Cashman Signs 3 Year Extension with NY

Dave · September 30, 2008 at 1:58 pm · Filed Under Mariners 

Cross Brian Cashman off the candidates list – he’s re-signing with the Yankees. 3 years at a reported $2 million per year.

From what I’m hearing, it’s more likely that the M’s are going to go with a first time GM over an experienced guy. It’s not set in stone, but right now, bet on Hahn, Lacava, or Ang.

Comments

25 Responses to “Cashman Signs 3 Year Extension with NY”

  1. jimmylauderdale on September 30th, 2008 2:08 pm

    Is it likely the White Sox, Jays, and Dodgers let them interview with the M’s?

  2. gwangung on September 30th, 2008 2:17 pm

    Not sure about Hahn or LaCava, but I’d almost bet that the Dodgers would let Ng interview. She’s interviewed for the Dodger job before and it’s likely there’s an understanding she could go looking for other jobs if the opportunity came up (nothing sure, just speculation here).

  3. Typical Idiot Fan on September 30th, 2008 2:25 pm

    Hahn, Lacava, or Ang.

    Look, his airbending skills may be great, but he’s got a lot to learn before he’s ready to save anyone, let alone a baseball franchise.

  4. Dave on September 30th, 2008 2:26 pm

    Except in cases where they have an explicity agreement that he won’t seek employment elsewhere (Antonetti, Depodesta, a few others), it’s pretty rare for a team to prevent one of their AGM types from interviewing for a GM job. It’s basically understood etiquette that teams should let people go for promotions in other organizations.

  5. Sports on a Schtick on September 30th, 2008 2:43 pm

    This M’s offseason is shaping up to be much more interesting than the past five months.

  6. TomTuttle on September 30th, 2008 3:00 pm

    So. . . . . .

    If it turns out to be one of those 3, is that a good thing?

  7. Steve T on September 30th, 2008 3:07 pm

    I really like the sound of Hahn and Ng. Don’t like LaCava as much, but he’s better than Bavasi, that’s for darn sure.

    The real question is whether any of them will be allowed to operate free of interference from Armstrong.

    I’d almost prefer to see a lesser choice (LaCava) take over, and then get in a loud public fight with Armstrong after Chuck nixes his first great deal he worked hard on, resigns in a huff, and thereby poisons the job for any future candidates until Armstrong himself is removed. I’d love to see this franchise forced to operate without a GM at all until the bastards just can’t take it anymore.

    Then let Ng or Hahn come in and run the franchise properly.

  8. dnc on September 30th, 2008 3:20 pm

    You like Hahn and Ng more than LaCava? Why?

  9. Dave Clapper on September 30th, 2008 3:24 pm

    I’m curious about the Hahn love there, too. At best, he’s an enigma to me right now. Ng, please.

  10. wabbles on September 30th, 2008 3:30 pm

    I’ve asked Chuck Howard questions before at FanFest (maybe it was a question, can’t remember) and here’s one I would like to pose to him this year:

    After the Black Sox scandal, Judge Kenesaw Mountain Landis agreed to save the owners from themselves by becoming the game’s first commissioner. But he took the job only on the condition that it was a lifetime appointment and he could do whatever he wanted as he saw fit. Will the new general manager (We should have one by then.) be given similar latitude to fix this mess? Obviously not the lifetime appointment but able to make baseball decisions if maybe not payroll decisions?

  11. gwangung on September 30th, 2008 3:35 pm

    I’m curious about the Hahn love there, too.

    Had to be the win share talk. Anybody who thinks that way has to be, at the very least, interesting.

  12. dnc on September 30th, 2008 3:56 pm

    Honestly, I don’t get the Ng love either. She’s a good executive, but to my knowledge she doesn’t have a track record in personnel decisions.

  13. Swungonandbelted on September 30th, 2008 4:07 pm

    I’m really happy to hear that Cashman is back with NY. It takes him off the table for the M’s, which is probably a very good thing.

  14. MattThompson on September 30th, 2008 4:19 pm

    Honestly, I don’t get the Ng love either. She’s a good executive, but to my knowledge she doesn’t have a track record in personnel decisions.

    From her bio on the Dodgers’ website:

    Ng’s primary responsibilities are to assist General Manager Ned Colletti in player acquisitions and contract negotiations in addition to coordinating player transactions. She oversees the club’s arbitration efforts, player development and professional scouting departments and manages the day-to-day operations of the baseball department including the medical, clubhouse and team travel divisions.

    She works specifically on player acquisition for the Dodgers, and is an ace at arbitration cases, which certainly entail analyzing a player’s value.

    Also, she runs player development, so I’d imagine she’s got a big say in what players are sent where in, and how they advance through, the Dodgers’ minor-league system. That strikes me as a pretty solid background in personnel decisions. Plus, as you say, she’s a talented executive (she’s one of the experts in all of baseball on transaction rules governing things like waivers, etc.).

  15. VictorB on September 30th, 2008 5:45 pm

    Ng’s primary responsibilities are to assist General Manager Ned Colletti in player acquisitions and contract negotiations in addition to coordinating player transactions. She oversees the club’s arbitration efforts, player development and professional scouting departments and manages the day-to-day operations of the baseball department including the medical, clubhouse and team travel divisions.

    Don’t all Asst GM have basically this same bio in the media guide? Personally, I need to hear about what he or she has done personally in acquisitions. Also, why did LA pass on her for Colletti? Why did Houston hire Ed Wade instead of her (could be they’re stupid, I realize)?

  16. njpozner on September 30th, 2008 5:57 pm

    Also, why did LA pass on her for Colletti? Why did Houston hire Ed Wade instead of her (could be they’re stupid, I realize)?

    Hiring Ng, who would be the first woman GM, is going to attract attention. Really, baseball is not, on the whole, known for progressive thinking. LA possibly felt that going outside the box on the DePodesta hire had blown up in their faces and didn’t want to leave themselves exposed to criticism if it happened twice in a row. Of course any organization that makes two lousy GM hires in a row will take criticism, and it’s unfair to call DePo’s time in LA lousy, but that’s been the perception.

    I think the act of hiring Ed Wade proves the Astros were stupid.

  17. Steve T on September 30th, 2008 7:34 pm

    I like Hahn and Ng better than LaCava for the reasons stated, as well as the fact that I just don’t know much about LaCava. The USSM report included an interview, which proved that he loves to shoot the breeze about baseball, but I wasn’t getting much of a modern analyst vibe. That’s not really a criticism, and I don’t really know a damn thing about him or the other two, it’s just my rough impression.

  18. gottago on September 30th, 2008 8:51 pm

    just use a dartboard. Seattle’s off the map for most of the U.S. The first thing is to find someone who will come here after last season. Hmmm…go to Seattle, a long way from anywhere that matters, fix a broken, bankrupt organization (not WaMu), OR go fishing and wait for something better to come along. Cast off!

  19. msb on September 30th, 2008 9:15 pm

    From what I’m hearing, it’s more likely that the M’s are going to go with a first time GM over an experienced guy.

    huh. and here Steve Kelley just opined that he feels the FO won’t go with an assistant, but instead will want someone who has been there, done that.

  20. matto on September 30th, 2008 9:16 pm

    The M’s will like the PR blast about hiring Ng if they go for a first time GM, my money’s on her.

  21. joser on September 30th, 2008 11:18 pm

    gottago, Dave has posted numerous times about why Seattle — yes, even after a season like this — is a desirable location. I could look them up for you, but I’m sure you know how to do searches too.

    No, the M’s probably can’t tempt away a GM from another organization (especially not a winning one, which is the only ones you’d want). But look at it this way: there are only 30 GM jobs on the planet. There are a lot more assistant GMs than that, and most of them are in organizations where their boss isn’t leaving anytime soon. Sure, they can wait, but they aren’t getting any younger, and the strongest and most ambitious ones will be tempted. The greater the challenge the greater the reward: the quickest way to make a name for yourself is to pull off the seeming impossible and turn the team around. And the M’s are not without their attractions. This isn’t, say, the Marlins with no payroll and an evil dickwad owner, or Baltimore with brutal divisional competitors and an idiot meddling owner, or even hapless and hopeless Kansas City*. A smart potential GM will see that, and realize that the lowered expectations of everyone, from fans to “analysts,” means that it’s easier to look like a hero with just a few shrewd moves and a little luck.

    * (and yet somehow all those organizations manage to find GMs).

  22. gwangung on September 30th, 2008 11:29 pm

    Um….gottago….the one thing the Seattle Mariners are NOT…is bankrupt.

    Fixing a broken organization may be hard…but having money makes lots of things way easier….

  23. gwangung on September 30th, 2008 11:30 pm

    huh. and here Steve Kelley just opined that he feels the FO won’t go with an assistant, but instead will want someone who has been there, done that.

    Yeah, well bet opposite of that.

    How many of those times are there? And how many of them will want to leave their positions?

    Not thinking it through, as usual….

  24. gottago on October 1st, 2008 9:07 am

    I didn’t mean “bankrupt” in the balance sheet sort of way. I’ve been a season ticket holder for 8 years and know what that has cost me for seats to 81 games a year.

    I meant “bankrupt” in the sense that the Mariners are without a coherent, focused plan. Sure Howard and Chuck can count beans and give the ownership group a nice report on finances, but where is the desire to win. And I cannot stand the idea of Howard and Chuck continuing to lead with mediocrity on the field. Or this year, worse.

    If you can afford to own a baseball team wouldn’t you want to see your team getting better and going to the playoffs? I want someone to make tough and unpopular decisions (Raul, Ichiro, Johjima) and tell the fan base to chill and see what starts to happen in 2010.

    If the owners were all about the money, they wouldn’t own a baseball team. There are too many ways to profit with a private company without having to listen to every decision be critiqued on KJR or in the papers and the blogs.

  25. gwangung on October 1st, 2008 1:21 pm

    I meant “bankrupt” in the sense that the Mariners are without a coherent, focused plan.

    Well, I think moron, numbskull, incompetent would probably be better terms, given the way the economy is these days….

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.