RSS Twitter Facebook YouTube
Expand Menu

Jim Pete's article

Talk about the Cleveland Indians, Major League Baseball, and other sports.

Jim Pete's article

Postby indians1 » Sun Sep 02, 2012 8:30 pm

I think Jim is right on the mark. There is no way to get around it . The indians are not even close to contending right now.

After tearing this thing apart in 2008 and antonetti declaring this is our window to contend, he is a colossal failure.

Not one picher can we count on next year in the rotationn to be a consistent starter. I am not even saying an #1 or #2.

Our rotation is filled with a bunch of #4 and #5 pitchers in the rotation with masterson being the closest to a #3. How after 4 years of rebuilding is this organization still so void of upper echelon talent. (especially in the starting rotation).

We have no power in the system and we continue to draft left handed guys that don't hit for power. There is no plan in place and the dolans have to face facts.

I think shapiro and antonetti have to be fired because they have lost the confidence of the fan base. For the longest, the perception was that dolan was short changing the budget and antonetti and shapiro were handcuffed.

After the last few years, the perception is still dolan is cheap but the FO is incompetent. No matter what happens this offseason, the attendance is going to be worse next year. And this will be the first time i think the fans are justified.

I don't see how anybody can think the situation can get better with shapiro and antonetti running the show. They are the only constants in the influx of change that has occurred at the other areas of the organization and the results are the same.

BAD BASEBALL!!!!

The best message the indians can send to the fans is that they won't accept failure and not maintaining the status quo.

Does anybody out there think this current regime can get it right?
indians1
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 12:00 am

Re: Jim Pete's article

Postby go_tribe » Sun Sep 02, 2012 10:08 pm

Justin Masterson is, assuming he regains his consistency next year, a number one starter
go_tribe
Undrafted Free Agent
 
Posts: 90
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 1:49 pm

Re: Jim Pete's article

Postby daingean » Sun Sep 02, 2012 11:44 pm

Sadly, I think Mirabelli and Antonetti at a minimum must go.

1. Mirabelli was the scout in charge when solid trades were made acquiring Sizemore, C.Lee, Asdrubal, Choo and Santana but the Ubaldo, CC, and C.Lee trades really set this team back. Ubaldo was a guy that had LOST velocity before the trade and Knapp was already hurt when the C. Lee trade was made.

2. CA failed to address team needs in the offseason and presented us with the likes of Kotchman, Lowe and Cunningham (are those the acquisitions that a contending team makes?) For the record, I was okay with the Lowe trade (although 5mil is too much to pay for what we got but it was more than what we got from Kotchman and Cunningham). IMO, all of those trades were a result of looking at statistics but not the visual scouting because I've seen Kotchman and Lowe first hand and neither of those were guys that I would have went out and acquired (Lowe maybe for a 5th starter spot but no way would I even considered Kotchman).

3. CA had a chance to redeam himself with a deadline acquisition but alas Lars Anderson is no help.

Sadly, the last 2 years were opportunities to make it to the playoffs but like Nero watching Rome burn, the FO was affraid to go 3 years on a Willingham and settled for wasting money on Kotchman. The only thing exciting has been the draft where a real change in philosophy (draft athletes) has given us hope for the future. Now we just need to have hope in the FO to get us there when the next wave of prospects are ready (or the end of the Mayan calendar puts us out of our misery).
daingean
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1538
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 12:06 pm

Re: Jim Pete's article

Postby Edible14 » Mon Sep 03, 2012 5:20 am

I struggle to think of how it's CA's fault that the rotation fell apart. Unless you expect him to do some miracle job like what Beane did with the Oakland rotation, there's really not a whole lot to criticize. He realized it was a weakness, traded for the best available starter both at the deadline last year and during the off-season. Those best available guys ended up being awful, but I don't think there was much better options out there and I don't think that Pomeranz and White would be helping much more than Ubaldo. It's not like Kluber and Gomez have been tremendous either. I don't think it's really fair to fire a guy who's essentially in year 2 of his run as a GM, because most of what's been built here is not his to own.

I get the idea that we should clean house of all of Shapiro's team, Shapiro included. I get why that feels right. But I honestly really like some of the things we've been doing on the draft and international free agent front, and I don't think that now is the time to change it. Ultimately, everyone seems to want a "clean slate" in these sorts of things, but there really is no such thing in sports. You can fire the entire front office and coaching staff, but the fans will still make the same complaints about Dolan. Look at what's happened with the Browns over the years. They change regimes often, and it rarely puts a dent in the complaints and attitudes of the fans. Nobody gave that team a "clean slate" when Mangini came in, nor when they brought in Shurmur/Heckert/Holmgren. The complaints are always the same, and that didn't even change when Lerner left town.

Ultimately, winning is what matters. I fail to see where cleaning house actually translates into more wins. I doubt it will actually soothe the fanbase, and I don't see any "young kid who wants to be GM" actually doing a better job given the tough circumstances.
User avatar
Edible14
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1084
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 11:49 am

Re: Jim Pete's article

Postby indians1 » Mon Sep 03, 2012 7:58 am

People want to act like chris antonetti had nothing to do with this team prior to being GM. He was shapiro's "#1 lieutenant".

He is part of a regime that has failed for the most part of 12 years.

Let me state: In 2002- i supported the tearing apart of the indians and deciding to rebuild because they got away from what got them successful. In the late 90's, the indians were signing free agents instead of grooming their own talent. Look how they did from 98-2001 vs. '95-97. They made the playoffs almost every year, but they didn't go far in the playoffs in the late 90's.

The "blueprint for success" in 2002 was supposed to start building through the draft again and only sign free agents to fill holes. This team was supposed to be built on pitching. The trades of 2002 were supposed to accelerate the rebuild so they didn't have to wait on all their draft picks to make it to cleveland before they could contend. The plan early on worked because the trades that brought in sizemore and hafner hit because they were the major pieces to the lineup along with victor martinez. You had 3 impact players that teams feared from 2004-2007. That is what got people excited about the future.

The only problem is the 2nd part of the plan that was supposed to allow us to compete year in and year out has not worked. After the initial wave of talent brought in through trades (grady, hafner, lee,) the second wave of talent was supposed to be ready to contribute.

That was more than enough time (5 years) to start producing some impact players to complement what you had with the core of talent at the time. That is what brought on the rebuild in 2008 and 2009 (trades of victor, cliff, and CC).

Brad Grant is better than mirabelli but is he good enough? After 4 years of drafting, the only thing we know is that he can draft relief pitchers. We still don't know enough from kipnis and chisenhall. Pomeranz and white haven't proven anything in colorado. Where are the impact players in the farm system?

to be good (in a small market)- you have to produce your own ace and your own power hitting because to get them from outside is too expensive unless you get lucky on some guy that you discovered.

After 4 more years of rebuilding- where is there any hope of guys that can turn it around and be part of a team that can compete for more than 1 year at a time?

Justin masterson- is too inconsistent and the indians should have traded him, choo, and perez when they could have gotten premium value for them.

2013 is a wash where we are stuck and the attendance will be worse than even this year. The fans have lost confidence in the decision makers. Every GM is going to make some mistakes but he has to have more hits than misses.
indians1
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 12:00 am

Re: Jim Pete's article

Postby timdav » Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:31 am

You can say the Dolans are cheap all you want, but saying so won't change anything: they aren't going to fire themselves. And, no baseball team...or any kind of business...will heavily deficit-spend for very long before going bankrupt.

No major front office changes will fix things overnight. Nobody with a functioning brain expects that would happen. But, what's the point in following the same obviously failed plan over and over and over into infinity????

How long do you wait to do what deep down inside you realize is necessary? Aren't you guys sick of the losing?

It's not like the key members of the Indians front office haven't been given a more than fair chance to succeed: over 12 seasons+.

How long can any failed organization year after year after year blame "the employees" and not eventually hold accountable the very executives who oversee 99% of the "hiring and firing" of everybody else???

This is an absurd situation.
timdav
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 230
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 5:30 pm

Re: Jim Pete's article

Postby GeronimoSon » Mon Sep 03, 2012 10:53 am

Absurd?... Young players are put in positions (by ownership, front office executives and field managers) to succeed... And they don't.. They fail in many ways: Grady Sizemore couldn't stay on the field for three years as his knees crumbled.. Travis Hafner's shoulder is so frail that it took 2 1/2 years before he could play every other day.. The once devastating velocity of Ubaldo Jimenez's fastball has been reduced by 5 mph, making him vulnerable.. Fausto Carmona goes into a government forced limbo for nearly six months before he emerges as Roberto Hernandez.. etc.. etc.. etc..

Is it all "bad luck"?..of course there is some truth to that..

Is it due to Chris Antonetti signing the wrong guys: Casey Kotchman on a one year deal for $ 3 MM instead of signing Cody Ross on a one year deal for $ 3 MM?.. Sure... there's some of that..

Could the results of these transaction have been predicted? The easy answer yes.. Prediction of doom and gloom is called pessimism.. Will the "blow up the team" mantra succeed where the previous plans have failed..

The easy answer is OF COURSE BLOWING IT UP WILL FAIL.. every thing else has failed..and until something succeeds, then any prognostication that even hints at success must be evaluated as a future "FAIL"..

One thing that really galls this author.. It's not a money "thing".. that prevents success (both over and under paying).. it's a performance thing.. and to those that think if you pay more you get better performance: You are kidding yourselves or you would prefer to lose AND be poor as opposed to just lose..

This article by Jim Pete does point out one subject that I am in complete agreement and is very clear.. guys who were failing at the ML level were permitted to continue to fail.. too long, and, for this alone, the FO/Acta have no one but themselves to blame...
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3949
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Jim Pete's article

Postby timdav » Mon Sep 03, 2012 12:06 pm

Absurd? Well, yes...of course staying the course with the current FO is absurd. That was my point.

After 12 years of the same same same upper management...and their marginal to poor trade analysis and free agent selection, and selection of minor league scouts and development people...sure: absurd. Why stay the same and expect different results? How long is too long to decide to make major changes?

That's up to the owners.

Hello?????????????
timdav
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 230
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 5:30 pm

Re: Jim Pete's article

Postby Edible14 » Mon Sep 03, 2012 5:10 pm

timdav wrote:Absurd? Well, yes...of course staying the course with the current FO is absurd. That was my point.

After 12 years of the same same same upper management...and their marginal to poor trade analysis and free agent selection, and selection of minor league scouts and development people...sure: absurd. Why stay the same and expect different results? How long is too long to decide to make major changes?


Does the changing of their philosophy/personnel a few years ago count as making those major changes? I would argue it does.

Nobody disputes that the big issue here is that we didn't draft well 2002-2007. Those are mostly empty drafts that should have been producing some major league talent to refill the ranks. But that's an issue that seems to me has been resolved. They put Grant in charge, they started spending more money on guys, they started to be more aggressive on the international front. There seems to actually be a working plan in that department now.

It's not a mystery to me why this team sucks right now. The rotation fell apart because two distinct gambles - Lowe and Ubaldo - failed. And yes, that speaks to Antonetti making two bad trades. But again, there weren't better options and it's not like staying put would have made the team better. Instead of Lowe and Ubaldo, we would have had Alex White and... David Huff? Maybe McAllister would have started the year on the team instead of in Columbus? The point is that the rotation was not fixable between last year's trading deadline and this year. Not unless you know how to fix Justin Masterson. The rotation sucks, but it's because we drafted the likes of Sowers and Huff instead of getting legitimately good pitchers all of those years. Hopefully some of the guys we've taken recently - Araujo, Howard, Salazar, etc. - actually develop into those types of pitchers.

I'm all for putting a better plan into place. Let's do that no matter what that means. If that means firing the FO, I'm fine with that. If that means CA stays and simply readjusts his free agency and trade strategies, that's fine too. But I have my doubts that bringing in someone from outside the organization with no GM experience will actually be anything but a feel-good move. My point is that if your argument comes from the idea that it'll be a clean slate, and we'll able to rebuild without intense public scrutiny, you're making the wrong argument. I get the idea that someone should be "punished" for the failings, but to an extent that's already happened and that's not a mindset that's focused on actually putting a better plan in place. Fixing the future requires a mind on that future, not on punishing people for the past.

I don't doubt that there's a good baseball mind out there that might make a really good GM. Where I really cast doubt is that Dolan would be the one to find him, and that he'd be in a position to really succeed here. It's a tough market with challenging conditions, not really an ideal spot for a first-timer. Antonetti is supposedly the exact same thing - a young baseball mind who has some front office experience - but he has the advantage of local experience. What's the point in swapping him out for another young GM who will likely have similar growing pains with the position? Where's the sense in cleaning house on the drafting/international front when that side of things seems to actually be producing for once?
User avatar
Edible14
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1084
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 11:49 am

Re: Jim Pete's article

Postby timdav » Mon Sep 03, 2012 5:39 pm

All of this debating back and forth between a bunch of us aside....this organization hasn't won consistently since the last few years of John Hart's tenure as GM and the Jacobs ownership.

How long is this going to continue?

The ownership isn't going away. Over the years of the Dolan family ownership they've replaced everybody else in the on-field organization over and over and over again...except the front office. If this were a normal business, the key members of the FO would've been gone years ago.

Hey, if you guys here on this forum want to pontificate til the end of time about players and philosophies...keep at it. Doing so has really gotten boring, IMHO. And pointless. It sure isn't very entertainlng for me.

I'd love to see a winner again....like the 90's....only maybe take the last step and win a ring. Something most of us aren't old enough to remember (1948).
timdav
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 230
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 5:30 pm


Return to Beyond The Minors

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron