Photo

International Signings & Discussion


  • Please log in to reply
258 replies to this topic

#241 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 35,466 posts

Posted 16 May 2018 - 11:51 AM

Have you never had to carry out orders you disagree with?

Boss says do X....  You say, "Boss, we really should not do X, because of 1,2,3."   Boss says, "I don't care, do X."

If you are in a great environment, the boss / owner etc will listen to their subordinate, and have empowered them to operate as they deem fit.

If you are in most positions, the ultimate decider will decide.  And sometimes when there is a clear chain of command, and you are in a subordinate position, it is your responsibility to carry out the agenda of those above of you.... even if you disagree with their pov.

 

I can't recall being forced to do something that I know is with 100% incorrect which would endanger our project.  Most of the hinge points at my job are more 55/45 type tradeoffs where one way might feel like a better route but it's not so obvious that either is right/wrong, and neither choice would be something that causes potential disaster.

 

With this, it's completely black and white and one of the sides is a complete disaster.  If I had a scenario at my work where someone above me is insisting that we do something  that I know to be 100% wrong and would dangerous or even catastrophic for the mission, I'd refuse to follow out the order (I'm not military, so I can do that).  I'd speak up, go over people's heads (not an option for Duke here), scream and shout until the person foolishly trying to do something that I know will jeopardize the mission is convinced of their folly and the terrible idea is abandoned.

 

If I was Duquette, I'd ignore Angelos' orders here.  I can't imagine that international free agent contracts require the owner's signature to be valid.  I'm sure there is some autonomy in the scouting department to do things and sign certain guys.  I'd do them.  I'd spend up to our allotted budget.  If Angelos' signature is required, I'd resign if he refuses to allow the team to sign international players.  I know it's easy to say that while not holding that job, but this is a huge deal.  Acquiescing to ownership's ridiculous stance on this is not an acceptable option.



#242 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    Sr. Orioles Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 71,695 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 16 May 2018 - 12:11 PM

I stop short of calling them stupid baseball people. I think, they just know the environment they are working in and for various different reasons choose to accept it.

Their environment isn’t telling them to trade this asset for nothing.

Their environment is telling them you can’t spend the money on what it is intended for.

That’s completely different than saying, you take a valuable asset and piss it away for nothing.
@BSLRobShields

#243 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 96,526 posts

Posted 16 May 2018 - 12:12 PM

Mackus, on 16 May 2018 - 12:55, said:
I can't recall being forced to do something that I know is with 100% incorrect which would endanger our project. Most of the hinge points at my job are more 55/45 type tradeoffs where one way might feel like a better route but it's not so obvious that either is right/wrong, and neither choice would be something that causes potential disaster.

With this, it's completely black and white and one of the sides is a complete disaster. If I had a scenario at my work where someone above me is insisting that we do something that I know to be 100% wrong and would dangerous or even catastrophic for the mission, I'd refuse to follow out the order (I'm not military, so I can do that). I'd speak up, go over people's heads (not an option for Duke here), scream and shout until the person foolishly trying to do something that I know will jeopardize the mission is convinced of their folly and the terrible idea is abandoned.

If I was Duquette, I'd ignore Angelos' orders here. I can't imagine that international free agent contracts require the owner's signature to be valid. I'm sure there is some autonomy in the scouting department to do things and sign certain guys. I'd do them. I'd spend up to our allotted budget. If Angelos' signature is required, I'd resign if he refuses to allow the team to sign international players. I know it's easy to say that while not holding that job, but this is a huge deal. Acquiescing to ownership's ridiculous stance on this is not an acceptable option.

I've worked for three large multi-national corps, and several smaller ($10-$50M annual revenue) local leaders...

At every one of those positions, I've had to carry out orders I disagreed with. In several of those positions, I've had to be the public face to external clients in explaining said company policy.

In no world was I able to express, "This isn't what I would do, but this is our company policy." The expectation is that as that public face, you will express the companies position and operate accordingly.

In none of those positions would have it flown for me to take my concerns further up the chain (if there was a larger chain). That would have been cause for dismissal.

(The exception would have been if I was being asked to do something illegal... then there were mechanisms for bypassing the existing chain.)

Coming from those environments, I simply can't relate to the expectation that Duquette should scream and shout until Pete understands his folly.

Now, I can agree to the point that if you vehemently disagree to the point that you can not consciously carry out the order, that the only alternative to that is to resign.

But I think saying Duquette should resign and walk away from his salary if he disagrees is a step too far.

I also think saying Duquette should ignore the orders of his employer is just not right. If you want to say Duquette is culpable by staying on, and taking the check... okay, I can somewhat buy that.

Asking him to ignore the orders of his boss? That's just not going to fly with the great majority of companies.... and if you are Duquette, and you've already spent a decade exiled from the game.... it seems that much more unlikely to think he should ignore the orders of his employer, and think that would not impact his chances of working elsewhere.

#244 jkough1

jkough1

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,383 posts

Posted 16 May 2018 - 12:19 PM


But I think saying Duquette should resign and walk away from his salary if he disagrees is a step too far.
 

 

Isn't this exactly what DD tried to do and go to Toronto and got blocked? And basically dared the O's to fire him as well? 



#245 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 96,526 posts

Posted 16 May 2018 - 12:21 PM

Isn't this exactly what DD tried to do and go to Toronto and got blocked? And basically dared the O's to fire him as well? 

 

Well no... not exactly.  He was recruited for a promotion. The O's declined to let him leave....  against every standard practice in the game, where people getting promoted are always allowed to leave.



#246 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 35,466 posts

Posted 16 May 2018 - 12:26 PM

I think it's difficult to compare other lines of work to professional sports.

 

Duquette is not a spokesman.  He's not the public face of the team.  He's the General Manager.  The guy in charge of everything short of setting the budget and signing the checks.  Only one guy can fire him and everyone outside of the organization is going to give Duke the bulk of the credit or the blame for the state of the team and the farm system. 

 

An enormous part of his job is selling his concepts to ownership for approval.  We heard last year that he had to get their blessing to explore trading Britton, and presumably again this offseason to explore trading Manny.  This is the same thing, except he hasn't been able to get ownership to agree to the right course of action.  Just like part of his job was convincing ownership that they should allow a trade of Britton and/or Manny, it's part of his job to convince ownership to get involved in the international market.  Failing to convince them of that is a failing just like if he hadn't been able to convince them to agree to shop Britton would have been.

 

I wouldn't say that he should resign if ownership refused to consider trading Britton.  That's a small deal.  But this is a huge deal.  He should do a better job of convincing the owner to spend internationally.  And if he tries his absolute best, makes a compelling and convincing argument but ownership keeps shutting its eyes and plugging its ears, then I think he should resign and make it clear that the reason he did is because the owner refuses to be involved in all aspects of major league baseball.  This is no different than if Angelos simply refused to ever let the team play a second baseman.  Its that big of a disaster, IMO.



#247 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 96,526 posts

Posted 16 May 2018 - 12:32 PM

Let's say Duquette is making $3M a year.  Has no way of knowing if he'll ever make that level of income again.

He makes a compelling and convincing argument to ownership, and ownership continues to bury their heads in the sand....  Duquette should walk away from that salary?

I think that is where we'll disagree.

 

 

(We'll also disagree about Duquette not being a public face...  he obviously is.  Anytime you engage with the public, representing your organization, you are a public face.)



#248 jkough1

jkough1

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,383 posts

Posted 16 May 2018 - 12:36 PM

Well no... not exactly.  He was recruited for a promotion. The O's declined to let him leave....  against every standard practice in the game, where people getting promoted are always allowed to leave.

 

So you're saying DD's people did nothing to try and drum up potential interest from Toronto either. I also find that pretty hard to believe. I think DD had some part in the opportunity formulating and getting his name on the list. But who knows. 

 

But if I'm trying to quit my job, I'm generally trying to have my next job lined up first. 



#249 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 35,466 posts

Posted 16 May 2018 - 12:38 PM

We'll also disagree about Duquette not being a public face...  he obviously is.  Anytime you engage with the public, representing your organization, you are a public face.

 

He's not a spokesman.  He's the decision-maker.  He isn't just a face on the front of the packaging, he's responsible for what's in the package.



#250 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 96,526 posts

Posted 16 May 2018 - 12:40 PM

So you're saying DD's people did nothing to try and drum up potential interest from Toronto either. I also find that pretty hard to believe. I think DD had some part in the opportunity formulating and getting his name on the list. But who knows. 

 

But if I'm trying to quit my job, I'm generally trying to have my next job lined up first. 

 

IDK.   Certainly wouldn't be shocking if Duquette had interest, and made it known through back channels that he would like to be considered.

That's possible.

 

It's also possible that it was as simple as Toronto having identified him as a possible candidate, and having sought permission to meet with him and determine the possible fit.

(I do think you can rightly assume that Duquette either had interest, or was using Toronto's interest as leverage for a salary bump... or when his name came out, he would have immediately said, "I'm not interested, and that is the end of things.")



#251 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 35,466 posts

Posted 16 May 2018 - 12:42 PM

He makes a compelling and convincing argument to ownership, and ownership continues to bury their heads in the sand....  Duquette should walk away from that salary?

 

Yes, if he has any pride in his work.

 

Also, he's been paid many millions for his work here already.  It's not like he's turning down money and going to go sleep under a bridge.

 

Complete speculation, but I imagine that him resigning would demonstrate to other teams that he's not ok with the international policy here, and they would be willing to offer him other jobs.  I'd view that action as a stronger statement against the Angelos policies than if he simply is interviewing for other jobs this offseason after his deal here expires (and after two straight disaster seasons and a disastrous international spending history) and says "well I wanted to spend internationally but ownership wouldn't allow it".



#252 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 96,526 posts

Posted 16 May 2018 - 12:45 PM

He's not a spokesman.  He's the decision-maker.  He isn't just a face on the front of the packaging, he's responsible for what's in the package.


You don't have to be titled as a spokesman to represent your organization.

If you go Best Buy today, and the $8 an hour employee in the Best Buy shirt tells you Best Buy policy is X.... that employee is still representing Best Buy, even with him being 200 layers away from being the decision maker.

When a person in a leadership capacity speaks to the public / press; they are not speaking as individuals, they are speaking as reps of their organizations. 

 

Find any example anywhere of a person in a leadership position of any organization whose stated public opinions are held to be separate from the organization they represent. 



#253 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    Sr. Orioles Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 71,695 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 16 May 2018 - 12:46 PM

If he’s that respected, make the issues public (in a “nice” way) and make them fire you..that way you still get paid and people understand your situation.
  • Mackus likes this
@BSLRobShields

#254 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 96,526 posts

Posted 16 May 2018 - 12:48 PM

Yes, if he has any pride in his work.

 

Also, he's been paid many millions for his work here already.  It's not like he's turning down money and going to go sleep under a bridge.

 

Complete speculation, but I imagine that him resigning would demonstrate to other teams that he's not ok with the international policy here, and they would be willing to offer him other jobs.  I'd view that action as a stronger statement against the Angelos policies than if he simply is interviewing for other jobs this offseason after his deal here expires (and after two straight disaster seasons and a disastrous international spending history) and says "well I wanted to spend internationally but ownership wouldn't allow it".

 

I think your speculation has validity.

 

I think saying because Duquette has made money previously, he should be willing to walk away from the most money he will likely ever earn (especially after the personal experience of being out of the game for a decade) because he disagrees with a policy is a lot to ask.

 

But I asked, and I respect the position you have there.

As I said previously, I agree to the point... that if you vehemently disagree enough with said policy, the only alternative is to resign. And if you don't resign, I can see the idea of being held at-least partially culpable.



#255 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 96,526 posts

Posted 16 May 2018 - 12:50 PM

If he’s that respected, make the issues (in a “nice” way) and make them fire you..that way you still get paid and people understand your situation.

 

Angelos doesn't like firing people. He just lets contracts end. 

 

And if you get fired for not doing something that was mandated from above, or by disobeying the order as Mackus suggested... then you are fired with cause, and you aren't paid...  and in-fact could be of breech of contract, and owe.



#256 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    Sr. Orioles Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 71,695 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 16 May 2018 - 12:58 PM

Angelos doesn't like firing people. He just lets contracts end.

And if you get fired for not doing something that was mandated from above, or by disobeying the order as Mackus suggested... then you are fired with cause, and you aren't paid... and in-fact could be of breech of contract, and owe.


It’s not that you disobey him. You can publicly say I want to spend internationally but ownership won’t let me. You keep doing that, again in a nice way, he could fire you.
@BSLRobShields

#257 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 35,466 posts

Posted 16 May 2018 - 01:00 PM

I don't think they could fire him for cause if he signs a bunch of international free agents.  Or tries to sign them constantly and keeps having the deals die at Angelos' desk.



#258 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 96,526 posts

Posted 16 May 2018 - 01:04 PM

Let's get to the bottom-line of what we agree on....

This policy from the O's has to change. Hopefully it does with John.

It's crippling to the organization, and just incredibly short-sighted.

Whoever the next EVP is, before the accept the job, they should be looking for assurances that there will be a change in organizational philosophy.



#259 Coker

Coker

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,451 posts

Posted 20 May 2018 - 06:30 PM

He (Angelos) is saying we're not going to spend it.  So, if you know the O's aren't going to spend it... that does impact possible return in exchange for it.

That doesn't excuse the decisions in the last year to sell off.    They could have just kept what they had, and been in better shape for Ohtani, right?   (Doesn't mean he would have come here, but still.)

The Orioles had 500k left in their bonus pool when Ohtani was officially allowed to sign. And then didn't send a presentation to Ohtani's agents.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Partners