“Team chemistry. It runs through the team, the manager, the staff all the way to the FO and GMs. Confidence in the GM is critical for any team to succeed.”

to

“Do you realize that one of the biggest obstacles the M’s face currently in bringing in quality free agents is the reputation of our current GM?”

In other words, you’ve changed your argument. Since DMZ and Jeff Nye looked at the second argument, let me clarify why I disagree about the first, and then come back to your new argument.

I find the idea of GMs being able to eke performance out of players through nebulous “team chemistry” to be ridiculous- the concept is mainly a backwards-looking idea of “well, they must have had chemistry because they won”. What GMs do is make sound or unsound player personnel and management decisions, and that is how we evaluate them in any sort of systematic manner. It’s fairly obvious that the Mariner loading up on FA veterans and the remnants of the 1995 team was going to come back and haunt them at SOME point, and 2004 was that point. Gillick did not leave Bavasi with much in the cupboard to deal with that. Therefore, I think it’s eminently fair to hold him responsible in part for 2004.

The problems with the 2004 team (which is what we are arguing about) had not very much to do with Bavasi’s ability to bring in quality free agents- the roster was mostly set (recall the 5 man rotation that had been in every start in 2003). The major additions were Spiezio, Guardado and Ibañez (one big flop, one injury-plagued player who was still good for a while when healthy, one very solid signing, and before you say that Gillick would have done better, James Baldwin and Jeff Cirillo say “Hi”)- and recall that Pat Gillick was on the payroll ADVISING Bavasi, Armstrong et, al. in 2004.

No it isn’t. There’s no evidence that this is the case.

Do you not realize that players follow certain GMs because they know they have a reputation of putting together winners? Gillick is one of those GMs.

No they don’t. No he isn’t.

I don’t think it’s smug to say that these are silly opinions, because they are silly opinions.

Free agents don’t turn down the best offer on the table because of the reputation of the GM. Beltre and Sexson didn’t, and they were premier free agents that year — was Bavasi’s reputation any worse then, compared to the new, years-of-improvement Bavasi?

Like him or not, Bavasi’s got a fine reputation as a good guy to deal with, who does the right things for his players — it’s not like Jim Bowden, where there are bitter guys who got screwed on handshake deals around the league.

If you’re ignorant of that reputation, that’s one thing. But to say that something — which isn’t true — is the cause of something that isn’t happening, well, start at the start.

Further: free agents don’t follow GMs.

a) GMs don’t move enough
b) free agents aren’t free agents enough
c) free agents don’t turn down the best offer for one GM over another

What GMs can offer players they’re on good terms with is trust that they’re being brought on for the role they’re told, that they won’t (for instance) be offered arbitration after a short contract, that the terms of the off-contract no-trade will be honored, and so on.

There’s a substantial value to that compared to, say, signing with Jim Bowden (not to harp on him).

But where are these players who prove this point, choosing to pass up superior offers because they want to be on one team over another? They’re not out there.

Free agents pick the best offer, acting in their self-interest. That’s it. That’s all.

To quote from the handy-dandy USSM Orientation post linked at the top:

Generally speaking, in discussions:
The burden of proof is on the person who makes the assertion, and the wilder your assertion, the better your evidence should be. If you want to argue that Raul Ibanez is the best defensive left fielder ever, or that clutch hitting exists, or whatever, you need to bring the proof. “You need to disprove my theory” is not an acceptable argument, ever.

So if you’re going to claim that: team chemistry is a factor in success on the field not only between players, but between the front office staff and players as well; that free agents won’t come to the Mariners because of Bill Bavasi; or that the “bloggers” here are all uninformed hooligans, while not providing ANY evidence to support your assertions…

Expect to get a lot rougher treatment than either eponymous coward’s post, or this one.

((”GMs do not have magical properties and improving player performance”))

Do you realize that one of the biggest obstacles the M’s face currently in bringing in quality free agents is the reputation of our current GM? Do you not realize that players follow certain GMs because they know they have a reputation of putting together winners? Gillick is one of those GMs. (and no, I did not set out to be a Gillick apologist).

Safe it to say, that you, or any other blogger, have no actual idea as to the extent of Gillick’s 2004 involvement with regards to team personnel decisions, any more than you know who was juicing and coming off inflated numbers that year.

And do not bolster your positions by calling mine very silly, that type of retort makes you sound smug, and I don’t think that is how you want to come off.

Thanks!

So had Gillick been there, Boone, Edgar, Wilson and Olerud would have all been able to hit worth a damn?

Seriously, that’s a very silly argument. GMs do not have magical properties of anti-aging and improving player performance, and 2004 was a clear case of the team being old… and the decisions to put those guys under contract for 2004 were those of one Pat Gillick. In addition, as has been detailed on the blog, Gillick WAS involved in the player personnel decisions.

I don’t think Bavasi is a good GM, but Gillick’s strategies tend to leave the team vulnerable to getting old and bad suddenly, which has happened every place he’s left. Like Auric Goldfinger says: “Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it’s enemy action.”

From CEO to batboy? ALL WILLIE, ALL THE TIME.

Sorry, my two separate databases had shown – 1999 = Gillick. Anyway, I hesitated to use Johnson to bolster my position because he was a pitcher and nobody in his right mind would want to give up the best pitcher in the league. But that was Woody’s finest hour as ‘the Reluctant Hero’

Johnson left in 1998, leaving the 1999 Gillick team to adjust to the loss of the best pitcher in baseball and team history. BTW, Gillicks first year saw payroll drop twelve-million dollars.

well $6-9M of that was not paying RJ …