Monfort being too honest.... - Page 2

hiaspire · February 4th, 2007, 09:11 AM

Then lecture your OWN self for being involved in that conversation first, and having multiple posts on that subject. Not me. I wasn't going to respond to that discussion in an entirely different thread from where it was happening, just as you yourself didn't either. Police your own self instead of needing to do that for everyone else - or just me.

Roxpert · February 4th, 2007, 10:51 AM

Unfortunately, HiAspire, I feel compelled to respond to points or questions raised by any poster which are directed at me. Remember RP asking me if being a Giants fan colored my thinking on the A's model? He asked me a silly question, but I feel it only right to respond and give him an answer.

When I want you to tell me who or when I should respond to people, I'll let you know.

hiaspire · February 4th, 2007, 12:01 PM

Ditto for me. When I want you to tell me what posts I can or can't respond to I'll let you know.

So why the need to tell others to NOT do what you are doing? Are you the only one allowed, and you get to criticize others for doing what you do?

Roxpert · February 4th, 2007, 02:58 PM

How have I criticized you on this thread, other than to say you are showing too much trust in the Monforts to do the "most suitable" thing, and starting to stray off-topic? Those remarks weren't out of line.

Besides, you are no one to cry "hypocricy" when you have displayed it multiple times as I, Hoser, and others have repeatedly pointed out to you in the past.

rockieprogress · February 4th, 2007, 03:52 PM

OK guys. Do we need to step out for popcorn every time you guys start in on each other?

Roxpert, When the franchise was commandeered by the Monforts, there wasn't a sustainable farm system. Hence the need to build it first, before bringing any outsiders in to fill the gaps in developed talent.
That's why we've endured stopgap player after stopgap player. I think we can both agree on that point.

There is NOW a farm system that the future can be built around (like the A's have had for 18years), so advocating spending more money before now is, I believe, to espouse the Yankee way of running a franchise.

When the fans start going crazy about the thought of trading Helton, and the owner responds by talking to the writers (as opposed to answering 1000 emails) to get his point across that by keeping Helton and not trading him in a salary dump, that the future will dictate that Holliday, Atkins, Cook... etal will need to be traded before they reach FA and can walk away uncompensated. That's my read on what he was doing. (And please, don't try to hand me the "where did he say that" BS. Just because it isn't actually IN WRITING doesn't mean he, or any one of us here, isn't saying that. That's a cop-out.)
Are you of the opinion that he shouldn't say anything and should just let the fans wonder what the franchise is doing?

I posted that I was for trading Helton. Even as a salary dump I would've traded him. It would've allowed the franchise to keep 3 of the 5 players everybody is mentioning, WITH THE SALARY INCREASE YOU ADVOCATE.

Adding a CF, and increasing Hollidays salary by $10M (to $15M or so) and raising Atkins to $10M to $12M, Cook to the same, will add $30M to the payroll.
Factor in Hawpe, Tulo in a couple of Arb seasons, Iannetta same thing, the Francis increases, and its likely to approach $35M to $37M over what they have now.

Should the owner just stay silent about that?

I don't agree with how he did it any more than you do, but that doesn't mean that it didn't need to be done.

BTW, the Giants question isn't a silly question. What is learned when first exposed to any subject is hard to forget, especially when learned at a young age.
The Giants have done things a different way, than the A's are doing currently, since they went to the BayArea, with respect to utilizing their farm system. I was wondering if you formulated your opinions of managerial style (GM) based on the way the Giants did them, as opposed to the way the A's have done them since Sandy Alderson took over.

Roxpert · February 4th, 2007, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockieprogress

There is NOW a farm system that the future can be built around (like the A's have had for 18years), so advocating spending more money before now is, I believe, to espouse the Yankee way of running a franchise.

This "black and white" way you look at things is nonsense. Since when is spending at a MEDIAN level of league payroll a "Yankee way" of running a franchise? A $75 or $80 million payroll is a far cry from a $200 million payroll.

Quote:

Are you of the opinion that he shouldn't say anything and should just let the fans wonder what the franchise is doing?

I don't think even Monfort knows what the franchise is going to be doing, so YES, I do think he should remain silent about certain subjects that have the risk of alienating his own homegrown players. This latest gaffe by Monfort wasn't as bad as when he called out Jennings, Holliday and Atkins for not talking with him about extensions around the time they traded Jennings. What he is saying is not engendering any sort of loyalty from his players once they do have leverage.

Remember when Monfort said a year ago that he wouldn't keep the fans hostage, and would sell the franchise if they can't win or pay for a winner in a few years? If he's going to talk about not being able to "afford" to keep his own homegrown stars, at least he should also remind people that if they can't contend under his austere model, then he won't hold fans hostage.

But Monfort's best policy would have been to remain coy about how much he may or may not spend on players in the future. I give him credit for openness, but as the title of this thread says, I think he's been a bit "too honest".

Quote:

BTW, the Giants question isn't a silly question. What is learned when first exposed to any subject is hard to forget, especially when learned at a young age.
The Giants have done things a different way, than the A's are doing currently, since they went to the BayArea, with respect to utilizing their farm system. I was wondering if you formulated your opinions of managerial style (GM) based on the way the Giants did them, as opposed to the way the A's have done them since Sandy Alderson took over.

Trying to psychoanalyze where I form my opinions is a waste of your time, and I can't quite understand why you'd even try.

rockieprogress · February 4th, 2007, 05:48 PM

"I can't quite understand why you'd even try"

How about so I can understand your point of view on a subject...

FYI, The "Yankee way" is to bring in talent, at the expense of the farm system.
Players from the Yankee sys don't seem to make it to the Bigs with them. They're traded away so they can bring in "experienced" players, as opposed to the A's way of bringing up players to fill needs, and trading them away when they start to get expensive.
Not every reference used is from a monetary standpoint.

Now that the farm system of the Rockies is where it needs to be, now Monfort should be held accountable for his statement. To do it before now, while the rebuild of the system was in progress, doesn't make sense. The only thing they could've done was to spend money, at 7 positions, before 2011 to cover up that the talent within the farm system was lacking.

If the players want to treat the system as a "Business" why shouldn't Charlie?
He OWNS the rights to the players, so why should he worry about alienating them?
So Atkins can worry about leaving? Who cares... Stewart will be ready next year, so Atkins could be traded then.
Maybe, just maybe, do you think he could be trying to condition the fanbase to start watching the farm system, like sg does, so they can see that the time spent waiting for it to develop is for a reason?

I would also like to add one thing to your previous observation about Kroenke. The Av's aren't doing so well this year are they? That's because they didn't do anything but act like the Yankee's (from a monetary standpoint here) and bring in the Straw-that-stirs-the-drink while they had Roy in net.
No Roy, no chance.

Just my $.02...

Roxpert · February 4th, 2007, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockieprogress

Maybe, just maybe, do you think he could be trying to condition the fanbase to start watching the farm system, like sg does, so they can see that the time spent waiting for it to develop is for a reason?

You come up with some funny ideas, RP, but this may be the funniest. Yeah, Monfort is concerned with his fans following the Sky Sox, Drillers, Nuts, and Tourists, all of them minor-league franchises he doesn't own. He wants us to grow an early affection for the prospects when they are mere babes, so that when they "turn 18" and can move out of the house, we can root for them on other teams.

Monfort doesn't know what he owns. You do know, however, how to spin whatever nonsense he may be giving the press into even MORE.....umm....nonsense. LOL!

hoser · February 5th, 2007, 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roxpert

How have I criticized you on this thread, other than to say you are showing too much trust in the Monforts to do the "most suitable" thing, and starting to stray off-topic? Those remarks weren't out of line.

Besides, you are no one to cry "hypocricy" when you have displayed it multiple times as I, Hoser, and others have repeatedly pointed out to you in the past.

Yeah baby! A Hoser sighting.

Just for good times sake... Todd Helton is declining... and fast! Put that in yer pipe and smoke it HiAsspire.

TheIncredibleRox · February 5th, 2007, 11:42 PM

Quote:

Yeah baby! A Hoser sighting.

Just for good times sake... Todd Helton is declining... and fast! Put that in yer pipe and smoke it HiAsspire.

Hahahahaha.... that is the best thing I've ever seen written on this board, even if I disagree with everything contained within it on multiple levels.

Thanks for the goodnight laugh. I won't get that much from the South Park episode I'm about to watch, and SP always does it for me.

February 4th, 2007, 09:11 AM	#16 (permalink)
hiaspire Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 481	Then lecture your OWN self for being involved in that conversation first, and having multiple posts on that subject. Not me. I wasn't going to respond to that discussion in an entirely different thread from where it was happening, just as you yourself didn't either. Police your own self instead of needing to do that for everyone else - or just me. Last edited by hiaspire; February 4th, 2007 at 09:22 AM.

February 4th, 2007, 10:51 AM	#17 (permalink)
Roxpert Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Denver Posts: 1,082	Unfortunately, HiAspire, I feel compelled to respond to points or questions raised by any poster which are directed at me. Remember RP asking me if being a Giants fan colored my thinking on the A's model? He asked me a silly question, but I feel it only right to respond and give him an answer. When I want you to tell me who or when I should respond to people, I'll let you know.

February 4th, 2007, 12:01 PM	#18 (permalink)
hiaspire Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 481	Ditto for me. When I want you to tell me what posts I can or can't respond to I'll let you know. So why the need to tell others to NOT do what you are doing? Are you the only one allowed, and you get to criticize others for doing what you do?

February 4th, 2007, 02:58 PM	#19 (permalink)
Roxpert Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Denver Posts: 1,082	How have I criticized you on this thread, other than to say you are showing too much trust in the Monforts to do the "most suitable" thing, and starting to stray off-topic? Those remarks weren't out of line. Besides, you are no one to cry "hypocricy" when you have displayed it multiple times as I, Hoser, and others have repeatedly pointed out to you in the past.

February 4th, 2007, 03:52 PM	#20 (permalink)
rockieprogress Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: aurora Posts: 183	OK guys. Do we need to step out for popcorn every time you guys start in on each other? Roxpert, When the franchise was commandeered by the Monforts, there wasn't a sustainable farm system. Hence the need to build it first, before bringing any outsiders in to fill the gaps in developed talent. That's why we've endured stopgap player after stopgap player. I think we can both agree on that point. There is NOW a farm system that the future can be built around (like the A's have had for 18years), so advocating spending more money before now is, I believe, to espouse the Yankee way of running a franchise. When the fans start going crazy about the thought of trading Helton, and the owner responds by talking to the writers (as opposed to answering 1000 emails) to get his point across that by keeping Helton and not trading him in a salary dump, that the future will dictate that Holliday, Atkins, Cook... etal will need to be traded before they reach FA and can walk away uncompensated. That's my read on what he was doing. (And please, don't try to hand me the "where did he say that" BS. Just because it isn't actually IN WRITING doesn't mean he, or any one of us here, isn't saying that. That's a cop-out.) Are you of the opinion that he shouldn't say anything and should just let the fans wonder what the franchise is doing? I posted that I was for trading Helton. Even as a salary dump I would've traded him. It would've allowed the franchise to keep 3 of the 5 players everybody is mentioning, WITH THE SALARY INCREASE YOU ADVOCATE. Adding a CF, and increasing Hollidays salary by $10M (to $15M or so) and raising Atkins to $10M to $12M, Cook to the same, will add $30M to the payroll. Factor in Hawpe, Tulo in a couple of Arb seasons, Iannetta same thing, the Francis increases, and its likely to approach $35M to $37M over what they have now. Should the owner just stay silent about that? I don't agree with how he did it any more than you do, but that doesn't mean that it didn't need to be done. BTW, the Giants question isn't a silly question. What is learned when first exposed to any subject is hard to forget, especially when learned at a young age. The Giants have done things a different way, than the A's are doing currently, since they went to the BayArea, with respect to utilizing their farm system. I was wondering if you formulated your opinions of managerial style (GM) based on the way the Giants did them, as opposed to the way the A's have done them since Sandy Alderson took over.

February 4th, 2007, 05:48 PM	#22 (permalink)
rockieprogress Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: aurora Posts: 183	"I can't quite understand why you'd even try" How about so I can understand your point of view on a subject... FYI, The "Yankee way" is to bring in talent, at the expense of the farm system. Players from the Yankee sys don't seem to make it to the Bigs with them. They're traded away so they can bring in "experienced" players, as opposed to the A's way of bringing up players to fill needs, and trading them away when they start to get expensive. Not every reference used is from a monetary standpoint. Now that the farm system of the Rockies is where it needs to be, now Monfort should be held accountable for his statement. To do it before now, while the rebuild of the system was in progress, doesn't make sense. The only thing they could've done was to spend money, at 7 positions, before 2011 to cover up that the talent within the farm system was lacking. If the players want to treat the system as a "Business" why shouldn't Charlie? He OWNS the rights to the players, so why should he worry about alienating them? So Atkins can worry about leaving? Who cares... Stewart will be ready next year, so Atkins could be traded then. Maybe, just maybe, do you think he could be trying to condition the fanbase to start watching the farm system, like sg does, so they can see that the time spent waiting for it to develop is for a reason? I would also like to add one thing to your previous observation about Kroenke. The Av's aren't doing so well this year are they? That's because they didn't do anything but act like the Yankee's (from a monetary standpoint here) and bring in the Straw-that-stirs-the-drink while they had Roy in net. No Roy, no chance. Just my $.02...