Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    Join The Internet Home for Angels fans today! AngelsWin.com - Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

  • AngelsWin.com's Charity of the Month

Joel Sherman: Dave Dombroski a name that comes up voluminously with Angels GM job


Recommended Posts

I understand that, but being dog shit for several years a-gain after mostly going through that in the 1970’s, 1990s, and 2010s Is monotonous, especially if another WS is not reached and the tearing down happens.

33 under .500 seasons out of 60 is a lot, when one has been a fan since 1966.

Edited by Angel Oracle
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Dombrowski inherited strong farm systems in his previous jobs, which he was able to leverage into a "win now" mode.  The problem here, though, is our farm system is mediocre on the whole (not terrible

I’m sorry if I am laughing at the “horror” of winning for four years and getting a WS ring, but then suffering for 5 years after that.  Man that five years after the parade would be rough. Maybe 

I would still take a World Series ring and some years like we had from 2004-2009 if it meant trading away our prospects. 

38 minutes ago, DCAngelsFan said:

This article was published yesterday - 2020 Rookies ranked by future value - in the top 25, there are 4 Dodgers in the top 30, 3 Mariners, 2 A's -- and 1 Angels (Walsh, at #28.)  

https://www.mlb.com/news/ranking-2020-mlb-rookies-by-future-value 

The Dodgers continue to shame us in terms of finding talent ...

And the Dogs rarely ever draft early in each round.   Same with the A’s since 2013

Get with the program, Arte.   Bring in better scouting and development!   You’ve had SEVENTEEN years to do it.

Edited by Angel Oracle
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Blarg said:

It doesn't undermine either, it is the same structure of the Dodgers. Both have their roles and responsibilities regardless of ownership. 

Yes - and I say this as a fan of Arte the Owner, but do you think Arte the Owner can actually allow a set-up like that? In many ways, it's no different in effect than Scioscia-Reagins or Arte-Reagins or Scioscia-Dipoto. Scioscia didn't have the title, but it's fairly clear that both Reagins and Dipoto were pretty limited in their actual autonomy or authority. 

I think Eppler really was given the reins the first couple of years and it hasn't produced. Arte has been much more involved past year or so. It's difficult to see Arte relinquishing his influence, much less adding a second person to take more of his influence...

I mentioned it in another post, but I also said Dombrowski + Eppler could be a hell of a combo, so I'm definitely on-board. Just not sure Arte's forward-thinking or humble enough to recognize the opportunity. And again, I say this as a fan of Arte the Owner.

If you could replace Arte with Dombrowski in the FO equations and keep Eppler, it could be great.

Part of my 'undermine' comment was also more along the lines of how often do you see an incumbent GM lose duties without also losing his job?

Edited by totdprods
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Blarg said:

It doesn't undermine either, it is the same structure of the Dodgers. Both have their roles and responsibilities regardless of ownership. 

It doesn't necessarily undermine either, but from my understanding of the Dodgers' infrastructure when it was Friedman/Zaidi (President of Baseball Ops + GM) - Friedman was essentially what we would consider a "GM" in the sense that he had the ultimate say in terms of trades, signings, etc.

Zaidi, OTOH, was the man mainly in charge of the minor leagues and the under-the-radar type roster moves/signings - i.e., signing Max Muncy, etc.

I think for Eppler, if he stayed on board while we hired a President, while his title would still be GM, it would effectively be a demotion in terms of responsibilities, and I am not sure he would want that.  And, more importantly - a new president would likely want "his guys" to fill out his FO, which likely would not be Eppler.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Fourts said:

Why is anyone worrying about being dog-shit after a few years of winning, etc.  Do you not realize that we CURRENTLY are dog-shit.  We had the 10th worst record last year.  We are even worse this year.  Half the teams are making the playoffs and we are not even in the playoff hunt in a 60 game season.  That's how bad we are.  It can't get much worse. 

Hmm, maybe because this is how we *got* to be dogshit - bad drafts, bad trades, bad free agent signings - all thinking - "this is the deal that'll put us over the top!  This is what'll get us back to the World Series!!" ...

So, the fear (or being an Angels fan, the expectation) is that we'll blow up the farm, and trade for guys who'll fail spectacularly, perhaps some pitcher who needs TJ on *both* arms after one start or some guy who literally spontaneously combusts in the clubhouse and burns down the stadium - and then we'll continue to be dogshit until we're all dead.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Warfarin said:

It doesn't necessarily undermine either, but from my understanding of the Dodgers' infrastructure when it was Friedman/Zaidi (President of Baseball Ops + GM) - Friedman was essentially what we would consider a "GM" in the sense that he had the ultimate say in terms of trades, signings, etc.

Zaidi, OTOH, was the man mainly in charge of the minor leagues and the under-the-radar type roster moves/signings - i.e., signing Max Muncy, etc.

I think for Eppler, if he stayed on board while we hired a President, while his title would still be GM, it would effectively be a demotion in terms of responsibilities, and I am not sure he would want that.  And, more importantly - a new president would likely want "his guys" to fill out his FO, which likely would not be Eppler.

This was definitely what I was alluding to more with the 'undermine' comment. 

I could see a structure like that with Dombrowski and someone else, but hard to see it with Eppler. Which is a shame because I think Eppler could do that Zaidi role well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Angel Oracle said:

And the Dogs rarely ever draft early in each round.   Same with the A’s since 2013

Get with the program, Arte.   Bring in better scouting and development!   You’ve had SEVENTEEN years to do it.

Honestly - and I have no way of knowing - but I've long had the feeling that Arte has run a shoestring (cheap) operation outside of the major league club.   

I mean, like you say, he's had all these years to build such an organization, and outside of one spectacular draft pick, the results from that part of the club has been mediocre, at best.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DCAngelsFan said:

Hmm, maybe because this is how we *got* to be dogshit - bad drafts, bad trades, bad free agent signings - all thinking - "this is the deal that'll put us over the top!  This is what'll get us back to the World Series!!" ...

So, the fear (or being an Angels fan, the expectation) is that we'll blow up the farm, and trade for guys who'll fail spectacularly, perhaps some pitcher who needs TJ on *both* arms after one start or some guy who literally spontaneously combusts in the clubhouse and burns down the stadium - and then we'll continue to be dogshit until we're all dead.  

 

Right.  For the crowd who wants Dombrowski because it "guarantees" we win a title - I'd say that the key element of the Red Sox is that he inherited a tremendous farm system AND a huge payroll.  He leveraged the farm system to augment the team, which in turn led to a title.

He would not have that kind of farm system here, and moreover, he likely won't have much payroll to add.

Now, the caveat - *IF* Arte decides he is willing to spend more with Dombrowski in charge than Eppler because he trusts him to spend better - then, well, in that case, I would support Dombrowski, simply because it means Arte is more willing to pump money into the team.

But, all that said - I hope Arte takes a look at the truly successful MLB franchises, goes the route of hiring a Dodgers/Rays FO member who will emulate their structure, and we see our team (finally) elevated into a perennial contender.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Angel said:

I really feel like the Dombrowski method will decapitate this franchise for a decade, the real and only growth we have really seen has come from within, mainly home grown but some re-calibrated talent from other teams.  Eppler doesn't deserve to lose his job because of the major improvements the team has made since the early struggles, the sample size is not large enough to call him a failure over 162 games.  We basically get a freebie, shortened season that was mostly forgettable and an extra off-season to re-calibrate the team once again.

And Dipoto/Eppler hasn't decapitate us?

Not like it could get any worse. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trout is 29 and has about 4-5 years (maybe) left of peak performance. 

If the Angels did the Dombrowski method and spent big to get a ring within those 4-5 years then I'd call it a success. 

We all want to see a prime Trout playing in the World Series. 

Plus if after 5 years we need to rebuild then i'm all for it. Might be good to have a REAL rebuild for once. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since 2014 the Angels are below .500 and they've finished with a winning record once while 2020 will be the 5th year in a row with a losing record.  I'm not worried about the Angels 5 years from now when Trout and Rendon are past their primes I'm more concerned about the next 3-5 years and whether or not they muddle along in mediocrity.  I'm not for gutting the farm but the last 5 years have made me realize how great 2004-2009 were.  Obviously we would have loved another ring especially when some of those teams felt like they had a legit chance (screw you 2005).  As disappointing as it was to not win a second ring I would absolutely take the feeling of being close but not quite there over talking about next season before the current regular season ends. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Catwhoshatinthehat said:

Since 2014 the Angels are below .500 and they've finished with a winning record once while 2020 will be the 5th year in a row with a losing record.  I'm not worried about the Angels 5 years from now when Trout and Rendon are past their primes I'm more concerned about the next 3-5 years and whether or not they muddle along in mediocrity.  I'm not for gutting the farm but the last 5 years have made me realize how great 2004-2009 were.  Obviously we would have loved another ring especially when some of those teams felt like they had a legit chance (screw you 2005).  As disappointing as it was to not win a second ring I would absolutely take the feeling of being close but not quite there over talking about next season before the current regular season ends. 

The Sox were also in a much better position to win in the short term than we are now. I don't have the confidence that Dombrowski can build us a winner with the resources he'll be given.

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, DCAngelsFan said:

Hmm, maybe because this is how we *got* to be dogshit - bad drafts, bad trades, bad free agent signings - all thinking - "this is the deal that'll put us over the top!  This is what'll get us back to the World Series!!" ...

So, the fear (or being an Angels fan, the expectation) is that we'll blow up the farm, and trade for guys who'll fail spectacularly, perhaps some pitcher who needs TJ on *both* arms after one start or some guy who literally spontaneously combusts in the clubhouse and burns down the stadium - and then we'll continue to be dogshit until we're all dead.  

 

Look, i'm certainly not advocating trading all the prospects for one run (ala AJ Preller in 2014/2015 for the Padres).  Far from it -- i'm a farm system building/foundation mindset guy.  I'm just saying it's funny people worried about a change because we might be bad for a long time.  Like ignoring the fact we are currently (& have for years) been dog-shit and an after-thought in MLB (post-season...not off-season).  It's not like we have a bright future or a top 5 farm system.  We should...but we don't.  Somehow the Mariners with DiPoto have a brighter future (WTW?!?!).  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with the common idea that we're at a binary position of either A) give up any hopes of winning during Trout's prime and continue to build from within, or B) gut the farm in order to win now.

This isn't a bad team, and more importantly: it is actually a pretty good team and isn't far from being a very good team. Given a full season, this team as configured would probably win 85-90 games. Let us not forget that after a terrible start that saw the Angels at 10-22, they've played very well since: 14-9, which prorated to 162 games is a 99-win pace. I'm not saying they're a 99-win team, but they may be a 90-win team. Right now, with no changes.

So what to do? I would continue to build up the farm and bolster the current team with modest free agent and trade acquisitions. I wouldn't trade away any of the higher upside players--Adell, Marsh, Adams, Detmers, C Rod, Kochanowicz, Vera, Paris, etc--but I would try to be savvy and look for another Bundy, be it via free agency (Gausman?) or trade.

There is really no reason why 2021 can't begin another era like 2004-09. Whether that includes a WS championship is impossible to control. The Yankees are always good but haven't won in 11 years, the Dodgers haven't won since 1988. But almost every year they are in the thick of things, which makes the season far more interesting. Whey are they in the thick of things? I think mostly because they're smart organizations: they invest heavily in scouting and player development. They generally only offer mega-deals to premium players still in their prime. Most of the teams with perennial success have some variation of the same thing in common: excellent scouting, player development, and savvy player acquisition. And perhaps a bit of luck.

I don't think Dave Dombrowski is the answer. He did win with the Red Sox in 2018, but at what cost? The Price deal essentially cost the team Mookie Betts. Kimbrel was great and then fell apart. The Sale contract is turning into a disaster. JD Martinez seems to be getting old really fast. Meaning, he caught lightning in a bottle and the Red Sox were ridiculously good, but are terrible two years later.

I'm not sure Billy Eppler is the answer, either, but the team's play over the last few weeks may be more indicative of what is in store going forward than the first month or so. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Red Sux are a different comparison to the Angels though as they are expected to contend every year with the yanks.  One bad year is all that town/franchise will take.  So maybe Dom was brought in with the understanding he'd turn it around ASAP rather than continuing to build the farm.  IDK honestly.  But i don't think it's a straight parallel to us and say he'd do the exact same thing.  Ultimately, it's Arte's team and his desire for what he wants that will likely control what we get & how the team is run for 2021+. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

if we could have a successful five years in a row, including a WS title, followed by five years of crap, i'd do that in a heartbeat. if that means bringing in dombrowski, fine by me. 

the whole goal is to win championships. there's nothing like being on top of the mountain.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Warfarin said:

Dombrowski inherited strong farm systems in his previous jobs, which he was able to leverage into a "win now" mode.  The problem here, though, is our farm system is mediocre on the whole (not terrible, but not a top tier one).

Um..  No

He didn't inherit shit in Florida, he was the first GM in Marlins history and 5 years later they had won a WS with a team he built from scratch.   He got tired of Marlins ownership BS and moved on to Detroit after the 2001 season.  A team made up almost entirely of guys he brought to the Marlins would win their second WS two years later -- check their roster and when/how most were acquired.

The 2001 Tigers top 10 prospect list looked like this.  The prospect rankings for all these guys were PRE-season, so the only guys still ranked in the top 100 when he took over where Cornejo, and Infante.

1 Brandon Inge - Made debut with Tigers in 2001, was there until 2012 - ranked 67th in 2001
2 Ramon Santiago - Made debut with Tigers in 2002, traded in 2004 for Carlos Guillen (huge win), ranked 95th in 2001
3 Eric Munson - Made debut with Tigers in 2000, was there until 2004.  - 23rd in 2000
4 Matt Wheatland - Never made it to majors, was injured when he got there - 0 top 100
5 Nate Cornejo - Made debut with Tigers, was there until 2005 - ranked 55th in 2002
6 Shane Loux - Made debut with Tigers, was there until 2004 (6 year ML FA) - 0 top 100
7 Andres Torres - Made debut with Tigers, was there until 2004 (granted FA) - 0 top 100 
8 Omar Infante - Made debut with Tigers, was there unttil 2007 -  ranked 95th in 2002
9 Andy Van Hekken - Made debut with Tigers, was there until 2005 - 0 Top 100
10 Nook Logan  - Made debut with Tigers - 0 top 100

Other than Ramon Santiago, he didn't trade shit.  He didn't inherit any stars either.
Here's a nice recap of the 2002 Top 10 https://www.blessyouboys.com/detroit-tigers-prospect-report/2013/1/10/3859346/a-look-back-baseball-americas-top-10-tigers-prospects-of-2002

Now these are the people he drafted and graduated to MLB while GM of the Tigers.

Curtis Granderson, Justin Verlander, Cameron Maybin, Matt Joyce, Andrew Miller, Casey Fien, Scott Sizemore, Rick Porcello, Charlie Furbush, Alex Avila, Jacob Turner, Nick Castellano, Chance Ruffin, Drew Smyly, Rob Brantly Curt Casali, James McCaan...   Dude is a witch drafting catchers.

The 2002 Tigers he inherited lost 106 games.  He inherited a bad team and went about gutting it to try to fix it ...  He turned a fading Jeff Weaver into Jeremy Bonderman and Carlos Pena.
The 2003 Tigers lost 119 games as the rebuild was fully underway.
The 2004 Tigers lost 90 games.  He signed Pudge to catch, traded for Carlos Guillen who would give them 7 years of 121 OPS+ offense from a MI.  He picked up Rondell White as a cheap castoff.  He traded Mark Redman for Nate Robertson who he had drafted in Miami.
The 2005 Tigers lost 91 games.  He signed Magglio Ordonez for 6 years -- he ended up getting a 123 OPS+ for his Tigers career -- the last year sub 100.
The 2006 Tigers WON, 96 games -- lost the WS.  Justin Verlander and Curtis Granderson (his picks), graduated.   Bonderman won 14 games as a 23 year old.  Robertson faked his way to a 3.84 ERA over 200 IP.  Zack Miner had been acquired for a 29 year old Kyle Farnsworth.
The 2007 Tigers Won 88 games.  He traded 3 guys people never heard of for Gary Sheffield who put up a 119 OPS+.  Placido Polanco put up a 121 OPS+ at 2B after being acquired for Urgeth Urbina.
2008 -- Miguel Cabrera trade...

2011-2015 the Tigers won four straight AL Central titles..

Dude built both the Marlins and the Tigers up.   He'd done the same with the zero budget Expos.  Yes, he spent prospects like a drunken sailor in Boston -- but that's exactly what they asked him to do but the narrative that he's always done that just isn't based on reality and sells Dombrowski short.  Would I want him over Eppler?  No.  Would I prefer him to another guy that's trying to cut his teeth...  I guess it depends on who the other candidates are.. 

But with Trout in his age 29 season next year the future is NOW, and say what you will about Dombrowski, he's won everywhere he's been and he's had nothing handed to him outside of Boston.


 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, totdprods said:

I wonder if there's some sort of hybrid outcome. I know it's very unlikely, but what about Dombrowski for some sort of VP of Baseball Ops, with Eppler still serving as GM?

Obviously, this sort of arrangement does not happen often, if ever, but perhaps Eppler's strong work rebuilding the farm and finding cheap talent, paired with Dombrowski's strong work in aggressive, flashy win-now moves, could compliment. They could also also conflict in a quite remarkable way. 

It really pains me that this offseason is starting to revolve so much around Moreno. Overall, I really like what he's done to Angels baseball. But he really makes some bone-headed, bizarre moves sometimes that really set things back. This is maybe the most important offseason in the Trout Era and it sucks that inevitably the rest of his contract will likely be shaped by what Moreno wants to do this winter. Does he want to spend more on the MLB payroll? Spend less because of lost revenue due to the virus? A win-now GM that goes for broke for a quick win? An extension for a GM with questionable results? 

This offseason really comes down to what Moreno wants to do for the future of the franchise. I know he's always a factor, but this winter, more than ever. 

Eek.

This would be my ideal situation.  But Dombrowski was put into that position once before and canned the acting GM in his first year.  Still worth looking at IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, totdprods said:

I wonder if there's some sort of hybrid outcome. I know it's very unlikely, but what about Dombrowski for some sort of VP of Baseball Ops, with Eppler still serving as GM....

Hybrid is a key word here....not in the management sense necessarily but in a team building way....it doesn't have to be one way or another, trade away all your prospects and win now or blow it up and start over....if Dombromski is a smart guy, he can adapt and maybe piece together a strong farm, good FA signings and good trades...they aren't mutually exclusive...if you want to set up a "VP of Baseball Operations" type of structure, let Dombromski pick a young, smart guy he likes to do a lot of the heavy lifting...Hybrid all the way around...

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, UndertheHalo said:

Or it’ll just be a disaster and we’ll end up without a winner and with a thrashed farm system again.  I think you give Eppler a couple more years to let his work bear fruit.  It was always ridiculous to think he’d be able to fix the Reagins/Dipoto disaster in 2 or 3 years.  No one could have done it.  The right way to run a major league organization is to develop a consistent pipeline of talent.  We aren’t sitting on a bunch of premium prospects.  

He's had long enough, UTH. Let's give someone else a chance. The Angels shouldn't be this bad for so long.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DMVol said:

Hybrid is a key word here....not in the management sense necessarily but in a team building way....it doesn't have to be one way or another, trade away all your prospects and win now or blow it up and start over....if Dombromski is a smart guy, he can adapt and maybe piece together a strong farm, good FA signings and good trades...they aren't mutually exclusive...if you want to set up a "VP of Baseball Operations" type of structure, let Dombromski pick a young, smart guy he likes to do a lot of the heavy lifting...Hybrid all the way around...

Isn't this what every team is trying to do?  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...