Author Topic: Vindication for Mike Rizzo (and the Lerners).  (Read 1397 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37353
  • LAC 8)
Re: Vindication for Mike Rizzo (and the Lerners).
« Reply #50: August 14, 2012, 01:52:27 PM »
When did the Lerners take control?  I thought it was after the 2006 season started?  I'm not sure you can blame them for not re-signing Loaiza.  I don't know what went into the decision to trade Wilkerson, Sledge, and I think Galarraga for Soriano, but I would not call the move a cost-cutter or even that bad a call in terms of talent judgment.  2005 was a half a year of luck.  Especially after Patterson got hurt, we weren't going anywhere off of the talent we had left over from 2005.  You can even argue they may have been too timid in breaking up that team and should have moved more guys.

during the '06 season they took control.  then we saw the payroll decrease ... decrease ... decrease ...

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 18489
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Vindication for Mike Rizzo (and the Lerners).
« Reply #51: August 14, 2012, 01:55:07 PM »
You are right.  It's just the comment (maybe yours) said that after '05 we were so close and my points were that the team wasn't that good at the end of 2005 and a lot of the damage to that roster, like losing one of the top 3 pitchers to free agency and another to injury, was before they took over.

Offline OldChelsea

  • Posts: 5962
  • From the best seat in the house at Nationals Park
Re: Vindication for Mike Rizzo (and the Lerners).
« Reply #52: August 14, 2012, 01:55:20 PM »
When did the Lerners take control?  I thought it was after the 2006 season started?[...]

It was - 24th July 2006, to be exact.

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37353
  • LAC 8)
Re: Vindication for Mike Rizzo (and the Lerners).
« Reply #53: August 14, 2012, 01:58:02 PM »
again ... nobody should be blasting them for what front office/ownership is doing now b/c they've built a pretty damn good team (although shutting down strasburg is going to hurt them). 

i'm just calling BS for someone to pretend there weren't dark days because of them (mostly owners).

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 33929
  • Next year, maybe?
Re: Vindication for Mike Rizzo (and the Lerners).
« Reply #54: August 14, 2012, 02:05:17 PM »
The Nats were one win away from being forced to draft Dustin Ackley... I doubt any part of their "plan" included being lucky enough to land two generational talents with back to back #1 picks.

So, are they vindicated for their losing ways? I guess... but a lot of the team's turn around came down to blind luck on who was available when it came to draft day.

Having said that... Rizzo has done a darn good job building up the staffing and development on the minor league side... so he certainly should be praised for that.

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37353
  • LAC 8)
Re: Vindication for Mike Rizzo (and the Lerners).
« Reply #55: August 14, 2012, 02:06:22 PM »
there's probably not a GM or manager i'd rather have than rizzo and davey.

Offline Mathguy

  • Posts: 3962
  • Whoa That Was A Good One ! Poke His Brain Here !
    • Outer Banks Beach House
Re: Vindication for Mike Rizzo (and the Lerners).
« Reply #56: August 14, 2012, 02:07:07 PM »
My - we actually agree on something

there's probably not a GM or manager i'd rather have than rizzo and davey.


Offline wj73

  • Posts: 236
Re: Vindication for Mike Rizzo (and the Lerners).
« Reply #57: August 14, 2012, 02:23:52 PM »
Yes, the Lerners are to blame for the "dark years" after they took over in 2006, but I think that the blame has to be measured. 

First, as we all know they took over a team that had been looted and pillaged by the other 29 owners with Bud's assent. 

Secondly, although the Lerners are incredibly savvy business people, they were novices in the baseball world.  We all know JimBo is a slick talker.  I think he convinced them that he had some sort of magic eye for talent and could spot the diamonds in the rough, and could build them a contending baseball team on the cheap.  We all like a bargain so it's understandable that they'd want to believe that.  Additionally, they did have a supposed baseball expert in the group in Stan Kasten, who was forced on them by Bud to provide some baseball experience for the ownership group.  I never heard rumors to the effect that Kasten ever stood up and told them that JB was all talk and very little talent. 

So they inherited a team that was horrible to begin with, lucked out into 2005 season that was fluke for the talent on hand but probably served only to disguise the true lack of talent, had a slick-talking GM in JB, and a supposed baseball "expert" in Stan Kasten who failed to tell them that everyone in baseball knew that JB was full of it.  I give them credit for finally figuring it out (thanks in large part to the DR baseball scandal) and eventually clearing out both JB and Kasten to make room for better FO talent. 

And I love that we're going for character guys as well as talent guys - no Elijah Dukes types in that clubhouse.  I believe that's a big factor in how well this team seems to have gelled this year - no clubhouse cancer types to interfere with team chemistry. 

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 33929
  • Next year, maybe?
Re: Vindication for Mike Rizzo (and the Lerners).
« Reply #58: August 14, 2012, 02:30:27 PM »
Yes, the Lerners are to blame for the "dark years" after they took over in 2006, but I think that the blame has to be measured. 

First, as we all know they took over a team that had been looted and pillaged by the other 29 owners with Bud's assent. 

Secondly, although the Lerners are incredibly savvy business people, they were novices in the baseball world.  We all know JimBo is a slick talker.  I think he convinced them that he had some sort of magic eye for talent and could spot the diamonds in the rough, and could build them a contending baseball team on the cheap.  We all like a bargain so it's understandable that they'd want to believe that.  Additionally, they did have a supposed baseball expert in the group in Stan Kasten, who was forced on them by Bud to provide some baseball experience for the ownership group.  I never heard rumors to the effect that Kasten ever stood up and told them that JB was all talk and very little talent. 

So they inherited a team that was horrible to begin with, lucked out into 2005 season that was fluke for the talent on hand but probably served only to disguise the true lack of talent, had a slick-talking GM in JB, and a supposed baseball "expert" in Stan Kasten who failed to tell them that everyone in baseball knew that JB was full of it.  I give them credit for finally figuring it out (thanks in large part to the DR baseball scandal) and eventually clearing out both JB and Kasten to make room for better FO talent. 

And I love that we're going for character guys as well as talent guys - no Elijah Dukes types in that clubhouse.  I believe that's a big factor in how well this team seems to have gelled this year - no clubhouse cancer types to interfere with team chemistry. 

They didn't cut ties with JB or Kasten... they both resigned.

Offline blue911

  • Posts: 17055
Re: Vindication for Mike Rizzo (and the Lerners).
« Reply #59: August 14, 2012, 02:35:44 PM »
Kasten brought in Rizzo to replace Bowden. It wasn't Stan that kept Leatherpants around.

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 18489
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Vindication for Mike Rizzo (and the Lerners).
« Reply #60: August 14, 2012, 02:41:39 PM »
It's a heck of a lot easier to say "vindication for Rizzo" then it is for "vindication for Rizzo and the Lerners."   The period prior to Rizzo becoming GM was largely a wasted opportunity.  There were sell high moments not taken advantage of because JB became infatuated with his dumpster dives and overvalued relievers.  There were moves that could have been made to pick up players that would not have cost significant draft position, would have put more credible teams on the field, and may have even yielded extra draft choices under the CBA during the JimBo era that were also not made.  The team lost a ton of credibility and the fan base that is still being felt by this team.  Rizzo has done a terrific job even if some of his decisions did not work out.  The ownership survived a wasted period.  It isn't vindication.  It's more like "there's got to be a morning after."

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 18387
Re: Vindication for Mike Rizzo (and the Lerners).
« Reply #61: August 14, 2012, 03:06:10 PM »
They didn't cut ties with JB or Kasten... they both resigned.

Just curious, with the mess in the Dominican, was JB faced with a resign or be terminated situation?

Offline wj73

  • Posts: 236
Re: Vindication for Mike Rizzo (and the Lerners).
« Reply #62: August 14, 2012, 03:30:50 PM »
Yes, technically both Bowden and Kasten resigned.  But you don't think there was some pressure there?  Lots of people "resign" because it's just a matter of time before they're forced out.  I think both of them knew which way the wind was blowing and got out while the getting was good. 

But maybe there was no pressure and both of them left completely on their own volition.  End result is the same - the Lerners changed their philosophy and turned the team over to seasoned pros and opened their wallets.  Some owners would have fired the GM and President, but never changed their basic philosophy.  See Angelos, Peter. 

And yes, I will hold Kasten responsible for Bowden staying around for so long.  Kasten took over as President in 2006.  Bowden didn't resign till 2009.  I'd say three years was plenty of time to toss Bowden, yet Kasten kept him on till the DR fiasco forced the "resignation". 

And yes, Kasten deserves props for bringing in Rizzo.