Does Pat qualifies for best Jay ever?

I posted this on the other thread where this came up:

I guarantee you we're going to start hearing whispers about [Gillick] coming back to run the Jays. Maybe just from Those People on Those Other Message Boards, but we'll hear it.

McCown and Cox are even as I type this discussing the possibility of Gillick coming back as a consultant for Ricciardi, and why this might or might not happen, or might or might not be a good idea.

It pretty much won't happen because Gillick has already commited himself to the Mariners. He probably feels that obligation given that the M's still want him as GM.

And what is Pat really going to suggest the Jays do which they aren't doing already? Draft pitchers in volume? They're doing it. Spend more money on pitching? They're going to do that too. Convince them not to spend $18 million a year on Delgado or any single player again? I don't think anyone has to worry about that.

The Jays don't need help with direction. They need some pitchers to develop and some money freed up to spend. Which should happen over the next 2 or 3 years.

I've never understood this fascination with "bringing back the guy who helped us win it all before." Off the top of my head, I can't think of a single instance when a coach, manager or GM won another championship on his second tour of duty with the same club. Billy Martin never finished better than 2nd on any of his return engagements as Yankees manager. Earl Weaver learned to regret coming out of retirement to manage the Orioles. Scotty Bowman was smart enough never to return to Montreal; ditto with Bill Parcells, who's never coached the same franchise twice. Yet to listen to chowderheads like Cox and McCowan, you'd think the Leafs should be exhuming Punch Imlach.

Jordan: I agree. I think that the error, though, isn't so much 'bringing back the guy who helped us win it all before' as it is 'there's only one guy who can help us'. I think that many people around the Jays are thinking that way, now, about Ricciardi. Same thing with the Argos and Pinball Clemons - if the Argos needed their offices painted, their only plan would be to ask Pinball to do it.

Of course, there are all kinds of capable people out there, as the Jays proved when they raised Ricciardi up out of relative obscurity, and as the Mariners may demonstrate to us. I don't think DePodesta's going anywhere, and I suspect Gillick's retiring for good this time.

Not only do the guys who helped win one title somewhere not want to come back, but these guys also almost never win a second title elsewhere, Scotty Bowman, Dick Williams, and Phil Jackson notwithstanding. Yet it never fails when somebody like Larussa, Parcells, Larry Brown (he's never won an NBA title), George Seifert, Billy Martin, et al, are expected to lead their new team to the promised land. History, for the most part, says it simply won't happen.

What can Gillick possibly tell JP about building a championship club?

"You know JP, back in 92/93 I built a championship club by having the highest payroll in baseball. Maybe you can do that."

What can Gillick possibly tell JP about building a championship club?

This reminds me of an exchange I saw on the Official Site message boards in the '01-'02 offseason. Ricciardi had just been hired and had traded Koch, Quantrill and Gonzalez, to general consternation among the posters there. Meanwhile, the Mets traded for Roberto Alomar, and one guy posted something to the effect that that's the sort of thing smart general managers did.

It's an interesting question, though . . . what does/did Gillick do better than Ricciardi? I don't know. Obviously Gillick has more patience than Ricciardi; Gillick doesn't mind if he goes for years before making a trade, while Ricciardi is much more aggressive. That's just style, though.

Both men believe strongly in a strong minor-league system and the value of young players. They both surrounded themselves with capable people. Gillick invested heavily in Latin American scouting/player development, and effectively; Ricciardi seems to have chosen not to. Gillick had much more of a budget to work with. Gillick was able to endear himself to the local media in a way that Ricciardi hasn't. (Yet. This may just be a function of success.) Both men are considered to be fine judges of talent. Both men proved adept at fleecing their former organizations of some helpful talent when they joined the Jays.

Anybody see where Gillick has an edge over Ricciardi? Did I miss anything? I'm not saying Ricciardi is better; that's a statement that he'll have to earn over the next decade or more. I'm just saying I don't see any holes in Ricciardi's skill set that Gillick doesn't have.

You know, for all the flack Gillick has taken for his stewardship of the Mariners (the Stand Pat jibes), just examine the M's win-loss record the past four years.

We can only hope that JP can duplicate the record Gillick has built during his career as a GM.

Gillick might have more contacts, especially in foreign countries which are outside the draft.

Gillick got Olerud to sign when Olerud said he would stay in college. It's not clear if J.P. could pull off something like that (maybe if he had a background with the player, as I believe Gillick did in Olerud's case, but my (unsubstantiated) feeling is that Gillick is more of a "networker" and hence more likely to have an "in" to take advantage of.)

Gillick was pretty good at taking advantage of the inefficiencies of his day (e.g. among the first to find talent in the Dominican).

Gillick was notorious for thinking about the long-term, not the short term. He wouldn't trade away top prospects.

I think Gillick is still a believer that his own minor league system teaches players better than colleges do and mostly drafts accordingly (not sure). This may be a reason to prefer J.P. But overall I think Gillick would still be a good GM for practically any team.

It would be interesting to see Gillick run a team on a small budget, which he has never had to do. I think he would do fine, and in some ways, might do even better than he did in Seattle without the James Baldwin / Dan Wilson type contracts he handed out.

I don't see what he really has to offer to the current Jays' front office, however.

Does Pat qualifies for best Jay ever?
Gillick has a great sense for the game and knows how to build a team but on a 60M budget I'd have reservations about calling him Best Jay Ever. Granted, the Mets have oodles of money and still can't find heads from tails.

Gillick drafted very few college position players in the early rounds, John Olerud being the main exception. I recall some good college pitcher picks (Key, Cerutti). I wouldn't say his high draft picks did exceptionally well, though.

What he was good at was getting young players from other organizations via trade (McGriff, Fielder) and Rule 5 (the greatest Rule 5 GM in history).

Gillick took his share of criticism after 86, 87, 88, 89 and 90 for not making trades and always coming up short. Of course the 4-star trade and the Junior Felix for Devon White swap took care of the first part, and back-to-back World Championships (during which he traded top prospects away for the first time) blew away the latter.

If Gillick wants a challenging project - he should take the Mets GM job.

The Mariners should be flooded with good candidates. If you were looking for a GM job, how many teams would you rather work for? Not many, in my view. Seattle has:

1. Tons of revenue
2. Relatively unoppressive press, like in Boston or New York
3. A solid, if aging team
4. Good minor league talent, especially on the mound
5. A great city in which to live
6. Ownership that simply wants a profitable contender, but is not hell-bent on winning the title (ie. job security)
7. In-roads into the Asian free agent market

For the paltry sum of a few hundred K a year, I'd be happy to move my family West and take the job.

I am withdrawing my name from consideration.

If Gillick's staying on with the Mariners as an "advisor," then I doubt Beane has much to worry about losing his favourite stathead.

I'm not surprised Pat's leaving. He seemed more than a little weary in this exchange.

I would second the nomination for Pat as Best Jay Ever. (That doesn't mean I necessarily think he should win. But he deserves consideration.) Hey, I'm all for J.P., but let's before we start denigrating Pat for not "winning without a budget" or whatever let's be clear that J.P. hasn't done it yet, either.

Yeah, I agree with the nomination. Pat Gillick did truly great things in Toronto.

before we start denigrating Pat for not "winning without a budget"

Just to be clear, I didn't mean that as a criticism at all. Lots of GM's with large budgets don't win, and Gillick has won everyone he has worked. What I was getting at is that it would be interesting to see what approach he would take if he didn't have much cash at his disposal. I think I indicated he would do even better if he didn't have the discretion to hand out big deals to mediocrities, which is a luxury he has almost always had.

I think a big part of Gillick's legacy has to be signing players that others either didn't know about or considered unsignable. The Rule 5 picks were, for the most part, outstanding. Olerud, Shawn Green, and Steve Karsay all declared that they would be going (or returning, in Johnny O's case) to college, and Pat signed all of them.

Someone asked about the differences between Ricciardi's and Gillick's skill set. There are obvious differences. Ricciardi is much more of a "my way or the highway" style of GM than the benevolent, watchful style of Gillick. Gillick had a more collegial and respectful relationship with his manager, his scouting staff, his players and so on. Sometimes this caused problems (the Jimy Williams regime, for instance), but on other occasions, his acceptance of different approaches (e.g Epy Guerrero) worked to the benefit of the club.

I do not think Gillick would be well suited to be the general manager of a team in the financial circumstances of the current Blue Jays. There is a financial hard-headedness that is required that is not well-suited to his personality.

In any event, Gillick was a fine general manager. JP's task is, I think, harder, and if he can accomplish some of what Gillick accomplished, then he will have done well.

Very well put, Mike. I agree with you completely.

Gillick cut his teeth and earned his deserved reputation in the early years of the Blue Jays. Since then he has chosen wisely where to next to ply his trade. His modus operandi is to find a team with a shiny new ballpark, a solid fan base - due in part to the shiny new ballpark - and the ability to spend with the big boys. It is a simple plan and one Mr. Gillick has worked to perfection. He has also achieved success with this plan which was perfected in Toronto. (Remember those glorious days when the Skydome was all the rage.) This is hardly a criticism. I honour him for having the wherewithall to effect this plan and perform as one of the few great General Managers in the Major Leagues.

Accepting all that has been said, accurately, about Gillick's ability to win with a full house and a talented roster. Still, it shouldn't be forgotten that he literally built the Blue Jays from the ground up and produced a largely home-grown team that posted a winning record 11 seasons in a row, a team that with a break or two could've won a World Series before 1992. More to the point, I think Gillick really set the mould for constructing a solid franchise through the farm system and the Rule 5 draft; he was a pioneer, the John Hart (Cleveland version) of his day. I'd call that his real claim to fame.

One small regret I have about Gillick's tenure here (glorious as it was) is how the pitching staff crumbled after '93.

In 1992, Jimmy Key, David Wells, Todd Stottlemyre, Al Leiter, and Pat Hentgen were all Toronto property, and only 1 was good enough to earn a playoff start. By '96 only Hentgen was left. I know the Jays tried hard to sign Leiter, and Beeston was always bitter about his departure, but the first 4 pitchers all had arguably their best seasons after leaving Toronto. In '95, Key, Wells, Stott, and Leiter won a combined 44 games. In '96, they won 54. It's too bad that more of those wins didn't come in blue and white.

I always felt it was a mistake to let Key go. From what I remember, it was over contract length and the Jays (at the time) had a policy of not giving out contracts of more than 3 years' duration to pitchers.

The policy was a sound one, but in Key's case, an exception should have been made. He had a very fluid motion and was a good bet to remain productive for years.

As I recall, after Key signed with Yankees, a story came out that Key and his wife went on a cruise during the negotiations, and were only reachable via fax. Gillick commented that the team didn't negotiate $17 million deals via fax, and next thing you know, Key was a Yankee.

I completely agree that a 4-year deal, in hindsight, would have been fine, although Key did miss most of '95 with an injury.

Rich,

Too bad they didn't have cellphones back then! Key might have finished his career as a Jay.

Hey, maybe. I think the writing was on the wall during the '92 season, however. The fact that they didn't get close to a deal during the year made it seem pretty inevitable that he would walk. I remember him tipping his cap when leaving the mound during Game 4 of the Series, and McDonough commenting that this would likely be his last-ever start as a Blue Jay. That seemed to be the general feeling at the time among the baseball media, and they were right.

One small regret I have about Gillick's tenure here (glorious as it was) is how the pitching staff crumbled after '93.

On Stephen Tomlinson's website there's an article about how the problem with the '94 Jays was the offense and not the pitching. It is a persuasive article.

I too wish Key had stuck around longer, and think that Leiter left the Jays in the lurch to some extent, but the pitching transaction that really drove me nuts was the release of David Wells. As far as I can tell, they let him go after the '92 season because they didn't like him. A preseason baseball book at the time quoted an anonymous member of the Jays organization saying, "The sooner we get that fat clown off our roster, the better." I often thought that one flaw of the Gillick-era Jays was that they were arrogant with their talent; this is the best example.

I guess the other pitching move of Gillick's that backfired after first title was letting Henke walk, even though it made perfect sense at the time. By '92 Ward was clearly a better pitcher, but after he got hurt the bullpen was horrible. Henke had 3 productive years from 93-95, and the Jays desperately missed Wardo during the latter 2 years.

Good point about the release of Wells; Derek Bell went through much the same thing. Pain-in-the-ass that they were, dumping young talented players like this for nothing in return is never a good strategy, in my opinion.

http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewSellersOtherItems&userid=graded_card_sale&include=0&since=-1&sort=3&rows=50
CLICK URL:

http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewSellersOtherItems&userid=graded_card_sale&include=0&since=-1&sort=3&rows=50