red Sox history; and they did it with exciting players to boot.

After 2004-2007, it was the best 4 run in (modern) Red Sox history.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
71,221
Wha? Since 2006, he's finished no lower than third in his division once (fifth in 08) and has a .500 or better record every year except two (08 and 15). He's also won seven division flags since 2011. He's pretty good in the regular season too.
it was linked above, his teams are below .500 for his career:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Dombrowski#Record_as_General_Manager_/_President_of_Baseball_Operations

And even these two Phillies teams both barely made the playoffs, 87-75 and 90-72. It's awesome if your team kicks ass in the postseason, it doesn't matter much if you don't get there.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
71,221
But my point wasn't that DD is bad at building regular season teams, it was more that he is the flip side of teams like LAD and TB and ATL and NYY who have mostly underachieved recently in the playoffs, his teams tend to overachieve there.
 

Sandwich Pick

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2017
713
Someone who follows the Phillies more closely than me can elaborate on this, but I was thinking last night that PHI is very lucky that Rhys Hoskins has been out all season, as it's allowed them to move Harper to first and let Schwarber DH. If Hoskins was healthy, Schwarber would presumably be in LF everyday, and he was the single worst defensive player in MLB this year (https://fieldingbible.com/DRSLeaderboard).

DD is interesting from the perspective that we've been talking recently about how the regular season and the playoffs are different things. DD is not especially good at building regular season teams, but if they get into the postseason, look out.
The Phillies kind of lucked out (for lack of a better term) because Harper wanted to play ASAP but couldn't throw because of his UCL injury. He volunteered to play 1B. The rest of the dominoes you listed don't fall without this happening.

It took a while for the power to come back (3 HR and .400 SLG in 246 PA before the all-star break) , but Harper was still a better alternative than Darick Hall/Kody Clemens or moving Bohm to 1B and giving those AB to Edmundo Sosa.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
12,324
Well if Harper had to DH, they could have just played Schwarber at first :)

It’s kind of weird to claim injuries to Hoskins and Harper (often times injuries to key players are an excuse for a GM) as a positive.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
6,491
Great GM for all the reasons above. Definitely was the right man for the job with the situation the Sox found themselves in in '16. Also, perfect time to let him go (maybe even a year too late with the Chris Sale misfire... but letting your GM go a year after a WS victory???? no way). I also still think Bloom will be looked at in 6 years as providing the farm system that produced several years of highly competitive, playoff baseball team with hopefully a WS victory in that time frame.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2001
24,644
it was linked above, his teams are below .500 for his career:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Dombrowski#Record_as_General_Manager_/_President_of_Baseball_Operations

And even these two Phillies teams both barely made the playoffs, 87-75 and 90-72. It's awesome if your team kicks ass in the postseason, it doesn't matter much if you don't get there.
Right. But there's a reason for that, correct? He was the GM of the brand new expansion Florida Marlins, which is why he's underwater in the W-L department (and he's only under by 53 games). Expansion teams are always going to lose. A lot. Every team that he takes the GM helm usually kicks ass.
 

astrozombie

New Member
Sep 12, 2022
409
DD's somewhat muted reputation is probably due to 2 things:
1. Teams are worse off when he leaves. A lot of fans interpret that right or wrong as going out and having a great time, then ducking out before the bill comes. That isn't necessarily true, but the Marlins/Tigers/Sox all had some lean years after he left and it's hard to shake the idea that maybe he left them worse off for the medium term future. I can't speak for the Marlins, but as a Sox fan I loved 2018. But since then being a Sox fan has been on the whole somewhat frustrating, for reasons that are strewn all over this board.
2. Over the last several years - say, starting with his run in Detroit - he has gotten to pick opportunities where he has few constraints. A lot of those Tiger teams had payrolls in the top 10. He was allowed to trade top prospects for Sale or Cabrera. I was pretty anti-Bloom, but I recognize he was given nowhere near the leeway DD was. It is reminiscent of the argument about Brian Cashman - if he wasn't the GM of the Yankees and instead was the GM for Seattle for example, would he have been as successful? I think there is an idea that Theo could have taken a AAA team and made them a contender, but people like DD or Cashman are really only good if they have access to a ton of resources (and that includes scouting departments, one thing that I think DD gets overly dinged for but is actually solid at).
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,853
Right. But there's a reason for that, correct? He was the GM of the brand new expansion Florida Marlins, which is why he's underwater in the W-L department (and he's only under by 53 games). Expansion teams are always going to lose. A lot. Every team that he takes the GM helm usually kicks ass.
He also built a winner in Florida and was immediately told to tear it down, to the tune of losing 108 games a year after winning the World Series. He then later inherited a historically bad Tigers team that lost 219 games his first two years on the job, before turning them into a perennial contender.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,276
I don't really have a problem with DD, but he likely would have had some poor seasons under his belt here had he stuck around, regardless of what would have happened with Mookie. The lack of cost controlled talent to fill the many holes wasn't going to go away.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,962
Unreal America
I don't really have a problem with DD, but he likely would have had some poor seasons under his belt here had he stuck around, regardless of what would have happened with Mookie. The lack of cost controlled talent to fill the many holes wasn't going to go away.
I could be way off on this, but I think Dombrowski did what he did during his first 3 years with the Sox (trade a lot of prospects away) because he had a young, strong core that had several years ahead of it to contend.

When DD was let go in 2019 the Sox had 6 of their 8 starting positional spots occupied by homegrown talent, all under 30. Yes, he was going to have to pay some of them over the next 2-3 years, but I assume he figured Sox ownership was up to that task (he was wrong, obviously). Thus he had a window to rebuild the farm. Which is what he did, because those guys are all playing for the Sox in 2023 and 2024.

I think the guy is a heckuva GM. In retrospect, the Sox should have kept him.
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
5,638
02130
But my point wasn't that DD is bad at building regular season teams, it was more that he is the flip side of teams like LAD and TB and ATL and NYY who have mostly underachieved recently in the playoffs, his teams tend to overachieve there.
Do they? The Phillies are but I don't know if his other teams really have under or over-achieved in the playoffs. And this is almost entirely luck anyway unless you have David Ortiz.

In all I think it's very hard to evaluate a GM (other than the ones who are mostly bad and don't get another chance in the league) when you don't quite know what instructions they were given from ownership about what they could spend and whether they could go all-in to trade prospects. Analytically-bent fans like the GMs who build long-term success with low spending because we know that they have made shrewd moves and we can shrug away the guys they let go because we (probably correctly) assume they had to do so. But maybe DD is super-good at convincing ownership to go all-in? Maybe Bloom or Cherington or whoever really wanted to make some very smart deals and ownership said he had to do something else. There's no objective way to know this because we don't have the data.

DD has been around a long time and keeps getting hired, and keeps having solid success. I think he's certainly pretty good, whether he's better than someone like Epstein or Friedman is basically unknowable.
 

Bergs

funky and cold
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2005
21,725
I could be way off on this, but I think Dombrowski did what he did during his first 3 years with the Sox (trade a lot of prospects away) because he had a young, strong core that had several years ahead of it to contend.

When DD was let go in 2019 the Sox had 6 of their 8 starting positional spots occupied by homegrown talent, all under 30. Yes, he was going to have to pay some of them over the next 2-3 years, but I assume he figured Sox ownership was up to that task (he was wrong, obviously). Thus he had a window to rebuild the farm. Which is what he did, because those guys are all playing for the Sox in 2023 and 2024.

I think the guy is a heckuva GM. In retrospect, the Sox should have kept him.
I liked Bloom more than many, but I agree with your conclusion.

That said, the Sale extension SUUUUUCCCKKKKKKEEDDD
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
27,123
Newton
I’m mostly a defender of Henry, but I’m not sure I entirely understand why he fired DD. It wasn’t as if we all knew the Sale extension was crippling at that point.

What do we think would’ve happened if he hadn’t been fired? As noted, the Eovaldi deal ended up being a great one and a bunch of his draft picks have panned out.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,962
Unreal America
I liked Bloom more than many, but I agree with your conclusion.

That said, the Sale extension SUUUUUCCCKKKKKKEEDDD
Oh, I agree. The moment I heard about the Sale extension I was furious. Particularly because it seemed clear the guy was hurt, and we had a whole season to see how that played out.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,276
I could be way off on this, but I think Dombrowski did what he did during his first 3 years with the Sox (trade a lot of prospects away) because he had a young, strong core that had several years ahead of it to contend.

When DD was let go in 2019 the Sox had 6 of their 8 starting positional spots occupied by homegrown talent, all under 30. Yes, he was going to have to pay some of them over the next 2-3 years, but I assume he figured Sox ownership was up to that task (he was wrong, obviously). Thus he had a window to rebuild the farm. Which is what he did, because those guys are all playing for the Sox in 2023 and 2024.
Sure, but as you say, those farm guys didn't arrive until 2023/2024. The core of 6-8 guys was nice, the problem was...everything else. Let's say they kept the 2019 team together. They didn't trade Mookie (or Price) or JBJ or Benentendi. Those 4 plus JD, Sale, Vaz, Devers, Eovaldi, and Xander -- that's 10 guys, 182 million, and about 20 WAR. It typically takes a little more than double that to make the playoffs, so assuming the same budget of 206 mil, DD would have had about 24 million to come up with 20+ WAR on the FA market and what the farm had produced at that point. That's not impossible, but the degree of difficulty is beyond the capacity of anyone who doesn't get supremely lucky. Again, I'm not anti-DD. He put together a multi year run that ended up in one historically great year with a WS win. Even if you blame the farm system dry spell 100% on him, it was worth it. But that dry spell, it's a hell of a thing, and he was going to have to either try get ownership to spend more, and more, and more, or play FA roulette they way Bloom did.
 
Last edited:

Sausage in Section 17

Poker Champ
SoSH Member
Mar 17, 2004
2,096
He doesn't seem to do well building an organization up, but he can come in and take them the rest of the way toward relevance/contending.

He's a closer GM. You bring him in when you're close, and he'll mortgage your future to put you over the top.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,962
Unreal America
Sure, but as you say, those farm guys didn't arrive until 2023/2024. The core of 6-8 guys was nice, the problem was...everything else. Let's say they kept the 2019 team together. They didn't trade Mookie (or Price) or JBJ or Benentendi. Those 4 plus JD, Sale, Vaz, Devers, Eovaldi, and Xander -- that's 10 guys, 182 million, and about 20 WAR. It typically takes a little more than double that to make the playoffs, so assuming the same budget of 206 mil, DD would have had about 26 million to come up with 20+ WAR on the FA market. That's not impossible, but the degree of difficulty is beyond the capacity of anyone who doesn't get supremely lucky with FA. Again, I'm not anti-DD. He put together a multi year run that ended up in one historically great year with a WS win. Even if you blame the farm system dry spell 100% on him, it was worth it. But that dry spell, it's a hell of a thing, and he was going to have to either try get ownership to spend more, and more, and more, or play FA roulette they way Bloom did.
Of course, but we know there would have been trades, at least at the margins, and other roster machinations. And DD had a pretty good track record of finding strong contributors.

Also, isn't that core a lot more than 20 WAR? I think you get to ~15 with Mookie, Devers and X alone.

I was just saying that I could see why DD did what he did in 2016-17, given the core he inherited.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,276
Of course, but we know there would have been trades, at least at the margins, and other roster machinations. And DD had a pretty good track record of finding strong contributors.

I was just saying that I could see why DD did what he did in 2016-17, given the core he inherited.
On the latter, I agree 1000%.

On the former, he was going to have to win bigly on pretty much everyone of those moves on the margins to put enough pieces together.
 
Last edited:

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
5,307
I’m mostly a defender of Henry, but I’m not sure I entirely understand why he fired DD. It wasn’t as if we all knew the Sale extension was crippling at that point.

What do we think would’ve happened if he hadn’t been fired? As noted, the Eovaldi deal ended up being a great one and a bunch of his draft picks have panned out.
I think given their pursuit of Bloom, ownership recognized that DD wasn't building a sustainable development machine in the minors and realized, after mostly running it back in 2019, that something needed to change for long term organizational health.

I'm not sure if DD has done better work in that area with the Phillies.
 

Hank Scorpio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 1, 2013
7,001
Salem, NH
I have very mixed feelings on Dombrowski. Yes, we won three straight division titles, had a 108 win season, and won a championship.

He brought in Price, which I still see as a “win”, since we won a championship. It wasn’t the best signing, but it wasn’t the worst either. I can’t really fault DD for the Price signing.

He traded for Chris Sale and Craig Kimbrel.

He traded a lot of high value prospects, but didn’t really give away anything that turned out to be especially painful. And he kept Devers.

On the other hand…

- he inherited a core of Mookie Betts, Xander Bogaerts, Jackie Bradley Jr., and Rafael Devers.

- he didn’t extend Mookie early (although it’s not clear how much of an opportunity he actually had to do this - so this might be unfair)

- he signed the Chris Sale extension, which was completely unnecessary at the time, especially considering how iffy Sale was health-wise down the stretch in 2018.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,276
Also, isn't that core a lot more than 20 WAR? I think you get to ~15 with Mookie, Devers and X alone.
You are right, I miscalculated -- it's about 24 WAR. So it's not quite as bad, but getting into the low 40s with 24 mil to spend and zilch form the farm is still daunting.

Xander 5.9
Mookie 6.4
Devers 4.4
Price 0
Sale 0
JBJ -0.5
JD 1.1
Vaz 2.1
Eovaldi 1.5
Benny 3.2
 

RG33

Certain Class of Poster
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2005
7,240
CA
He doesn't seem to do well building an organization up, but he can come in and take them the rest of the way toward relevance/contending.

He's a closer GM. You bring him in when you're close, and he'll mortgage your future to put you over the top.
Well, except for that time he took an expansion franchise and turned it into a World Champion.

Great opening post to this thread. Dombroski is a surefire Hall of Famer at this point. It almost feels like his firing will be one of the biggest mistakes Henry and team made.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,749
I think given their pursuit of Bloom, ownership recognized that DD wasn't building a sustainable development machine in the minors and realized, after mostly running it back in 2019, that something needed to change for long term organizational health.
I think it's partially this... in combination with their desire to pull back on payroll.

The lack of a sustainable development machine is a lot more important if you are falling back into the middle of the pack on that front. Seems pretty clear with the Bloom/Tampa connection that they decided they wanted to do things differently rather than be a top 3-5 payroll team (at least for a few years).

Also, DD does seem to wear out his welcome, he might be a bit "prickly". Not sure we ever got an entirely satisfying answer from the FO why he was canned 10 months after winning the World Series, maybe something else behind the scenes.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
12,324
I’m mostly a defender of Henry, but I’m not sure I entirely understand why he fired DD. It wasn’t as if we all knew the Sale extension was crippling at that point.

What do we think would’ve happened if he hadn’t been fired? As noted, the Eovaldi deal ended up being a great one and a bunch of his draft picks have panned out.
I think he fired him because he saw how much he was paying and getting from Price / Sale / Eovaldi / Porcello, and compared it to what Tampa was paying and getting from their guys.

In an alternate world, they run the same team back In a covid free 2020, have better health, and do pretty well.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Someone who follows the Phillies more closely than me can elaborate on this, but I was thinking last night that PHI is very lucky that Rhys Hoskins has been out all season, as it's allowed them to move Harper to first and let Schwarber DH. If Hoskins was healthy, Schwarber would presumably be in LF everyday, and he was the single worst defensive player in MLB this year (https://fieldingbible.com/DRSLeaderboard).

DD is interesting from the perspective that we've been talking recently about how the regular season and the playoffs are different things. DD is not especially good at building regular season teams, but if they get into the postseason, look out.
Right, because his style is based on bringing in proven major leaguers, I think? I look at this Phillies team and kinda see a type -- Castellanos, Turner, and of course all the former Sox, guys who might be a little flawed and a little (or more than a little) overpaid if you judge their 162-game numbers. But with a base of homegrown talent, he is good at supplementing that with guys who can step up.

I have mixed feelings about him but always appreciated how decisive he was. IIRC he would make moves a bit earlier than the market might dictate, and would just "go get his guy." As much as I liked Bloom that was clearly not his strength, and maybe that Dombro kind of certainty reflected a clearer vision than we have had of late. Even there, I don't care, we didn't need a clear vision the last few years as much as we needed lots and lots of talent, but going forward is a different story.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,231
Portland
This is my thought almost exactly (though I wouldn't have been able to come up with the AC/DC comp).

The Sale one is a big one, since it is at least believed to be one of the main reasons that we have to watch Mookie Betts play for the Dodgers, so it's a pretty big knock (though, I think if ownership wanted to keep Mookie anyway, they could have found other ways of getting under the luxury tax), but he oversaw a time that was one of the best runs of my lifetime. Even the two teams that lost in the DS were a lot of fun, and 2018 speaks for itself.
Right. And Theo had plenty of stinkers on his watch too - Crawford (and the resultant Nick Punto trade), Renteria, re-signing Lowell and Varitek. To a lesser degree, Dice-K, Lackey.
He also had god awful drafting for 5 consecutive years from 2006-10 with Jason Place, Nick Hagadone, Casey Kelly, Reymond Fuentes, and Kolbrin Vitek as his first round draft picks.

No question Theo was the best GM in Sox history and one of the greatest of all time, but every GM the Sox have had has had major fuck ups that crippled the roster for a spell.
 
Last edited:

Sandwich Pick

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2017
713
I think it's partially this... in combination with their desire to pull back on payroll.

The lack of a sustainable development machine is a lot more important if you are falling back into the middle of the pack on that front. Seems pretty clear with the Bloom/Tampa connection that they decided they wanted to do things differently rather than be a top 3-5 payroll team (at least for a few years).

Also, DD does seem to wear out his welcome, he might be a bit "prickly". Not sure we ever got an entirely satisfying answer from the FO why he was canned 10 months after winning the World Series, maybe something else behind the scenes.
It clearly didn't scare off John Middleton, who wouldn't take no for an answer and made DD tell him why he was turning them down personally.

I had no idea that DD was potentially part of an expansion group in Nashville.

Middleton talked to Dombrowski about the lackluster expansion prospects for Nashville given the state of the league. He then offered Dombrowski an out in case things didn’t go to plan.

“I said ‘I’ll make it easy for you,’” Middleton continued. “I said ‘If you take our job I’ll put in the contract you can walk away any time you want and go back to Nashville.’ I said ‘If I’m wrong, you’re excused.’”
https://www.audacy.com/theteam980/sports/middleton-details-how-he-got-dombrowski-to-join-phillies
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,820
If a GM's job is to identify talent then Dombrowski has to be one of the best ever. I mean here's an article from 2020 with all of his "bad" trades and signing: https://www.nbcsportsphiladelphia.com/mlb/philadelphia-phillies/dave-dombrowskis-worst-trades-and-signings/174564/. After all of the moves he made, people are still pointing to a trade where he traded Randy Johnson (who wouldn't figure it out for years) for a guy who was one of the best pitchers in baseball for a year?

Right, because his style is based on bringing in proven major leaguers, I think?
If I recall correctly, Dombrowski's philosophy is to bring in players he thinks can perform or has a track record of performing on the biggest stages. I'll note that one thing he does that many other GMs don't is to watch the games: he grew up in baseball by tagging along with scouts and he watches (I presume he still does) every pitch of every games. https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/11/04/how-did-dave-dombrowski-learn-evaluate-players/t62KvikWsU38nTIJA7z9sK/story.html
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
No question the best GM in Sox history and one of the greatest of all time, but every GM the Sox have had has had major fuck ups that crippled the roster for a spell.
Would you put him over Theo? I don't think I'd agree there based on accomplishments alone. Although so much of how teams operate has changed in the last 20 years so maybe it's an apples/oranges comparison.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,853
Would you put him over Theo? I don't think I'd agree there based on accomplishments alone. Although so much of how teams operate has changed in the last 20 years so maybe it's an apples/oranges comparison.
Pretty sure he was referring to Theo in his post.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,231
Portland
Would you put him over Theo? I don't think I'd agree there based on accomplishments alone. Although so much of how teams operate has changed in the last 20 years so maybe it's an apples/oranges comparison.
I meant Theo was the best. Just edited post for clarity.