Ruben Amaro to be the next Astros GM?

Other Stuff

….please cross your fingers. This can only be considered good news for every level of our organization.

38 thoughts on “Ruben Amaro to be the next Astros GM?”

  1. Just wondering, if you are against Amaro than do you credit Arbuckle for the positives about this organization or are you one of those people who believe that the team succeeds despite the Front Office?

    Like

  5. Granted I am no Phillies Front Office Phan BUT I don’t think you can build a team like we have, doing it MAINLY through the farm, and be competitive and NOT have someone get credit for it.
    Sure there are a few times the Philly player overcomes the Front Office incompetence but some credit has to be given out somewhere. Post-season? No, but we have a winning record over the past 7-8 years. Our drafts have been ok not great not bad. And there were a few years our organization decided to not want any 1st round picks and build via free agency.

    I just can’t see how Amaro and Arbuckle don’t deserve some of the credit for this philly team. Two evils? I see two things that are in no way there fault but affected this team greatly –> 1. Ed Wade 2. Scott Rolen

    Ed Wade is pretty self-explanatory. Scott Rolen strong armed this team and sent us back quite a bit.

    Like

  6. I like Arby, credit him for the farm turnaround, and would be happy with him as GM. I also would not have minded trying Amaro at GM, although that is a gamble, because although he is a baseball guy and intelligent, we really don’t know if his baseball thinking is at all modern. Still, I fear we will get worse than Amaro to replace Gillick.

    Scott Rolen really did not strong-arm the team and that is really not what set us back. I’ll relay a totally unoriginal thought that I picked up from another board. The Rolen trade wasn’t awful. What was awful was the team not sticking with Polanco as its 3B replacement for Rolen. With that change, no David Bell, no lost draft choice for Bell, and a very nice lineup.

    Like

  7. Ed Wade is not self-explanatory. This is still essentially Ed Wade’s team. Nearly all of the core players were brought here by Wade. The notion that you have to give some credit to the front office for the team’s talent level over the last 7-8 years but none to Ed Wade is internally contradictory and nonsensical.

    Amaro is basically a cipher. We have nothing to go on in assessing whether or not he’d be a good GM. His public comments are meaningless because he’s an employee of, and therefore a spokesman for, Dave Montgomery and Pat Gillick. He’s middle management. And unlike Arbuckle, he doesn’t have a self-contained bailiwick within the organization within which one can evaluate his actions. I don’t see any basis either for praising him or criticizing him.

    Like

  8. Taco pal – 1st I mean by “self-explanatory” meaning we all know why he was let go.

    2nd – This team is not essentially the same team. Howard stayed here because of Gillick. Cole was brought up by Gillick and not traded away. Vic/Werth/Dobbs all have been key role players and do not have anything to do with Wade. Perhaps our most important bullpen peice, Romero, has nothing to do with Gillick. The decision to save our pen from an aging Gordon and throw Bret Myers in there, Gillick did that. Now PG does get a little knock for signing Gordon, but Gordon was big for us last year and against the Mets in September. Moyer? PG got him. He also got Eaton for better or worse, but Eaton has been huge against the Mets and IF we do get to the playoffs and pass the Mets Eaton is a huge reason why.

    Gone are Thome and Bell and Leiby and Wolf and Abreu. So really only J-Roll and Burrell and Utley and Myers and Madson are still here as key players from the Wade era. So NO, this is not the same team. Especially with Kendrick, because Ed Wade would have gone out and got some shtick like Trachsel and not bring up Kendrick.

    Oh yeah I almost forgot….ROWAND.

    This team is by no means the same as it was in the Ed Wade era. Before when players struck out they simply had that confused look on their faces like Pat Burrell or Abreu but now they actually have emotion and seem to care.

    But I tend to agree with the rest of your post how we can’t really evaluate Amaro. I do agree with that. I am by NO way an apologist nor do I think the entire Front Office is evil. But the Amaro’s and Arbuckle’s of the world have done some really good things here and that needs to be seen. That’s all, sorry if this post is too long.

    Like

  10. Allentown – Did you read that thing about Polanco on the Phllies mb? Only because I remember reading something like that on their.

    Still look at the overall package for Rolen and tell me honestly, could another team given us more if Rolen wanted to go anywhere? I mean we received Polanco, Bud Smith, AND Mike Timlin who was like 37 at the time!!! AND we had to give up a reliever as well, though I don’t think he was any good we still had to add something else which just seems ridiculous! AND we didn’t keep Rolen, Ed Wade traded him away for an arsonist. So it doesn’t matter if the trade could have worked beause Ed wade didn’t let it. Sorry but I just hate Rolen.

    Like

  11. “not great not bad” summarizes this organization. If you think being mediocre is acceptable, you’ve got some serious problems and need some clarity on the subject of why people watch pro sports teams.

    Like

  12. My GOD i am so fricken angry about Rolen I can’t even type. Well I meant Ed Wade traded Polanco for an arsonist. Now my bad joke looks even worse. I think I might just start drinking before I type posts and use that as my excuse.

    Like

  13. I really do not have time to write a detailed post, but here are my general thoughts.

    1. I think, if you met in person, Ruben Amaro, Jr. would be an impressive person. Very nice, dedictated, accommodating and articulate. He is also young and seems charismatic. All of this is background for the statement that I think he presents to other teams as a young, up-and-coming hot GM candidate. However, my view of the reality is that, in substance, he is not very good at all and we would be better off not to have him around.

    2. Ed Wade was a terrible, terrible GM. Seriously, in the entire time he was here, he never made a single good trade. I used to call him “Mr. buy high, sell low” – he was getting outfoxed by the more sophisticated GMs at every turn and, never, ever was nimble on his feet or had plan B or plan C if his plan A did not work out. Other than signing Jimmy Rollins, he was an utter disaster and, if he had been here another year, he would have screwed up the Ryan Howard promotion and never, in a million years, would have worked the type of deal for Jim Thome that Gillick got.

    I also do not give him credit for the minors – he had Arbuckle run that show – the only thing Ed did was trade away the players that Arbuckle produced and signed terrible free agents that deprived us of valuable picks. What a nightmare. In Philly we have a description for performance’s like Wade’s – he sucked.

    3. I have my criticisms of Arbuckle (not enough hard throwing right handers are drafted; a little too much emphasis is placed on competent prospects without a high ceiling), but, overall, he has done a good job (does anyone remember what the system was like before he arrived – it wasn’t pretty) and has been working with budgets that are probably far too light. I’ve never heard a complaint from him and I think he had cause to complain.

    I don’t know how his skills would translate to the GM role, but I am certainly okay with his player development skills.

    Like

  15. Wait, hold on. I coulda sworn that somebody in this thread praised Pat Gillick for signing Adam Eaton.

    And I disagree that Ed Wade never made a good trade. Everyone and his brother thought the Millwood trade was an absolute coup at the time it was made, and rightly so. A 27 year-old minor league catcher for a #2-type starter in his prime? Jon Schuerholz publicly complained that it was forced upon him by economic considerations (when Maddux unexpectedly accepted arbitration). Nobody could’ve foreseen that Millwood would tank in Philly. Of the 3 guys we gave up in the Wagner trade, only Taylor Buchholz now has a chance of turning into even an average major leaguer. And although Wagner isn’t remembered fondly around here, he did post ERAs of 2.42 and 1.51 in a Phillies uniform.

    The Ed Wade Phillies were an underachieving bunch, basically because several players simultaneously fell short their projections, got hurt, or both. I think Wade was unlucky as much as anything else.

    Like

  16. I apologize for this being a little off topic, but since there was some conversation on Mike Arbuckle and the minor league system from back in the day, I figured I’d post this:

    http://www.citypaper.net/articles/091996/article034.shtml

    I stumbled upon this about a half hour ago and immediately thought of phuturephillies.com. It’s just a snapshot of the team from 11 years ago, but it’s still pretty interesting. Some of the prospects mentioned here are bound to give me night terrors this evening.

    Like

  17. I bet Gio Gonzalez will be far better than anything Ed Wade ever gave up. Gullick/Amaro sure got a lot for Abreu, and don’t tell me that the money was freed up. Let’s see the money was used for Garcia, Eaton, Helms and Barajas. Sure was worth giving up Abreu for nothing for them. Talk about buying high!

    Like

  18. It’s commonly believed that although the acquisition of Abreu in 1997 occurred when Wade was still an assistant GM, that trade was Wade’s brainchild. It ranks up there with Grimsley-for-Schilling and Chris James-for-Kruk on the list of the best trades the Phillies have made over the past 25 years.

    Meanwhile, Gillick’s dumping of Abreu last July was possibly the Phillies’ worst trade since Ryne Sandberg. Luckily, we didn’t suffer too badly since Victorino and Werth have exceeded expectations by a wide margin this year, but that doesn’t change the fact that it was an idiotic decision.

    The bottom line is that Wade inherited a last-place team and turned it into an 85-90 win team. Gillick inherited an 85-90 win team and turned it into an 85-90 win team. Wade’s record, while flawed, is objectively superior to Gillick’s.

    Like

  19. A couple of rejoinders.

    First, I am talking about the merits of Ed Wade – he was demonstrably horrible as a GM – Pat Gillick’s spotty track record (the Garcia deal was an absolute nightmare – I went on this post months ago ripping Gillick for pulling off such an important deal with completing the most basic due diligence – a simple medical exam – that event was unbelievable) is incidental and irrelevant to my assessment of Ed Wade.

    Folks, Ed Wade was a terrible general manager. Remember, Ed Wade brought us Andy Ashby. Ed Wade screwed up negotiations with Curt Schilling and then made a really crummy trade that, in the long run, gave us nothing. Ed Wade and his crew also helped hasten Rolen’s departure out of town. Ed Wade was never nimble enough to help the team at the trade deadline (hello Turk Wendell). In about eight years as general manager, Ed Wade never got a young prospect in a trade who turned out to be even moderately successful and he continuously did things to rob the farm system of talent (trades and ill-advised free agent signings).

    The only thing that I can think of that turned out to be an okay trade was the Wagner deal – and that was not rocket science on Ed’s part – it was as much about the Phillies assuming a contract obligation (Astros had Brad Lidge) as anything else. As for Millwood, let’s face it, Ed was schooled. The Braves already knew what we soon found out – Millwood is a permanent underachiever who is out of shape and lackidaisical.

    Aside from harvesting the talent developed by Arbuckle, Wade never did anything to move the ball forward, which is the GM’s entire job. He was an over-matched, cautious company man who provided no added value and did nothing that showed foresight or ingenuity. He was just dreadful.

    Now, on to Pat Gillick. Gillick’s record is mixed, although he has screwed up his fair share of deals. The Garcia deal is among the worst I can remember – an “F” if ever there was one. The Eaton deal, while in its first year, would also have to qualify as an “F” – very bad. The Gordon deal rates as a “C” or “C-” – it might have been better if had been brought in to be the set-up man, not the closer. The secondary deals were also pretty bad this year – Helms and Barajas were not good. I won’t kill them for Helms because everyone thought he could hit last year and he may bounce back. Barajas is a stiff. Finally, Pat did a poor job of getting the bullpen together this year, which has forced the team into some terrible situations.

    Let’s look at the positive, some of it is obvious, other stuff is subtle, but makes a difference in the long run.

    First, the Abreu deal was entirely and completely a dump to save salary (and a lot of it – $15 million a year – not chump change) and to rid the team of a player who, while not a cancer, had absolutely no sense of urgency and no market value. And they were right to dump him. Have you watched the team this year? If you have, you will undoubtedly notice that the 2007 edition of the Phillies, minus Abreu, Lieberthal, Pratt and other distractions are the singularly most postive, selfless and team-oriented group of major league players I have ever seen, bar none. The subtraction of Abreu is a big part of that. The fact that they did not spend the saved money properly is another issue altogether.

    Second, the Thome deal was just phenomenal and, obviously, would have been better if Gonzalez had not been sent off in the Garcia trade. Trust me, there’s no way in the world that Ed Wade ever pulls off that trade. Rather, he would have either gotten nothing for Thome or would have done nothing and let the problem fester until it was impossible.

    Third, the trade deadline acquisition of Moyer and Lohse, have allowed the Phillies to play competitively late into the year both this year and last. Without those players, the Phils don’t have a prayer. Ed Wade never pulled off moves like that.

    Fourth, the acquisitions of Dobbs and Werth have proven to be quite excellent. Neither was a big move, but they have been instrumental to the team’s success. The J.C. Romero pick-up has also paid dividends. When did Ed Wade pick up anyone like that and lift them from obscurity? Answer – never.

    Fifth, I am not sure whether people have been noticing this, but, subtly, Gillick has been making moves that would, wherever possible, allow the team to obtain draft picks by allowing middle tier free agents to leave the team, such as David Dellucci and Jason Michaels. I give Gillick a lot of credit for this because, given his age and his directive when he got here, he could have easily tried to maximize all of the team’s resources for a 2 or 3 year pushed to the top, but, much to my surprise and delight, he didn’t do that.

    There’s also one thing you have to note about Gillick. When something doesn’t work, he doesn’t dwell on it – it’s on to the next plan, and, if that plan doesn’t work, he tries something else. How many years did we hear Ed Wade explain that the team would be great if everyone played to his potential (this never happens, something always goes wrong – the GM’s job is to fix those problems) and then, when they didn’t, Ed just waited it out and did nothing? This happened every year, year after year – it was unbelievable.

    So, my take on Gillick is that he’s done some things very well, but has made some huge mistakes. The jury’s still out on his tenure, but would I take him over Ed Wade? Are you kidding, of course, in a heartbeat.

    Like

  21. Ed Wade inherited a last-place team and exited with an 85-90 win team. Pat Gillick inherited an 85-90 win team and has failed to improve it in any way.

    Both GMs’ records include some good moves and some bad moves. Their net performance is observable in the results and those results speak for themselves.

    Like

  22. Indeed, Gillick has probably lowered the overall talent level on this team. The most talented Phillies team of this decade was probably the 2003 squad. The franchise under Gillick has been able to tread water in comparison to its pre-Gillick level mainly because Charlie Manuel is so far superior as a manager in comparison to Larry Bowa.

    Like

  23. If the Braves really hoodwinked Wade on the Millwood deal, their GM sure did a great acting job afterwards:

    “With Kevin’s arbitration number projected to be $10 million this season and with Greg Maddux accepting arbitration we were $15 million over budget. The economics in baseball stink. The economics stink, and if this isn’t a clear enough signal to the doubters and naysayers, to be forced to trade an 18-game winner to your arch enemy … The economics stink.” – Jon Schuerholz

    As for the Abreu deal, of course it was a salary dump. That doesn’t change the fact that Gillick traded one of the 30 best players in baseball (plus a league-average starting pitcher) and got NOTHING, in terms of baseball talent, in return. This still boggles my mind. And yes, I have watched the Phillies this year, and what I see is a team on course to win just about the same number of games they consistently won with Abreu on the roster. Whether or not they do this with smiles on their faces is sorta irrelevant to me, and I’ve always found the idea that getting rid of Abreu made the other players happy (was there ever any evidence that they didn’t get along??) to be little more than conjecture.

    Like

  24. It’s funny that this thread has morphed away from an Ruben Amaro thread into an Ed Wade thread, because according to philly.com the Astros have decided not to hire Ruben Amaro and instead have hired… Ed Wade. (Yes, for real.)

    Like

  25. More responses –

    Yes, I remember Schuerholz saying those things – I remember it very clearly. Who knows how much of that he believed in his heart and how much was good publicity spin. It’s kind of immaterial.

    As for Abreu, the point of the salary dump is that most other teams don’t want to take on the salary either. In most team’s view (and rightfully so, I believe) Abreu wasn’t worth the salary alone, so why would they give you good prospects as well? That makes no sense – we were not going to get good prospects for Abreu. Furthermore, this type of situation is not that uncommon. A couple of years ago, the Red Sox placed Manny Ramirez, who was then a Hall of Fame talent in his prime, on waivers. He was there for the taking with no trades or other compensation due the Red Sox. No one wanted him, so why would it be a shock that someone would not give you any legitimate talent in return for Abreu.

    By the way, I never said the other players didn’t get along with Abreu – he’s not a bad person and I think they were indifferent to him. What I am saying is that, if you watch this team, it is abundantly clear that, with the current personnel, there is a sense of purpose and urgency that you never saw in the team as a whole or with Abreu in particular. Look, I’m not a big believer in team chemistry at the expense of statistics, but, if you watch this team closely, the chemistry is critical and the creation of this team chemistry was by design. On top of this, ridding ourselves of Abreu had no adverse consequences – the current team is scoring runs like crazy and we don’t have Abreu’s salary on the books. So, on offense, we got rid of $15 million and we lost no fire power. Sounds good to me (yes, again, it would have been nice to get prospects but I truly believe that was not possible).

    Look, I’m no apologist for Pat Gillick. It seems to me that, by next year, Gillick will have to produce a winner. If not, he’ll have to take the blame. Hopefully, by the middle/end of next year, the new crop of young players that Gillick/Arbuckle have raised will begin to pay dividends. We’ll see.

    Like

  26. Ha! The ‘stros hired Ed Wade?! Good luck in the basement fellows. We look forward to consummating many trades with you. Mesa is officially available.

    Like

  27. Amazingly, the news on Wade is already included in Wikipedia.

    The folks at Wikipedia also reminded me that Ed Wade was the man who gave us David Bell.

    To be frank, I am positively shocked he got another GM job.

    Like

  28. I don’t see how anyone can knock PG for trading Abreu for nothing when Ed Wade traded away Rolen and Schilling for nothing.

    I just wanted to point out from the beginning that our front office gets knocked alot, yes I know we haven’t made it to the post season since ’93, but they have still made a team fighting for playoff races.

    PG has made some questionable moves but so has every single GM. Some teams can cover up there bad moves with money, the Yankees, or with prospects, the Braves, but the Phills seem to have a tougher time. Also, baseball in general is the toughest sport for a team to make it to the post season and since ’95 basically the Yankess and Braves have been near locks every year leaving fewer chances for everyone else.

    I just think that this ownership could pony up some more $ but PG, Amaro, Bill Giles, and Arbuckle aren’t the 4 deadly horsemen.

    Like

  29. First, Wade didn’t trade Rolen and Schilling for nothing. Second, Wade had to trade Rolen and Schilling because both had demanded to be traded. Gillick, in contrast, did not have to trade Abreu, but rather, went out of his way to do it. Gillick’s Abreu trade is so much higher on the stupidity meter that there really isn’t even a legitimate comparison.

    Like

  30. This string could go on forever, as there will never be an agreement, so let me boil this down to its essence. Abreu contributed offense and little else, but was very expensive and was a liability to team chemistry. A year after trading him, the team leads the league in runs scored, has outstanding team chemistry and pays about $13 million less for its rightfielder(s). Mission accomplished.

    Like

  31. Yes we did get nothing in return. If I say to you Schilling and Rolen or Padilla and Polanco, which set would you like to have? ……

    ….. Schilling and Rolen because we gave up superior talent for sub par players. Yes Padilla, as bipolar as he was, was a nice addition and Polanco was one of my favorites and you get every ounce of fight and ability out of him possble, but they are not of the same caliber as what we gave up. Ed Wade also traded away Polanco instead of trying to move him to 3rd. Yes I know about Utley but what impact did those trades make on this team. It showed we wouldn’t pay Rolen money and then to convince other Free Agents to sign here we had to go over top and pay for Thome and Bell.

    So the ripple affect of Rolen’s trade; Wade got us David I can’t wait to hit in to ANOTHER double play Bell.

    Maybe we could have done better if Rolen didn’t strong arm this team. AND it was Mr. Ed Wade that gave Abreu a no-trade clause that limited his trading partners PG could deal with, and the Yankees knew this. And I am sorry but Abreu’s departure had to do more than obtaining “prospects” and dumping salary, it was a shake up move to change the make up of this team. AND the team responded but going on a tear once the Ed Wade team started to be traded away and replaced by PG’s players of choice.

    Taco Pal – I refuse to believe you don’t see a difference with this team since Abreu’s departure and that in itself is worth the mediocre prospects we got. You seem very knowledgeable of both baseball and the Phills and you must have noticed the change in demeanor of this team over the last 12+ months. Trades sometimes need a year or two to see their full affect and maybe this is one. But honestly, were you more irritated with the actual Abreu trade or the spending of his salary by PG on mediocre players? And if so,where could we have traded Abreu? he had a complete no-trade clause. We saw what happened when we offered Burrell for soem Baltimore pitcher, don’t if it was Bedard or whoever, but he vetoed that. That’s also Ed Wade’s fault for his no-trade clause.

    Like

  32. Well I agree with H Man that this argument will never be decided. If PG gets this team to the playoffs than he has the upper hand until then, you have your view and I have mine.

    LETS GO PHILS…and marlins!

    Like

  33. Nick, my response would be (to pick up on an obscure quote): post hoc ergo propter hoc is the name of a logical error, not a reason to infer causation. Yes, the Phillies have scored a lot of runs in Abreu’s absence. I think they would have scored even more runs had he stayed. To whatever degree Abreu’s presence was negatively affecting the team’s chemistry, demeanor, biorhythms, or whatever you want to call it, I think it probably had less to with any direct effect Abreu was having on the team, and more to do with the fact that our fellow Phillies fans kept booing him every time he came up to bat last year. His teammates all spoke highly of him after he left, as did the coaching staff, and he doesn’t seem to be having any negative effect whatsoever upon his new team.

    In any event, we can definitely agree on your last sentence at least. Go Phils.

    Like

Comments are closed.