Lip Man 1 Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 (edited) The Athletic has a long story today on MLB front offices. Over 40 front office types voted on the teams with the best front offices and why. The White Sox did not even receive a single vote which shouldn't be surprising. Did not receive votes: (for the second season in a row, in all cases): Athletics, Chicago Cubs, Chicago White Sox, Colorado Rockies, Los Angeles Angels, Miami Marlins, Pittsburgh Pirates, St. Louis Cardinals, San Francisco Giants, Toronto Blue Jays. Edited April 16 by Lip Man 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtySox Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 No s%*#? 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 12 minutes ago, Lip Man 1 said: The Athletic has a long story today on MLB front offices. Over 40 front office types voted on the teams with the best front offices and why. The White Sox did not even receive a single volte which shouldn't be surprising. Did not receive votes: (for the second season in a row, in all cases): Athletics, Chicago Cubs, Chicago White Sox, Colorado Rockies, Los Angeles Angels, Miami Marlins, Pittsburgh Pirates, St. Louis Cardinals, San Francisco Giants, Toronto Blue Jays. They obviously didn't speak to Gene Watson who said the White Sox front office is the best in baseball. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestEddy Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 I wouldn't expect an organization that just tore up the floor boards and embarked on a rebuild to receive any votes for "best front office". It's going to take a while for Getz & Co. to settle in and develop a reputation. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chitownsportsfan Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 20 minutes ago, DirtySox said: No s%*#? Sox are just lucky it wasn't ranked choice voting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 Considering you still have players who were here last year trashing the organization as they settle into new organizations this year, I am not surprised. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeC Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 I worry that someone will take away the wrong lessons from the Brewers: Quote It’s not just that the Brewers do more with less. It’s the fact that the big spenders keep poaching their leaders, yet Milwaukee keeps right on winning. Owner Mark Attanasio lost GM David Stearns to the Mets and manager Craig Counsell to the Cubs, but recognized there was no overhaul needed. Instead of hiring from the outside, he promoted Matt Arnold and Pat Murphy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxjusttyped Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 1 hour ago, WestEddy said: I wouldn't expect an organization that just tore up the floor boards and embarked on a rebuild to receive any votes for "best front office". It's going to take a while for Getz & Co. to settle in and develop a reputation. I'm shocked running player development for years in an org right before they were the worst team of all-time wasn't enough to get a vote or 2. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 They don't see the vision. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tnetennba Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 44 minutes ago, maxjusttyped said: I'm shocked running player development for years in an org right before they were the worst team of all-time wasn't enough to get a vote or 2. Shocking, right? Assembling the worst team in modern history can't be good for one's reputation around the league. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestEddy Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 35 minutes ago, Tnetennba said: Shocking, right? Assembling the worst team in modern history can't be good for one's reputation around the league. Technically, it wasn't the worst. The '62 Mets had a worse winning percentage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 Obvious news is obvious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 15 minutes ago, WestEddy said: Technically, it wasn't the worst. The '62 Mets had a worse winning percentage. And the Mets weren't the worst winning percentage either. But MLB history still recognized them as losing the most games in a single MLB season in the history of the sport. Well up until the 2024 White Sox came along. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lip Man 1 Posted April 16 Author Share Posted April 16 3 hours ago, WestEddy said: I wouldn't expect an organization that just tore up the floor boards and embarked on a rebuild to receive any votes for "best front office". It's going to take a while for Getz & Co. to settle in and develop a reputation. This is true but what may also be true is if all these "changes" to the organizational structure, the bringing in of all these people from outside the organization were so meaningful, you'd think they'd get at least a vote or two wouldn't you? 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 Firing the 2020 Executive of the Year is going to hurt for a while. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 Seriously I'm more surprised that after asking only 40 or so front office types that 20 different teams received votes. I would have expected maybe five. There doesn't seem to be a clear consensus on what exactly makes a great front office. Although there is a clear consensus on what doesn't make a great front office. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almagest Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 1 hour ago, Lip Man 1 said: This is true but what may also be true is if all these "changes" to the organizational structure, the bringing in of all these people from outside the organization were so meaningful, you'd think they'd get at least a vote or two wouldn't you? Not really, no, because the team is still in the dumpster, and it takes a while for that progress to reflect positively enough to make its way around the league to a point where it would make a difference. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestEddy Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 1 hour ago, Lip Man 1 said: This is true but what may also be true is if all these "changes" to the organizational structure, the bringing in of all these people from outside the organization were so meaningful, you'd think they'd get at least a vote or two wouldn't you? No. They've all just started. How do you rate a team on international development when they just replaced the whole department? Everything doesn't have to be a devastating negative. And really, only about 11 teams got votes to be listed. More than half of baseball teams are seen as not having good front offices. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almagest Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 8 minutes ago, WestEddy said: No. They've all just started. How do you rate a team on international development when they just replaced the whole department? Everything doesn't have to be a devastating negative. And really, only about 11 teams got votes to be listed. More than half of baseball teams are seen as not having good front offices. Probably because they don't. I think ~5 teams would only really qualify by objective measures. The rest of the teams are average at best. Having a good to great front office is the best advantage you can have. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 1 hour ago, Texsox said: Firing the 2020 Executive of the Year is going to hurt for a while. 2019 to be exact... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 11 minutes ago, WestEddy said: No. They've all just started. How do you rate a team on international development when they just replaced the whole department? Everything doesn't have to be a devastating negative. And really, only about 11 teams got votes to be listed. More than half of baseball teams are seen as not having good front offices. So if no other front offices think the Sox are worth mentioning, despite all of the changes that they all can see personally in their work, and observe their work on a professional level that none of us can, that their point of view should be invalidated because their first hand observations aren't valid yet? It's wild how no one can judge anything happening in the White Sox organization, unless it is positive. We can sit and listen to being told that the changes they have made are so important by the media, and that is valid, but the people the Sox front office is literally competing against on a day to day basis can't. That's crazy. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almagest Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 14 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said: So if no other front offices think the Sox are worth mentioning, despite all of the changes that they all can see personally in their work, and observe their work on a professional level that none of us can, that their point of view should be invalidated because their first hand observations aren't valid yet? It's wild how no one can judge anything happening in the White Sox organization, unless it is positive. We can sit and listen to being told that the changes they have made are so important by the media, and that is valid, but the people the Sox front office is literally competing against on a day to day basis can't. That's crazy. Not really. Ten teams didn't receive votes, and some of those teams are pretty good, have been pretty good recently, or have been known in the recent past as having quality front offices. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestEddy Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 18 minutes ago, almagest said: Not really. Ten teams didn't receive votes, and some of those teams are pretty good, have been pretty good recently, or have been known in the recent past as having quality front offices. Forget it, he's rolling... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 21 minutes ago, almagest said: Not really. Ten teams didn't receive votes, and some of those teams are pretty good, have been pretty good recently, or have been known in the recent past as having quality front offices. If others thought these changes were as great as we keep getting told, SOMEONE would have noticed by now. Ex-players are still trashing the organization, and the rest of baseball isn't saying anything. All of the most qualified people to judge, haven't had anything good to say. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almagest Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 49 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said: If others thought these changes were as great as we keep getting told, SOMEONE would have noticed by now. Ex-players are still trashing the organization, and the rest of baseball isn't saying anything. All of the most qualified people to judge, haven't had anything good to say. No they wouldn’t, because it’s too early to know. It’s potentially promising to us, who are looking for reasons to be hopeful. It’ll be picked up around the league if results start showing up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.