The myth of Rick Hahn, Master Negotiator

[Dick Allen]

And I chose CLE for other reasons, besides them being in first place:

 

1) Their fanbase has been screwed over more often than ours even, with two complete rebuilds to suffer through (we had White Flag and 1994)...and they arguably had the best and most loyal fans in baseball from the mid 90's through that 2001 team

 

2) They have lower revenues/broadcast rights deal by far than the White Sox

 

3) They still managed to make the playoffs in 2013 despite all these competitive disadvantages

 

4) They still managed to make hiring a top manager a priority, despite limited resources

 

The GM never made any excuses. They messed up BADLY with Swisher and Bourn, but managed to mitigate those losses somewhat and move on. The GM doesn't blame the fans for only having 25 cents to spend, not $1, because he understands the history and the heartbreak those fans have been subjected to. The ONLY choice is to build a winning team despite all the obstacles. Their organization has a much more positive and uplifting atmosphere now as a result, because everyone's pulling in the same direction and they can play off their underdog status.

So when did Hahn mention only having 25 cents to spend?

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

I don't know what the big deal is. As a GM you win some you lose some. Hahn has lost more than he has won and by a fairly substantial margin. The bad still outweighs the good .However as many have said it starts at the top and Hahn is only a part of the problem. As awhole organization we really can't pinpoint anything the team does well that can lead to sustained success.

[caulfield12]

So when did Hahn mention only having 25 cents to spend?

 

 

He didn't.

 

I'm referring to Cleveland's situation.

 

If the White Sox have 50 cents, the Indians have only 25-30 cents to spend. They have to make every penny count.

[caulfield12]

I don't know what the big deal is. As a GM you win some you lose some. Hahn has lost more than he has won and by a fairly substantial margin. The bad still outweighs the good .However as many have said it starts at the top and Hahn is only a part of the problem. As awhole organization we really can't pinpoint anything the team does well that can lead to sustained success.

 

 

Has he been right at least 60% of the time?

 

That's the generally-accepted view around baseball of what an above-average or really good GM is capable of.

 

Statistically, you should be right 50% of the time, by sheer force of luck or chance.

 

Be right 40% of the time, whether you're a GM or a mutual fund manager, no matter how sound your logic, you'll be out of a job eventually.

 

 

The fact that we're going on 8 seasons without a playoff appearance, and Hahn's been an integral part of operations for that whole entire time...one that is only ahead of Seattle (Jack Z. fired), SD (Hoyer gone, his replacement fired and Preller installed) and the Marlins (too long a story to tell here) is all you really need to know.

Edited June 22, 2016 by caulfield12

[Dick Allen]

Has he been right at least 60% of the time?

 

That's the generally-accepted view around baseball of what an above-average or really good GM is capable of.

 

Statistically, you should be right 50% of the time, by sheer force of luck or chance.

 

Be right 40% of the time, whether you're a GM or a mutual fund manager, no matter how sound your logic, you'll be out of a job eventually.

 

 

The fact that we're going on 8 seasons without a playoff appearance, and Hahn's been an integral part of operations for that whole entire time...one that is only ahead of Seattle (Jack Z. fired), SD (Hoyer gone, his replacement fired and Preller installed) and the Marlins (too long a story to tell here) is all you really need to know.

Hahn wasn't the GM then and all of this has nothing to do with the subject of the thread you created. There already was a Rick Hahn thread this rubbish could have been posted. What do your posts have to do with your determination that is is a myth Hahn is a good negotiator?

Edited June 22, 2016 by Dick Allen

[caulfield12]

Yes, you're right.

 

It was a red herring meant to provoke a conversation away from Ventura.

 

We all know that he's good at negotiating. That's not the point.

 

 

It's what is he good at besides that? Not one single person has answered that question, or even attempted to.

 

Why can't we beat even one of our four fellow AL Central team in terms of delivering ROI on the amount of money we invest in the franchise? At best, you can argue we probably spend money more effectively than the Tigers, but they had four division championships in a row, and a World Series appearance in 2006.

 

I don't think that's going to cause the Tigers' organization to lose any sleep, or their fans to get too bent out of shape.

 

 

And what was Rick Hahn doing from October, 2008 through the end of the 2012 season? He was helping the team win/rebuild how?

 

 

 

(This is where you write that he was one of the most sought after GM candidates in the game at that time, and turned down interviews with Teams X/Y/Z....well, you could have said the same thing about Dan Evans fifteen years ago. What has he been doing recently? ANS: Trying to run an independent league and prevent it from falling into bankruptcy.)

 

 

 

[Dick Allen]

Yes, you're right.

 

It was a red herring meant to provoke a conversation away from Ventura.

 

We all know that he's good at negotiating. That's not the point.

 

 

It's what is he good at besides that? Not one single person has answered that question, or even attempted to.

 

Why can't we beat even one of our four fellow AL Central team in terms of delivering ROI on the amount of money we invest in the franchise? At best, you can argue we probably spend money more effectively than the Tigers, but they had four division championships in a row, and a World Series appearance in 2006.

 

I don't think that's going to cause the Tigers' organization to lose any sleep, or their fans to get too bent out of shape.

 

 

And what was Rick Hahn doing from October, 2008 through the end of the 2012 season? He was helping the team win/rebuild how?

 

 

 

(This is where you write that he was one of the most sought after GM candidates in the game at that time, and turned down interviews with Teams X/Y/Z....well, you could have said the same thing about Dan Evans fifteen years ago. What has he been doing recently? ANS: Trying to run an independent league and prevent it from falling into bankruptcy.)

So we all know he is good at negotiating. And if it is not the point, look at your first post. What was the point?Seems like it would be silly then to create a thread implying the opposite.

 

And your Dan Evans info is off. He is a scout with the Blue Jays, and does some stuff with BP. He was one of the first to use saber metrics. Surprised you are taking a shot at him for some reason in the Rick Hahnisn't a good negotiator even though we know he is a good negotiator thread.

Edited June 22, 2016 by Dick Allen

[caulfield12]

15 years ago, more than half of the White Sox wanted him to be the White Sox GM. Probably 2/3rd's.

 

Here we are today, 18 months ago, he was trying to keep the Northern League (independent/non-affiliated) baseball league afloat. Suffice it to say, he didn't become a HoF GM/Executive.

 

 

When I wrote the "myth," I meant it only in the sense that he was clearly among the best negotiators in baseball, and that somehow that was the most important skill to have in the "tool box" of an MLB GM.

 

Clearly, there are other GM's that are equally adept or can allocate financial resources just as, if not more, efficiently.

 

 

 

So, once again, what ELSE IS HE GOOD AT? That's what I really wanted to get at...that even if he's among the Top 5-10 or whatever negotiators in MLB, can we list one category that's related to being a GM that he would be considered in the Top 10-15 (upper half) even of major league GM's?

 

There are no "official" categories, obviously, or OPS/WAR/Pythagorean numbers for GM'ing.

 

 

 

"Chris was always the great negotiator," said Marc, a bariatric surgeon in South Carolina who served as an Air Force surgeon in Iraq. "He could talk his way in or out of anything since he was 6 years old."

 

It's a skill that served him well at the University of Massachusetts, where Antonetti piggybacked a business degree from Georgetown with a master's in sports management.

 

UMass law professor Glenn Wong was still handling salary arbitration cases for the Boston Red Sox at the time. He would hire his top two or three students to help research and prepare cases.

 

Antonetti wasn't one of them. So he paid Wong a visit, offering to do the work for free.

 

"It's not too often that kids come in and argue their case," said Wong, who relented.

 

Salary arbitration cases, heard to decide disputes over the fair value of a player still under contract, are based on statistical comparisons. Antonetti would offer suggestions on which data to use and how to use it, and in a manner that didn't offend his colleagues.

 

"As soon as I took him on," Wong said, "I saw immediately how good he was and how interested he was in that work."

http://www.cleveland.com/tribe/index.ssf/2...10/post_74.html

 

[Texsox]

Questioning everything is healthy in any organization. What this may highlight the most is how razor sharp the differences are between teams and how well teams in general are at running their businesses. I remember a sales lesson long ago and far away when the guy I was working with explained how you don't have to be twice as good as the next person, just a little bit better.

[Dick Allen]

15 years ago, more than half of the White Sox wanted him to be the White Sox GM. Probably 2/3rd's.

 

Here we are today, 18 months ago, he was trying to keep the Northern League (independent/non-affiliated) baseball league afloat. Suffice it to say, he didn't become a HoF GM/Executive.

 

 

When I wrote the "myth," I meant it only in the sense that he was clearly among the best negotiators in baseball, and that somehow that was the most important skill to have in the "tool box" of an MLB GM.

 

Clearly, there are other GM's that are equally adept or can allocate financial resources just as, if not more, efficiently.

 

 

 

So, once again, what ELSE IS HE GOOD AT? That's what I really wanted to get at...that even if he's among the Top 5-10 or whatever negotiators in MLB, can we list one category that's related to being a GM that he would be considered in the Top 10-15 (upper half) even of major league GM's?

 

There are no "official" categories, obviously, or OPS/WAR/Pythagorean numbers for GM'ing.

 

 

 

"Chris was always the great negotiator," said Marc, a bariatric surgeon in South Carolina who served as an Air Force surgeon in Iraq. "He could talk his way in or out of anything since he was 6 years old."

 

It's a skill that served him well at the University of Massachusetts, where Antonetti piggybacked a business degree from Georgetown with a master's in sports management.

 

UMass law professor Glenn Wong was still handling salary arbitration cases for the Boston Red Sox at the time. He would hire his top two or three students to help research and prepare cases.

 

Antonetti wasn't one of them. So he paid Wong a visit, offering to do the work for free.

 

"It's not too often that kids come in and argue their case," said Wong, who relented.

 

Salary arbitration cases, heard to decide disputes over the fair value of a player still under contract, are based on statistical comparisons. Antonetti would offer suggestions on which data to use and how to use it, and in a manner that didn't offend his colleagues.

 

"As soon as I took him on," Wong said, "I saw immediately how good he was and how interested he was in that work."

http://www.cleveland.com/tribe/index.ssf/2...10/post_74.html

They averaged 89 wins a season during his tenure and he drafted players.

 

 

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/dodgers/20...retrospect.html

 

 

I Have a friend who is one of his best friends and I met him a couple times many years ago. He is a good guy, someone who has no clue as to his work or character shouldn't be taking potshots. You really are being totally classless.

 

And as to Hahn you already posted in this thread every GM in baseball could have negotiated the contracts he secured. So no need to slam on the brakes and say that isn't what you meant.

Edited June 22, 2016 by Dick Allen

[Quin]

I legitimately have no idea what is supposed to go on I'm this thread anymore. It's a complete Trainwreck.

 

Which LeBron acted in and Michael Jordan starred in Space Jam. Much better than Kazaam for Shaq or that film Durant was in.

[caulfield12]

They averaged 89 wins a season during his tenure and he drafted players.

 

 

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/dodgers/20...retrospect.html

 

 

I Have a friend who is one of his best friends and I met him a couple times many years ago. He is a good guy, someone who has no clue as to his work or character shouldn't be taking potshots. You really are being totally classless.

 

And as to Hahn you already posted in this thread every GM in baseball could have negotiated the contracts he secured. So no need to slam on the brakes and say that isn't what you meant.

 

 

No, I didn't say every single GM....just that his skillset is QUITE common around the major leagues, and that's not the ONE thing we should really be hanging our hat on if we want to develop a consistently winning organization.

 

 

As far as Dan Evans goes, he has a cameo role in the SoxTalk book club, The Only Rule is it Has To Work. He seemed a nice enough guy...the two BP narrators seemed like they kind of felt sorry for him, that he was relegated to such work after being a former Dodgers' GM.

 

He flies directly in the face of your theory that members of the Sox front office/coaching staff will go on to have Hall of Fame careers once they inherit more talent or more resources in other organizations. Even with the Dodgers' payroll, he wasn't particularly successful and didn't retain his position for very long. Nor did he ever get another MLB GM job. Which is likely to be the same fate for both Robin Ventura and probably Rick Hahn as well.

 

If you want to talk about character assassination, lol...how about your constant sniping and attacks on Jeff Banister of the Rangers last year? You don't know him or his family or his character. You constantly ripped him, probably just to take the opposite stance because I said he was going to be an excellent manager and should have been considered by the White Sox. I even tried to get Phil Rogers to write an article about Banister to see if the Sox would at least listen, but to no avail. Did the same thing back when Wally Backman was managing in the Sox system, but his personal issues had already become too obvious to ignore.

 

At any rate, I'll pass on your apologies to Jeff, Karen and Alexandra when I am in Arlington for the A's weekday series in late July. I'm sure he will appreciate the fact that he was overlooked by the Sox like he was by many MLB teams for over 20 years.

Edited June 22, 2016 by caulfield12

[caulfield12]

I legitimately have no idea what is supposed to go on I'm this thread anymore. It's a complete Trainwreck.

 

Which LeBron acted in and Michael Jordan starred in Space Jam. Much better than Kazaam for Shaq or that film Durant was in.

 

 

Just going the back end route to disprove the "Associative Theory of HoF front office and managerial careers."

 

Actually, it won't really matter if Shields keeps providing historically bad performances and the team never scores more than 1 run for Jose Quintana again.

 

Hahn and Ventura will both be gone...at some point between this week and mid October.

 

 

It's okay, the seeds have been planted.

Edited June 22, 2016 by caulfield12

[knightni]

I went through three pages to try and figure out what Cleveland's and the Cubs' players have to do with Hahn's performance.

 

I still don't see the correlation.

[Texsox]

I legitimately have no idea what is supposed to go on I'm this thread anymore. It's a complete Trainwreck.

 

Which LeBron acted in and Michael Jordan starred in Space Jam. Much better than Kazaam for Shaq or that film Durant was in.

 

Airplane with Kareem was clearly the better film. More importantly the Executive Producer Jim Abrahams lined up a bunch of celebrities to appear, Lloyd Bridges, Peter Graves, Julie Hagerty, Robert Hays, Leslie Nielsen, Robert Stack, Barbara Billingsley, James Hong, David Leisure, Maureen McGovern, Ethel f***ing Merman, Jimmie JJ Walker, for near minimum scale payments thus generating more profits than Spaceballs.

 

But here is the big difference, he was also one of the directors, along with David Zucker and Jerry Zucker. So not only did he sign those actors, he directed them. You didn't have a situation where the producer could blame the director for not getting the best out of the actors he signed and the director could not complain that the actors that were signed sucked.

 

And when there was a crisis in post production they had the financial flexibility to bring in Bill Henderson and David Hudson to fix the sound. Fortunately they were not under contract with another studio at the time.

[brett05]

...a Boras client who will never in a million years sign an extension and lose a free agent year.

Happens all the time for Boras clients who avoid free agency. That's the real myth.