The Prince

Much discussion over at Da Box about JP Ricciardi, following on from Robert Dudek's insightful and timely piece on Ricciardi's legacy. In the comments, Robert and the always perceptive Mike Green pointed to intelligence and creativity as the key aspects of a good GM. I think that's missing something, as I replied:

There's a third leg to that GM tripod that gets far, far too little exposure but one which is equally as important as intelligence and creativity. Management.

A general manager has to be (unsurprisingly) a good manager, has to have or develop that specific, rather tight bundle of skills that enables someone to lead, organize, plan and control. Qualities like leadership. Bravery. Trust. Organization. Integrity. Wisdom. The bundle of skills that shows up not in the "what" of an organization but in its "how"; not in the individual decision-trees that we seize on as critical markers in the narrative of a general manager's tenure, but in the forest of continual process, growth and change that the 300 or so members of a major league organization are in the midst of on a daily basis.

If there is one constant in the list of names you mentioned, Mike, it is that they have or had superb leadership skills, to the point that they have built tremendous loyalty within their organizations (as well as without). There are a number of reasons why one organization supposedly loaded with young talent produces four Hall of Fame talents in eight years and another, equally loaded, nearly contemporary to it, produces nothing but heartache and misery. But the central reason is because one is led by John Schuerholz and the second is led by Frank Cashen, both of whom won exactly one world championship but whose organizations could not have been more different. And yes, it pains me viscerally to say nice things about the Braves. :)

Look at Branch Rickey, who had smarts and vision but whose smarts and vision would have come to nothing if he had not inspired (grudging) loyalty, or behaved himself with courage and integrity. All the vision in the world amounts to nothing without the courage to plow a different furrow.

To my view, this is where Ricciardi has fallen down most frustratingly, where he has not built upon his native strengths or worked to remedy his native deficiencies. Ricciardi's management approach has, if anything, grown more timid and afraid of failure since he has come into the job. He has pulled the organization into a defensive, reactionary shell, with the occasional body hurled over the parapet when someone fails to jump on board with his "us vs. them" philosophy. And he has failed to demonstrate the wisdom of acknowledging and learning from his mistakes.

He does do some of these things well. I think he's a good leader (though we're increasingly seeing cracks even in that, keeping in mind his recent comments on Gregg Zaun). I think he is decisive and aggressive and makes his decisions quickly. And he has inspired trust and loyalty from many, not least of which are the twin engines of the team, Roy Halladay and Brad Arnsberg. His willingness to stand up before than fans and be shot at, shows an example of his integrity. But those were his hallmarks when coming in, and he has not notably made improvements in his management skills generally. I thought, five-plus years on, that he'd be a smarter general manager now, and he has definitely accomplished that in my view. But I also thought he'd be a better manager, and I don't think he is.