anyone else seeing big changes ahead? Latest: Mark A says Melvin is going to be here a long time, Macha will not be fired Monday

[lcbj68c]

Nobody implied it was simple. Its discouraging

that this is what the discussion has evolved

to because I certainly was respecting your points of view. On the polar opposite I'd say its not impossible. But the current strategy of "signing the 2nd tier veteran who will sign but is likely in decline" isnt working out. Why is it so hard for fans like me to want a GM to try a different method that appears to be working. Could we hire another Sal Bando? Maybe. Could we hire an Andrew Freidman? Maybe.

[strawbossisevil]

The question is, though, which is more likely? How many Freidman's are there in the league vs. how many GMs that would be a downgrade to Melvin. If Melvin is (for argument's sake) in the top third. You are far more likely to end up getting worse than better by making a change.

 

The amount of young pitchers moved for less than top impact talent is minuscule. Freidman has been able to do it on a few occasions because he is working with what is the deepest farm system in baseball. His move for Garza is a perfect example. He gave up a player who was seen by most as a guy who would be a perennial all star for a guy who had top of the rotation potential. It worked out as Young flamed out, and Garza has shined. I don't think the Brewers have a "can't miss prospect" like Young in their system currently, as players like him typically come from the top of the first round.

 

All in all, Freidman is a good GM. But there is a reason why these trades are very atypical. Trading top of the rotation or even middle of the rotation prospects just doesn't happen very often at all. Expecting a future GM to match that is being unrealistic IMO.

 

In my mind it is like releasing Prince Fielder in the hopes that the next 1b we sign is going to play like Albert Pujols. It is setting up an unrealistic expectation and will likely end in further disappointment.

[1992casey]

I just deleted an entire post about each GM, and I'm too irritated to

retype the entire thing.

 

Use the preview function... a lot. As long as you preview, if you somehow lose your post, you'll likely be able to get to your previous drafts via the back button or your history.

[logan82]

I don't think there were to many posters who actually thought we were a playoff team as built unless we got pretty lucky this year. I personally thought we were a 84 win team and would fall in the 79/89 win range.

 

I have no problem with them spending $90M+ this year since most of the deals are 1-2 years long. I didn't like the Hoffman deal because they paid to much and signed him to quickly. None of the really bad deals are likely to hamstring the franchise after this year and it was in the team's best interest to try their best to get as many wins as possible to keep attendance up. That way when we have another group of good youngsters on the team in the next few years we can supplement them with good free agents. I would rather they spend the money than pocket it.

[sheethead]

In my mind it is like releasing Prince Fielder in the hopes that the next 1b we sign is going to play like Albert Pujols.

 

How does this relate to trading for pitching?

 

None of the really bad deals are likely to hamstring the franchise after this year

 

I hope we are not saying the same thing next year.

[EdgarDiazRocks]

As far as Friedman goes, obviously I think he's the best GM in the game, but there are plenty of other people out there who aren't getting their due, there's no way that Melvin or Jack Z are better GMs than Dan O'Dowd or Jon Daniels for example. Walt Jocketty would be a top 10 GM if he hadn't hired the worst possible manager for young pitching, Andy McPhail is top 10 GM at this time, he's positioned Baltimore for future success.

Wow has Billy Beane's star fallen to the point where I'm his defender? Two good years in Tampa and Freidman's the golden child. He also has old school Gerry Hunsicker right in the room with him.

 

Also whoever ran down Daniels failings forgot Adrian Gonzalez AND Chris Young for Adam Eaton. Ouch.

 

You're referring to THAT Andy McPhail, right? The one that ran the Cubs for 12 Years?

[paul253]

Ah yes, he should just trade for a young guy who will be a
top/middle of the rotation starter. How can Melvin not understand this?
It's so simple!

Obviously trading for guys who have a #1 or #2 ceiling is next to impossible because teams are so unwilling to give them up. That just makes it all the more important to be able to draft your own pitchers. How many guys that have been drafted since Melvin has been GM have actually started a game in Milwaukee? Gallardo obviously. Dana Eveland was drafted in 2002. I went through every draft and those are the only two I found. Two pitchers who have started a game, one of who was not good at all, in 8 drafts. Regardless of whether or not he is making the pick, as GM he is responsible for the drafts. If his guy isn't cutting it, then he should be replaced.

And this isn't even mentioning the prospects he has traded for (Capellan, Jackson, and JDLR) who have been no good. There is still some hope for Josh Butler, but we'll have to see.

With such a terrible record in all categories of pitching (draft, free agents, and trade) I don't see how he can be considered a top 10 GM.

[strawbossisevil]

In my mind it is like releasing Prince Fielder in the hopes that the next 1b we sign is going to play like Albert Pujols.

 

How does this relate to trading for pitching?

Wow, you totally missed the entire point of my post, or you only looked at that one phrase without looking at the context it had within my post. To make it simpler for you, in my illustration Fielder = Melvin type GM, Pujols = Freidman type GM. And the point is, giving up an above average GM for an unknown, and expecting that unknown to be a top level GM is setting oneself up for failure and disappointment.

None of the really bad deals are likely to hamstring the franchise after this year

 

I hope we are not saying the same thing next year.

I think you totally dismissed an excellent point about Melvin. He has throughout this whole situation maintained a very good amount of financial flexibility. Which is essentially when your salary is going to top top off at a league average level. He's had some bad FA signings, but the only one that has had any long term sting to it was the Suppan deal, and once again I suspect that Mark A had some influence on that deal.

[sheethead]

Fielder = Melvin type GM, Pujols = Freidman type GM

 

This still makes no sense to me, and I have tried numerous contexts. Are you comparing quality of player to GM? You think Melvin is the second or third best GM in the NL? This smells like a strawman argument.

 

My point is he is not above average, he is just average (and this does not mean I'm saying he is the worst). He has not maintained a good amount of financial flexibility. There was no room last year or this year to bring in an impact player via trade, because he has maxed out the payroll on Jason Kendall, Doug Davis, Jeff Suppan, Trevor Hoffman, etc. type players. I don't see how wanting a great GM for my favorite team is setting me up for disappointment. I just would like some decent pitching, and a great GM would have explored the possibility of trading Hoffman, Counsell, Cameron, etc. last year in an effort to get some. Some of these decisions may be affected by ownership, and I can acknowledge this. But Melvin's job is to work with the owner to make him realize what the best course of action is at a given point in time. The team was going nowhere last year, and likewise that is exactly what Melvin did... nothing.

Two good years in Tampa and Freidman's the golden child.

 

I don't think its stretching to say he will have three good years in a row after this year. Not just good, but very good.

[strawbossisevil]

Ah yes, he should just trade for a young guy who will be a

top/middle of the rotation starter. How can Melvin not understand this?

It's so simple!

 

Obviously trading for guys who have a #1 or #2 ceiling is next to impossible because teams are so unwilling to give them up.

Good, I'm glad we've made this clear. Getting top/middle of the rotation pitchers in trades is "next to impossible". This has been my point all along, and so those who claim we need a GM who can do this are expecting someone to do something that really only happens extremely infrequently in this sport. Could such a GM exist? Possibly. Is it likely that our next GM will be that guy? Not at all.

That just makes it all the more important to be able to draft your own pitchers. How many guys that have been drafted since Melvin has been GM have actually started a game in Milwaukee? Gallardo obviously. Dana Eveland was drafted in 2002. I went through every draft and those are the only two I found. Two pitchers who have started a game, one of who was not good at all, in 8 drafts. Regardless of whether or not he is making the pick, as GM he is responsible for the drafts. If his guy isn't cutting it, then he should be replaced.

This falls much more on Jack Z then it does on Melvin. Everyone loved Jack Z when he was here, he was the golden child. But he really failed Melvin in that he left him without any pitching prospects to speak of.

And this isn't even mentioning the prospects he has traded for (Capellan, Jackson, and JDLR) who have been no good. There is still some hope for Josh Butler, but we'll have to see.

These were all high ceiling pitchers, especially JDLR (who actually became quite good, but needed time to get there). Capellan was recognized by Baseball America as one of the top pitchers in the nation. Jackson was projected to be a solid #3 by those who are paid to know these things. These are the types of deals people here are clamoring for Doug to make. The trouble is, sometimes these deals work out (like they did with the Rays), other times the prospects flame out (like they did with the Brewers). And few can know which it will be until the players suit up in the big leagues.

With such a terrible record in all categories of pitching (draft, free agents, and trade) I don't see how he can be considered a top 10 GM.

Let's not ignore that he brought in Ohka, Capuano, Villanueva, Coffey and Sabathia all via trade. The Sabathia trade alone took us to the playoffs (without that trade we may be talking about having no playoff trips during the Fielder era).

Free Agents have been a struggle, mostly because of budget constraints. Most middle of the road FA pitchers are not going to provide you much more than middle to back of the rotation numbers. As far as relief pitchers, Melvin has been hit and miss, with Kolb (the first time) and Hoffman (last season) being big hits, and Gagne and Hoffman (this season) being misses. Free Agency is always going to be a struggle for Milwaukee, simply because it is not seen as a desirable place to live.

 

And in regards to the draft. Much of that falls on two aspects: #1 Jack Z did the drafts. #2 Injury/Suspension problems with top round picks.

 

Look at Melvin's trades. The guy "wins" in the trades that he does almost every single time. How many GMs can say that? Even with the Gomez/Hardy trade. Gomez is proving to be the better player. And many who panned that trade saying we didn't get enough back are eating a bit of barbecued crow right now.

Melvin also has an incredible ability at picking up meaningful players that other teams have given up on. Where would our team be/have been without McGehee? Naverson? Podsednik? Branyan? Edmonds? (I know he's hurt, but his numbers are solid). Davis? (the first time) It seems almost every year he picks up some player that comes out of nowhere to be a successful and cheap addition to our team. Few GMs do this better than Doug Melvin. And this is what truly sets him apart from most GMs. The rest of his "game" is rather average, but his ability to pluck meaningful players off of the waiver wire definitely pushes him into the top third.

[strawbossisevil]

Fielder = Melvin type GM, Pujols = Freidman type GM

 

This still makes no sense to me, and I have tried numerous contexts. Are you comparing quality of player to GM? You think Melvin is the second or third best GM in the NL? This smells like a strawman argument.

So you did figure it out. (For one, I don't consider Fielder top 3, when add in his defensive liabilities, he is probably a top 10 1st baseman overall). So no, I don't consider Melvin to be in the top two or three. I consider him to be in the top 10, and most people who are paid to have an opinion on this subject agree with my assessment. Most people disagree with you that Melvin is merely average, including nearly every MLB expert who has commented on the subject.

My point is he is not above average, he is just average (and this does not mean I'm saying he is the worst). He has not maintained a good amount of financial flexibility. There was no room last year or this year to bring in an impact player via trade, because he has maxed out the payroll on Jason Kendall, Doug Davis, Jeff Suppan, Trevor Hoffman, etc. type players.

You can't possibly say that about team flexibility with any certainty. You don't know if Mark A would have allowed an upgrade last year if they would have been in better shape at the trade deadline. You can't possibly know whether Mark A would sign off on an upgrade this year either were things going differently. This is pure guesswork on your part.

I don't see how wanting a great GM for my favorite team is setting me up for disappointment. I just would like some decent pitching, and a great GM would have explored the possibility of trading Hoffman, Counsell, Cameron, etc. last year in an effort to get some. Some of these decisions may be affected by ownership, and I can acknowledge this. But Melvin's job is to work with the owner to make him realize what the best course of action is at a given point in time. The team was going nowhere last year, and likewise that is exactly what Melvin did... nothing.

Problem is you aren't going to get any "decent pitching" from trading Hoffman, Counsell, Cameron etc. You don't get rotation upgrades by trading away 3 months of guys in their upper 30s or 40s, that is being entirely unrealistic. (Funny how that has been a common refrain when responding to you in this thread about your expectations..unrealistic, unrealistic, unrealistic, naive, naive, naive...).

Two good years in Tampa and Freidman's the golden child.

 

I don't think its stretching to say he will have three good years in a row after this year. Not just good, but very good.

I think it's fair to say that Freidman's done a great job. At this point, he is the "Albert Pujols" of GMs in my mind. And expecting to get a guy like that is unrealistic. My guess is if we were to get rid of Melvin there is a much higher chance that we would get someone worse, than get someone better, and I'm pretty confident that most MLB experts would agree.

[sheethead]

Most people disagree with you that Melvin is merely average, including nearly every MLB expert who has commented on the subject.

 

Good for most people. Those same "most people" barely follow the Brewers, so I am not sure how much Ethos most people have on the subject, regardless of whether or not they are paid to have an opinion. Peter King was paid to print his opinion that the Bears were going to be in the Super Bowl this last season. I form my own opinions, rather than rely on most people who get paid to print theirs to form it for me.

 

You can't possibly say that about team flexibility with any certainty... This is pure guesswork on your part.

 

Not really, there are many sources that say the Brewers are pretty much maxed out on payroll.

 

Funny how that has been a common refrain when responding to you in this thread about your expectations..unrealistic, unrealistic, unrealistic, naive, naive, naive...)

 

You sir put words in my mouth over and over again. I am not clamoring for a trade to net a #1 or #2 starter like you keep saying I am. Decent pitching is what it is. Chances for MLB players. I never said trade those vets for front-line can't miss prospects. Those are the words you keep putting in everyone's mouth.

[Invader3K]

Mark Attanasio has regularly stated that if the team is close during the trade deadline period, he will allow additional money to be spent to acquire a needed piece. Maybe that is different this season, but I remember reading comments alluding to that last year. Not sure why that is really up for debate in this conversation.

[monty57]

For those that continue to rip Doug Davis, please remember that he's having heart problems. Without the heart working properly, muscles don't get oxygen and therefore won't work as well and will fatigure much more quickly. For me, the numbers he's put up this season should be swept off his record in judging him as a player. Condemning Davis for this season's work or condemning Melvin for signing him based on the numbers he's put up this season is pretty low. I hope he's able to get himself healthy. Whether or not he "lives up to his contract" is secondary.

[TooLiveBrew]

there are many sources that say the Brewers are pretty much maxed out on payroll.

I'm not trying to be combative, but what are the many sources? I know obviously reasonable speculation would say that $90M is about as high as the Crew can go, but I just don't remember reading anything specific like you cite.

[TheCrew07]

Every interview with Mark A. that the JS has done regarding financial situation has quotes from Mark A. about the payroll being about as high as they could go without losing money. He also said that the figures thrown around on the web are usually a little low, probably because they don't account for the coaches, scouts, or the Minor League program.

[strawbossisevil]

You sir put words in my mouth over and over again. I am not clamoring for a trade to net a #1 or #2 starter like you keep saying I am. Decent pitching is what it is. Chances for MLB players. I never said trade those vets for front-line can't miss prospects. Those are the words you keep putting in everyone's mouth.

Funny, I never even brought up the idea of #1/#2 starter. All I did was repeat your own phrase "decent pitching". So it actually appears like it is you putting words in people's mouths. And I still hold to the belief that you are being extremely unrealistic that any of those players could have netted us anything more than a potential #5 starter. The value of having those players for 3 months is just not that high that any team is going to be willing to trade away young, cost controlled pitching to obtain them.

[sheethead]

Funny, I never even brought up the idea of #1/#2 starter.

 

So what did this imply?

 

Ah yes, he should just trade for a young guy who will be a top/middle of the rotation starter. How can Melvin not understand this? It's so simple!

[strawbossisevil]

Funny, I never even brought up the idea of #1/#2 starter.

 

So what did this imply?

 

Ah yes, he should just trade for a young guy who will be a top/middle of the rotation starter. How can Melvin not understand this? It's so simple!

Are you really this disingenuous? That was from much, much earlier in the conversation.

I responded to your point about Cameron, Hoffman etc not being capable of bringing in a "decent starter" and called your assertions that a good-GM would have traded them for that type of pitcher ridiculous and unrealistic.

You countered by claiming that I was putting words in your mouth by saying that those players could have brought in a #1/#2 starter. Something I never once said. Heck, even in the disingenuously quoted quote I don't say that.

[paul253]

This falls much more on Jack Z then it does on Melvin. Everyone

loved Jack Z when he was here, he was the golden child.

 

But ultimately it's Melvin's responsibility. Whats that phrase, "s*** rolls up hill". He obviously felt that Jack Z's lack of ability of drafting a quality pitcher was not a good enough reason to replace him, probably because of his track record of drafting position players. So regardless of who made the actual draft pick, the results are just as much the responsibility of Melvin as they are of Jack Z.

Let's not ignore that he brought in Ohka, Capuano, Villanueva, Coffey

and Sabathia all via trade. The Sabathia trade alone took us to the

playoffs (without that trade we may be talking about having no playoff

trips during the Fielder era).

Capuano could sort of be considered a success. Right before the injury wasn't he removed from the rotation though? Tomo Ohka? He pitched here for a year and compiled a 4-5 record with an ERA close to 5. Serviceable but nothing to brag about. Villanueva is extremely inconsistent and his ERA has been going up every year since he broke in, up until this year. Sabathia obviously was a great move. Easily Melvin's best move as GM. Coffey I think was claimed off of waivers, not traded for. A good move too though. However, with the exception of the Sabathia deal, none of these moves were exactly earth shattering. If people are actually using Tomo Ohka in Melvin's defense, that's not really a good thing.

 

#2

Injury/Suspension problems with top round picks.

One of those picks, Rogers, was a bad pick. Most people agreed that Homer Bailey was a better pick, but IIRC we went with Rogers because his delivery and mechanics were supposed to be better and would be less likely to result in injury. As far as Jeffress goes....yeah, he was suspended. But let's not forget that in between suspensions he was actually demoted from Huntsville because of his performance. Also, my assumption is that he didn't start smoking weed after he was drafted. That is something that should have been addressed before spending a first round pick and millions of dollars on him. There's no guarantee that any of these guys would have panned out anyway. We can't just assume that we lost three #1 pitchers due to injury and suspension.

 

[sheethead]

[strawbossevil] called your assertions that a good-GM would have

traded them for that type of pitcher ridiculous and unrealistic.

 

So you actually admit to violating this forums policy? Not only were

they not my assertions, but you say they were and then call them

ridiculous and unrealistic?

 

"decent starter"

 

You quote this like its what I said. And you ask me if I am disingenuous? Much further back in the conversation? Its back one page. Don't have to go too far, and it was said smack in the middle of all my posts. So since it makes your argument weaker, we have to pretend it either didn't happen or it was so much further back in the conversation that it doesn't matter? So a top/middle of the rotation starter cannot be inferred as a #1/#2 with you? I'm done here.

[strawbossisevil]

This falls much more on Jack Z then it does on Melvin. Everyone

loved Jack Z when he was here, he was the golden child.

 

But ultimately it's Melvin's responsibility. Whats that phrase, "s*** rolls up hill". He obviously felt that Jack Z's lack of ability of drafting a quality pitcher was not a good enough reason to replace him, probably because of his track record of drafting position players. So regardless of who made the actual draft pick, the results are just as much the responsibility of Melvin as they are of Jack Z.

Right, in the end it is his responsibility. But I doubt any GM in baseball would have fired Jack Z.

Let's not ignore that he brought in Ohka, Capuano, Villanueva, Coffey

and Sabathia all via trade. The Sabathia trade alone took us to the

playoffs (without that trade we may be talking about having no playoff

trips during the Fielder era).

Capuano could sort of be considered a success. Right before the injury wasn't he removed from the rotation though? Tomo Ohka? He pitched here for a year and compiled a 4-5 record with an ERA close to 5. Serviceable but nothing to brag about. Villanueva is extremely inconsistent and his ERA has been going up every year since he broke in, up until this year. Sabathia obviously was a great move. Easily Melvin's best move as GM. Coffey I think was claimed off of waivers, not traded for. A good move too though. However, with the exception of the Sabathia deal, none of these moves were exactly earth shattering. If people are actually using Tomo Ohka in Melvin's defense, that's not really a good thing.

If it was just Ohka, then I'd agree with you. However Ohka is part of a fairly significant list. You could add to that list F. Cordero as well. Few GMs bring in top pitching talent via trade. So it shouldn't be surprising that Melvin's list includes more 4/5 type pitchers than 1/2. The same is true for just about every other GM.

#2

Injury/Suspension problems with top round picks.

One of those picks, Rogers, was a bad pick. Most people agreed that Homer Bailey was a better pick, but IIRC we went with Rogers because his delivery and mechanics were supposed to be better and would be less likely to result in injury.

This remains to be seen. Homer Bailey has a career ERA of 5.46 to this point and has struggled with injury problems including a shoulder problem this year (hmm, just as the Brewer's scouting team guessed would happen).

As far as Jeffress goes....yeah, he was suspended. But let's not forget that in between suspensions he was actually demoted from Huntsville because of his performance. Also, my assumption is that he didn't start smoking weed after he was drafted. That is something that should have been addressed before spending a first round pick and millions of dollars on him. There's no guarantee that any of these guys would have panned out anyway. We can't just assume that we lost three #1 pitchers due to injury and suspension.

I don't know if this can be realistically expected. Do the Brewers hire private investigators to do background checks and keep track of the 30 or so players that they feel that they could end up drafting in the first round? I agree that it isn't fair to assume that they all would have resulted in becoming #1 pitchers, nor have I ever made that claim. But when you draft three pitchers in the first round, all with top of the rotation ceilings, and all three either have injury problems or suspension problems, that is going to lead to pitching problems up at the major league level. In some respects, the fact that these three pitchers have not made it to this point is just bad luck, not bad GMing.

[strawbossisevil]

[strawbossevil] called your assertions that a good-GM would have

traded them for that type of pitcher ridiculous and unrealistic.

 

So you actually admit to violating this forums policy? Not only were

they not my assertions, but you say they were and then call them

ridiculous and unrealistic?

Nice try. But no. I have every right to explain why I think your views are unrealistic and ridiculous. It isn't a personal attack on you, it's an attack on your argument, two very, very different things.

"decent starter"

 

You quote this like its what I said. And you ask me if I am disingenuous?

Here is a quote from you, this is your own words that I responded to: "I just would like some decent pitching, and a great GM would have explored the possibility of trading Hoffman, Counsell, Cameron, etc. last year in an effort to get some." So yeah, you can't exactly play the "disingenuous card" here. It doesn't work.

Much further back in the conversation? Its back one page. Don't have to go too far, and it was said smack in the middle of all my posts. So since it makes your argument weaker, we have to pretend it either didn't happen or it was so much further back in the conversation that it doesn't matter? So a top/middle of the rotation starter cannot be inferred as a #1/#2 with you? I'm done here.

Here is how the conversation went step by step.

1) You made a point that a good GM would have gotten decent pitching for Cameron, Hoffman, Counsell etc.

2) I pointed out that I felt it was rather ridiculous to think that we could get a decent pitcher for 3 months of any of those players.

3) You respond by saying that you never claimed that we could get a #1/#2 starter from those mess of players.

4) I responded back that I never asserted that idea either, all I had done was repeat your "decent pitcher" line that you had used in your previous post. And that I didn't see those players realistically bringing back any "decent" pitchers back in a trade.

5) You go back a page into the discussion and bring up a post from yesterday where I mentioned "top/middle of the rotation starter" which had no relation to the current discussion of what we could have gotten for Cameron, Hoffman....

6) I point out how disingenuous it is for you to make use of a post outside of the current context of our discussion to put words into my mouth I never said in context.

7) You continue to ignore the context of the posts and hold to your disingenuous attempt to use a post I made earlier in the topic when discussing a more general situation, and taking that post and applying it to the very specific discussion we are currently in the process of having.

8) I make this post illustrating how doing so is completely disingenuous.

[paul253]

This remains to be seen. Homer Bailey has a career ERA of 5.46 to

this point and has struggled with injury problems including a shoulder

problem this year (hmm, just as the Brewer's scouting team guessed would

happen).

 

His injuries have been nothing compared to injuries to the guy we drafted instead of hm. Maybe they guesses right that Bailey would have shoulder problems, but then they certainly guessed wrong about Rogers. Plus, Bailey's era may be poor, but at least he made it. He threw a complete game shut out not too long ago so the potential is obviously there. And he lowered his era by over a run and a half since April, so he is getting a little better it seems. Mark Rogers is still in AA having difficulty throwing strikes. And I don't want to make it seem like I am down on Rogers. I follow his stats every week and pray he makes it. But between Bailey and Rogers, can you honestly say at this point you'd still rather have Rogers?

You could add to that list F. Cordero as well.

 

We traded a 2 time all star outfielder to get Cordero, a reliever. There are a lot of people who think that was a bad trade.

 

In some respects, the fact that these three pitchers have not made it

to this point is just bad luck, not bad GMing.

 

Even if I give you these three as bad luck, what about all of the other ones drafted on his watch that didn't make it?

 

Honestly I don't mean to sound like a jerk, but after 8 years I just don't see how you can defend his record on pitching. I just can't get over the fact that of all the pitchers drafted in his 8 drafts, only 2 of them have started a game for the Brewers.

 

[Ennder]

ut ultimately it's Melvin's responsibility. Whats that phrase, "s*** rolls up hill". He obviously felt that Jack Z's lack of ability of drafting a quality pitcher was not a good enough reason to replace him, probably because of his track record of drafting position players. So regardless of who made the actual draft pick, the results are just as much the responsibility of Melvin as they are of Jack Z.

 

Not singling you out in any way here but a lot of people on the forums want to give 100% credit for the good drafted players to Jack Z and 100% of the blame for the drafted players that didn't work out to Melvin. There is a pretty prevalent double standard at play on the forums.