Indians Ownership Discussion

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

People said the same thing about the Haslam, but once they got the FO right and the coaching he seen to be hands off, and every media is calling this Team the darling of the NFL right now,

What someone else did holds absolutely zero relevance here. What Haslam does has nothing to do with what Gilbert does, and what someone else may have said about Haslam has nothing to do with the points I brought up about Gilbert.

Unless you believe the stories about Manziel, there really isn't any track record of Haslam getting involved the way Dan does with the Cavs. Even if you believe the Manziel homeless guy story, one incident does not a pattern make.

Now whoever buys this team would have a ready made FO/Coach and would just need to support whatever they need, to say Dan Gilbert always have had that I would disagree, not to mention LBJ ran the franchise more then DG did, not many Owners/executives or coaches could have done anything different unless your Pat Riley etc etc….

If you have all the pieces good FO/Coaches great farm system etc etc you won’t become the Tigers , making a big move here in there to supplement whats you have won’t take away from your principal, you could have sign potentially Lindor a lot less a few years ago, Brantley not breaking the bank in Houston, same with Santana in KC….You looking at the Tigers I’m looking at Houston……Now maybe not at 194 mill, but DG would support 150 Mill if it means we’re competing for a championship…..

If you want to make excuses for Gilbert, go ahead. But he's not only never put into place a strong culture and executives who can lead--but he's actively rooted out anyone who started to show those tendencies.

That's the antithesis of a winning organization and the antithesis of the way the Indians have operated and found success.

Finally, if your reasoning behind all this is "maybe we can spend 150 million when we're contending" then why change anything? We were close to that total just recently.

 

[cliffdawg]

What someone else did holds absolutely zero relevance here. What Haslam does has nothing to do with what Gilbert does, and what someone else may have said about Haslam has nothing to do with the points I brought up about Gilbert.

Unless you believe the stories about Manziel, there really isn't any track record of Haslam getting involved the way Dan does with the Cavs. Even if you believe the Manziel homeless guy story, one incident does not a pattern make.


If you want to make excuses for Gilbert, go ahead. But he's not only never put into place a strong culture and executives who can lead--but he's actively rooted out anyone who started to show those tendencies.

That's the antithesis of a winning organization and the antithesis of the way the Indians have operated and found success.

Finally, if your reasoning behind all this is "maybe we can spend 150 million when we're contending" then why change anything? We were close to that total just recently.

We can agree to disagree, BIG IF DG becomes the new owner, I be one happy fan, knowing that some of my favorite Indians player won’t be leaving town because we can’t afford them……..Hell people doing the count down on how much longer we can keep Ramirez and Bieber…

Also if it true that the Dolans only would bring a new owner in if they keep the static quote, and if that happens to be DG we’re good then…..haha

 

[macbdog]

 

[DickyLeftridge]

So on one hand… you don’t want to give Garland any credit because it’s “too soon to tell” yet you’re already writing Okoro off? Sorry, but that’s hypocritical to a T.

I didn't write him off at all. I just said he was uninspiring. I also didn't fail to give Garland any credit. I said he had promise.

But to your bigger point, are you really telling us that you can never tell if a player in year one can be written off while simultaneously thinking other more experienced players show enough promise but you are still unsure if they were worth their high pick? How many years did you need with Anthony Bennett? With Johnny Flynn? At the same time, the list of players who continued to improve to hit their peak and validate their draft status is miles long--Julius Randle and Brandon Ingram the latest examples, Dirk and Lamarcus Aldridge older ones.

Come on. That's untenable. Happens all the time. No matter how much you want to make it seem like I invented the concept.

So as to try to pull us out of this Cavs rabbit hole, as this is the Indians forum, I'll just stand by what I said originally. Gilbert has continued to tolerate Altman, who is the worst GM in town (and would be in a lot of towns). So the idea that he'd come in here and fire maybe the best FO in the league Day 1 seems like a stretch. It seems like something people would say if they were unwilling to evaluate Gilbert fairly given their existing dislike for him.

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

I didn't write him off at all. I just said he was uninspiring. I also didn't fail to give Garland any credit. I said he had promise.

But to your bigger point, are you really telling us that you can never tell if a player in year one can be written off while simultaneously thinking other more experienced players show enough promise but you are still unsure if they were worth their high pick? How many years did you need with Anthony Bennett? With Johnny Flynn? At the same time, the list of players who continued to improve to hit their peak and validate their draft status is miles long--Julius Randle and Brandon Ingram the latest examples, Dirk and Lamarcus Aldridge older ones.

Come on. That's untenable. Happens all the time. No matter how much you want to make it seem like I invented the concept.

So as to try to pull us out of this Cavs rabbit hole, as this is the Indians forum, I'll just stand by what I said originally. Gilbert has continued to tolerate Altman, who is the worst GM in town (and would be in a lot of towns). So the idea that he'd come in here and fire maybe the best FO in the league Day 1 seems like a stretch. It seems like something people would say if they were unwilling to evaluate Gilbert fairly given their existing dislike for him.

Imagine if we told you that Altman being only mediocre at his job was a reason Dan renewed him.

Someone who's better at the job, and can lead a franchise, is seen as a threat and run off.

See: Literally just one GM prior.

 

[buzzdog]

I'd take it. But I'm kinda doubting Gilbert would have the inclination to buy a minority stake. Why not buy the whole thing?

Dolan isn't offering the whole thing, only a stake.

 

[kriegs]

Feel bad for those that think Dan Gilbert would run the Indians deep into the red. Because he’s rich so why not. Lol

 

[AZ_]

Feel bad for those that think Dan Gilbert would run the Indians deep into the red. Because he’s rich so why not. Lol

Always easier spending other people's money.

Dan didn't get to where he is by ignoring the P&L out of the sheer will to "win."

 

[Wham with the Right Hand]

Have there been any reports that Gilbert would consider buying the Indians? He is still recovering from a stroke suffered two years ago. In a rare public appearance in March he said he still has a long road to recovery. He said he was getting better, "an inch a day".

I don't see him as somebody who would want to get involved in a big new project. My impression is he's not nearly as involved in running the Cavaliers as before, but is just getting briefings on what is happening.

I could be wrong but I can't see him spending $1 billion to buy a team he is no longer energetic enough to have fun with.

 

[kriegs]

Have there been any reports that Gilbert would consider buying the Indians? He is still recovering from a stroke suffered two years ago. In a rare public appearance in March he said he still has a long road to recovery. He said he was getting better, "an inch a day".

I don't see him as somebody who would want to get involved in a big new project. My impression is he's not nearly as involved in running the Cavaliers as before, but is just getting briefings on what is happening.

I could be wrong but I can't see him spending $1 billion to buy a team he is no longer energetic enough to have fun with.

No, there have been no reports. Just reckless speculation because he's a businessman that Cleveland fans have heard of. And the fun but farfetched narrative that he would never let some other mortgage 'Middleman' on his turf.

 

[CalBuckeyeRob]

I like the front office, I would just like to give them some more money to use in building a roster. Owners don't have to reduce their personal wealth to run a franchise. I would prefer that Cleveland has an owner that wants to do that.

 

[bs80]

Just for the sake of speculating for shits and giggles, how do you think the front office would handle things differently if they had the green light to increase payroll? The "threading the needle" strategy can be frustrating as hell but it's something that I really hope these guys wouldn't bury just because they have more money to play with. What could we have done differently over the past five or so years that would have significantly improved our current situation?

I feel like a very high percentage of the cost-cutting moves that were made would be considered solid decisions even if they had more cash to spend. Trading Lindor, Clevinger, Bauer could all be argued as the right decision, even if we did have cash to spend. And hell, the year that ownership did loosen its grip on their cash, did we really do anything good with it? I thought the Encarnacion signing was decent value at the time, but in the end that was just a waste of money.

Where I do wish we had a less restrictive payroll is when we identified our own young talent and tried extending them early. We struck gold with the Jose extension, but whiffed on Frankie (back in 2017, not for anything close to what Stevie Cohen is on the hook for now). We may very well end up whiffing on Bieber as well.

I've bitched and moaned so much over the lack of a level playing field in MLB, but when I actually think about all the decisions that had to be made, I wouldn't change many of them at all. I guess I'm realizing that the main reason I'd love to see a salary cap in baseball isn't because our roster would be so much better, but instead it's because I would love to see large-market teams make fools of themselves trying to deal with the hand that 80% of the league has been dealt all along.

 

[Alabuckeye]

TBH.....I think they've hit an extraordinarily high percentage with those listed trades. Didn't like a couple at the time, but in retrospect, they've worked well for us. The only guy from the list I miss is Carlos Carrasco.....I hated giving him up.

It would be nice spending some on an OF, or two, in his prime(as opposed to say Eddie who is a smidge past his)......but beyond that, and our apparent lack of ability to develop our position players from prospect to major leaguer, I have nothing to complain about with how they run the team.

 

[sportscoach]

TBH.....I think they've hit an extraordinarily high percentage with those listed trades. Didn't like a couple at the time, but in retrospect, they've worked well for us. The only guy from the list I miss is Carlos Carrasco.....I hated giving him up.

It would be nice spending some on an OF, or two, in his prime(as opposed to say Eddie who is a smidge past his)......but beyond that, and our apparent lack of ability to develop our position players from prospect to major leaguer, I have nothing to complain about with how they run the team.

All teams miss on prospects, that's quite normal, we hit on them in the early to mid 2010s but we haven't hit on them of late, and that's been the issue at the current moment, but I think we will be fine with our next crop, they aren't just pure athletes but have some actually contact hit tool.

 

[DickyLeftridge]

Just for the sake of speculating for shits and giggles, how do you think the front office would handle things differently if they had the green light to increase payroll? The "threading the needle" strategy can be frustrating as hell but it's something that I really hope these guys wouldn't bury just because they have more money to play with. What could we have done differently over the past five or so years that would have significantly improved our current situation?

I feel like a very high percentage of the cost-cutting moves that were made would be considered solid decisions even if they had more cash to spend. Trading Lindor, Clevinger, Bauer could all be argued as the right decision, even if we did have cash to spend. And hell, the year that ownership did loosen its grip on their cash, did we really do anything good with it? I thought the Encarnacion signing was decent value at the time, but in the end that was just a waste of money.

Where I do wish we had a less restrictive payroll is when we identified our own young talent and tried extending them early. We struck gold with the Jose extension, but whiffed on Frankie (back in 2017, not for anything close to what Stevie Cohen is on the hook for now). We may very well end up whiffing on Bieber as well.

I've bitched and moaned so much over the lack of a level playing field in MLB, but when I actually think about all the decisions that had to be made, I wouldn't change many of them at all. I guess I'm realizing that the main reason I'd love to see a salary cap in baseball isn't because our roster would be so much better, but instead it's because I would love to see large-market teams make fools of themselves trying to deal with the hand that 80% of the league has been dealt all along.

Interesting question. I think the FO would have resigned Bauer and likely Clevinger. I think they would have been equipped with the necessary $ to attempt to resign Lindor years before it came to the tipping point last offseason. If they were still unable to do so, I have a feeling they would have done the same thing and traded him. And a one-off situation where, it would be much easier to understand that, no this guy is really demanding way too much money for a contending team to mortgage on 1 player.

Do I know these things? No. I'm speculating. Does anyone know my speculation wouldn't have been accurate? Also no.