PDA

View Full Version : For Moore and Antonetti -- why Reds instead of Red Sox?



Red_BlueDevil
01-24-2006, 12:17 PM
In a couple of places I've seen both Dayton Moore and Chris Antonetti named as potential replacements for O'Brien. Personally, I think either would be great choices -- I followed the Red Sox GM replacement pretty closely and came away impressed with the credentials of both assistant GMs.

However, both Moore and Antonetti, while initially in the running for the GM spot in Boston, took their names out. Whatever their reasons may have been (it's rumored that Moore has been promised the Braves GM position after John Schurholtz retires) why would either of these guys choose the Reds position if it's offered to them over the Red Sox position.

I realize that the knee jerk response to this question is that "we don't have a lucchino" and that they could then have total control here. But is that really enough?

TeamBoone
01-24-2006, 02:52 PM
why would either of these guys choose the Reds position if it's offered to them over the Red Sox position.

Because neither of them got the Red Sox position?

Red_BlueDevil
01-24-2006, 03:21 PM
But both removed their names from the hat, so to speak, before a decision had been made. Antonetti turned down an interview with the Red Sox outright and Moore dropped out as a candidate after a - reportedly - very strong interview. From this, it's quite clear that neither ended up wanting the Sox job -- whether they would have gotten it is another question.

For these "hot shots" (and you can probably throw DePo in here as well) what makes our club an attactive landing spot, or rather, can any of these guys be convinced that the Reds job is right for them?

Puffy
01-24-2006, 03:28 PM
I think a lot has to do with the owner and the heirarchy. I'm sure that Lucciano being President (with his meddling background) caused some of this disinterest.

I think the Reds might be attractive to potential GM's because they have a solid offensive core, some good young players (Dunn, Lopez and EdE), and if a person can come in and get some pitching and fill the minors with some talent they have a chance to be revered.

But its a legtimate question, and I am only speculating.

NewEraReds
01-24-2006, 04:08 PM
i think it has everything to do with the owner. bcast to me is coming across like someone who wants to get great people in here and let them do their job. where in boston, it seems like the higher ups want to meddle

Unassisted
01-24-2006, 05:29 PM
i think it has everything to do with the owner. bcast to me is coming across like someone who wants to get great people in here and let them do their job. But he's used the code phrase that strikes fear into the heart of autonomy-minded GM candidates everywhere... "hands-on."

blumj
01-24-2006, 08:44 PM
I think most of the younger GM candidates for the Boston non-job were kind of aware through the young front office guy grapevine that Theo was still hovering. Even so, who wants to be the guy who follows Theo? Boston is very weird. The uproar over Theo was bigger than the one after Damon went to the Yankees. Even today, they're obsessed enough with the front office situation and Theo's return that the whole Coco Crisp/Andy Marte thing is taking a back seat.

oregonred
01-24-2006, 10:49 PM
Even so, who wants to be the guy who follows Theo?

No way that this new young, whippersnapper the Red Sox just hired through a memo as GM can live up to that Theo guy.;)

cincinnati chili
01-24-2006, 11:23 PM
"we don't have a lucchino" and that they could then have total control here. But is that really enough?

Yes. That's enough. I think it's VERY likely that John Henry would have offered Chris Antonetti the GM position, had Antonetti not declined the interview.

He didn't decline the interview because Mark Shapiro is going to leave Cleveland anytime soon. I guarantee you that he declined the interview because he has more power (and gets vetoed less often) working as Assistant GM under Shapiro than he would as "GM" under Lucchino.