PDA

View Full Version : Is Billy Beane a good GM?



*BaseClogger*
01-14-2008, 01:37 AM
Simple. I started a poll so that you couldn't ride the fence... is he good or not?

Bip Roberts
01-14-2008, 01:40 AM
Where is the decent option :)

*BaseClogger*
01-14-2008, 01:41 AM
Where is the decent option :)

decent doesn't mean good does it? I asked if he is good (didn't ask great btw)

Bip Roberts
01-14-2008, 01:42 AM
I think hes good at building a cheap roster but hes bad at doing anything important with it :o

*BaseClogger*
01-14-2008, 01:43 AM
I think hes good at building a cheap roster but hes bad at doing anything important with it :o

is he a good GM? This isn't "are you smarter than a fifth grader?"

Stephenk29
01-14-2008, 01:44 AM
I think he's a good GM but very overrated. Some people took the Moneyball book way to far.

*BaseClogger*
01-14-2008, 01:45 AM
I think he's a good GM but very overrated. Some people took the Moneyball book way to far.

I would agree that Moneyball isn't as brilliant as it is cracked up to be. If he's a good GM why did you vote no?

Bip Roberts
01-14-2008, 01:53 AM
is he a good GM? This isn't "are you smarter than a fifth grader?"

I dont think hes good or bad :eek: I think hes pretty much right in the middle

Stephenk29
01-14-2008, 01:57 AM
Well I think he is a good manager overall, but he does have his moments. This recent fire sale makes me question him quite a bit. Plus I think I'm still kinda bitter about the number of people who think he's a god just because of Lewis' butt kissing. The vote of no was more of a brain fart. I meant yes.

Caveman Techie
01-14-2008, 09:37 AM
Given his resources in Oakland it is simply amazing what he's been able to accomplish there.

I would love to see what he could do with an actual budget.

I(heart)Freel
01-14-2008, 10:02 AM
He's overseen a club that contends darn-near every year. The knock on him is that his teams can't do anything in the post season, but I swear... that's a problem I'd love the Reds to have.

I can barely remember a late September game in this town that meant something.

SMcGavin
01-14-2008, 12:08 PM
The no voters, I am curious - why is Beane not a good GM? Because he hasn't won the World Series? Because he had a book written about him?

Stephenk29
01-14-2008, 12:49 PM
If not winning in the playoffs means your a bad GM then John Shurholtz is terrible. I think we can agree that would be nuts. Beane and the GM of Minnesota are among the tops I would say. They get things done through pure baseball smarts. Just about anyone could run the Sox and Yankees I think.

Bip Roberts
01-14-2008, 01:54 PM
If not winning in the playoffs means your a bad GM then John Shurholtz is terrible. I think we can agree that would be nuts. Beane and the GM of Minnesota are among the tops I would say. They get things done through pure baseball smarts. Just about anyone could run the Sox and Yankees I think.

Hes not a bad GM but his teams will never have any success besides making a late season push and choking out in the playoffs just because of how he runs his team.

Be cheap, be middle of the pack for a couple seasons, make a big push to make the playoffs, dump players that helped you make playoffs, go back to being cheap and start the process all over again.

757690
01-14-2008, 02:08 PM
If not winning in the playoffs means your a bad GM then John Shurholtz is terrible. I think we can agree that would be nuts. Beane and the GM of Minnesota are among the tops I would say. They get things done through pure baseball smarts. Just about anyone could run the Sox and Yankees I think.

Shuerholz won two WS rings, one with KC and one with Atlanta, has been to the WS four times and has won 14 playoff series while Beane has won 1. There is no comparison between Schueholz's postseason success and Beane's. Minnesota has won two WS too.

*BaseClogger*
01-14-2008, 02:50 PM
Shuerholz won two WS rings, one with KC and one with Atlanta, has been to the WS four times and has won 14 playoff series while Beane has won 1. There is no comparison between Schueholz's postseason success and Beane's. Minnesota has won two WS too.

He was talking about Terry Ryan, who has never won a WS...

GoReds33
01-14-2008, 05:55 PM
I think he is a very good GM. He has done the best with what he has. That's all you can ask of a GM. He knows when to pack it in, and he knows when to go for it all. In my book, he's one of the best in the game.

Bip Roberts
01-14-2008, 05:56 PM
I think he is a very good GM. He has done the best with what he has. That's all you can ask of a GM. He knows when to pack it in, and he knows when to go for it all. In my book, he's one of the best in the game.

When does he ever go for it all?

Caveman Techie
01-14-2008, 06:06 PM
When does he ever go for it all?

When has he ever had the money to go for it all? The A's have consistently been one of the lowest spenders in baseball, yet they consistently compete.

I'd take their record over the last 10 years rather than the Red's record.

dthomas24
01-14-2008, 06:07 PM
The knock on him is that his teams can't do anything in the post season.

Is that his fault? I'm just asking, I don't remember Beane going out and walking batters when it counted, striking out with the bases loaded, etc. It's his job to get the players, it's the players job to perform when it counts. I (heart) Freel, I'm not going after you I'm just going off of your comment about the knock on Beane. I agree that people knock him for this but again, is this really his fault????

Dracodave
01-14-2008, 06:31 PM
I think Beane's a GOOD GM, even though I misread the question and voted NO (thought it said great).

He's good at building teams but not good at buying that "one" piece that would put them over the top, typically a big bat. As much as I agree with the fact that he can judge talent like no other..he's just not great at "going for it all" which is what he CAN and SHOULD do every year because he has the 'core' to win it all.

Stephenk29
01-14-2008, 07:16 PM
Shuerholz won two WS rings, one with KC and one with Atlanta, has been to the WS four times and has won 14 playoff series while Beane has won 1. There is no comparison between Schueholz's postseason success and Beane's. Minnesota has won two WS too.

I know their accomplishments, but a lot of people like to give the Braves a hard time because they won 14 straight divisions and only 1 WS. For awhile they had the label of choke artists themselves.

Has Minnesota had the same GM since '87?

You can only build the teams, not swing the bats and throw the pitches. The A's with the Mulder, Zito, Hudson, Giambi was just about as good a team as you can field, and they still didn't win.

I(heart)Freel
01-14-2008, 08:55 PM
Is that his fault? I'm just asking, I don't remember Beane going out and walking batters when it counted, striking out with the bases loaded, etc. It's his job to get the players, it's the players job to perform when it counts. I (heart) Freel, I'm not going after you I'm just going off of your comment about the knock on Beane. I agree that people knock him for this but again, is this really his fault????

I meant that that's the one and nearly only thing that pundits can and do say negatively about Beane.

But even if it is his fault that the A's don't win in October... as the GM, the buck has to stop there... it doesn't at all in my mind diminish how good he is at building a contending team year in and year out.

And for that he is a good GM.

Like I said earlier, I would take several years of exciting meaningful baseball in September over one season with the pennant surrounded by seven years of 70-win seasons.

bearcatfan24
01-14-2008, 09:20 PM
Plain and simple he gets the job the done. At the end of the day he has gotten his team to the playoffs more than wayne has gotten us there.

Caveman Techie
01-14-2008, 09:23 PM
Plain and simple he gets the job the done. At the end of the day he has gotten his team to the playoffs more than wayne has gotten us there.


Beane didn't make the playoffs his first two years on the job either. Sometimes it does actually take awhile to rebuild.

Bip Roberts
01-14-2008, 10:33 PM
Plain and simple he gets the job the done. At the end of the day he has gotten his team to the playoffs more than wayne has gotten us there.

Well considering the time spent working at it for both teams its a little unfair to compare wayne and billy beane

Bip Roberts
01-14-2008, 10:34 PM
Is that his fault? I'm just asking, I don't remember Beane going out and walking batters when it counted, striking out with the bases loaded, etc. It's his job to get the players, it's the players job to perform when it counts. I (heart) Freel, I'm not going after you I'm just going off of your comment about the knock on Beane. I agree that people knock him for this but again, is this really his fault????

If its his "fault" they make the playoffs it has to be his "fault" when they always lose in them

Jim
01-14-2008, 10:54 PM
I voted no. Not because I consider him bad, but because I just consider him OK. His approach has yielded a lot of good talent, but it seems like he can't fit all the pieces together to bring a WS. It seems that if you trade off all your players for young talent each year or so, you don't give the team the chance to build chemistry. He may get lucky one year, but that's the same with Reds.

*BaseClogger*
01-15-2008, 06:31 AM
I voted no. Not because I consider him bad, but because I just consider him OK. His approach has yielded a lot of good talent, but it seems like he can't fit all the pieces together to bring a WS. It seems that if you trade off all your players for young talent each year or so, you don't give the team the chance to build chemistry. He may get lucky one year, but that's the same with Reds.

this is the kind of replies I was looking for from the no voters. Personally I can't belive that about 20% of the SunDeck thinks Billy Beane is not a good GM, but this is about the only argument I would concede, which is that he is only OK and not good....

Nasty_Boy
01-15-2008, 08:33 PM
I think the biggest reason Oakland hasn't succeeded at winning a WS, is due to the constant turnover. Beane has ownership that will not spend money to retain their top players. He is forced to trade his best players in order to avoid losing them for nothing in free agency. He is a great talent evaluator and he's a GM that has found a way to be successful without keeping his top talent.

GoReds33
01-15-2008, 08:37 PM
When does he ever go for it all?I'm a little late on awnsering this, but here it goes.

He is going for it all when he keeps his team intact. I know that going for it all is different if you are the Yankees, but that's how it is in Oakland. It's hard enough to keep talent at all in Oakland, but keeping it an extra year is a big risk for him.

Bip Roberts
01-15-2008, 08:45 PM
I'm a little late on awnsering this, but here it goes.

He is going for it all when he keeps his team intact. I know that going for it all is different if you are the Yankees, but that's how it is in Oakland. It's hard enough to keep talent at all in Oakland, but keeping it an extra year is a big risk for him.

So hes only a good GM because he can build a decent team for cheap that never does anything that remotely matters in the end.

I can defend every GM in some fashion.

757690
01-16-2008, 02:08 PM
I think the Linder years showed Reds fans that it is nearly impossible to go win a championship with an owner that will not spend the money needed to "go for it all". I think the only real model is to tear down the team, rebuild with prospects, guess what year they will develop, then buy a few big ticket free agents to go for it all.
The downside to that, is that no matter what, it means competing for a year, for every four years of being in the cellar.
Beane is doing the best he can with the Owner he has.

reds2221
01-17-2008, 12:14 PM
I think that Beane is a good GM from a buisness view. He takes what little money he has to use, and is able to compete with the big spenders. (I can't remember the exact numbers) he gets more wins per dollar spent than any other GM out there.