Outgoing MLB Giants Managing General Partner & CEO Bill Neukom Thursday denied there was a communications conflict with the club's BOD, and pegged his pending departure more toward a broader sense of accomplishment. "I've accomplished essentially what I set out to accomplish (in this role), and this is the right time to turn the reins over," Neukom said, adding there was "robust communications" between the front office and investors. He later added "forced out" was not the "right characterization" for what occurred, and there was no single precipitating event prompting the shift. "There is a time to come and a time to leave, and this is the time to leave," said Neukom, who also will be divesting his equity in the Giants. Neukom also denied there was an issue with regard to financial reserves, cited in Bay Area press reports as a key wedge issue between him and the board. "We have significant reserves. The Giants have a rainy-day fund and it is substantial," he said. Neukom, however, did acknowledge that the recent decision to cut CF Aaron Rowand and eat roughly $12M remaining on his contract for next season arrived "with a lot of agony and a lot of analysis." Meanwhile, incoming CEO Larry Baer said the team's '12 payroll has not yet been set, but added, "I don't foresee it going down." The Giants' '11 Opening Day payroll of about $118M was a club record. "Frankly, I don't see a lot of (organizational) change. It's business as usual, and we're extremely well positioned for the future," he said (Eric Fisher, SportsBusiness Journal).
MOVING FORWARD: Baer admitted that the front-office structure "would change somewhat in that he, as CEO, would not conduct the Giants' business as an owner-operator as Neukom and his predecessor Peter Magowan did." Baer "did not anticipate another member of the ownership group becoming actively involved in front-office operations and was unclear about whether the club would appoint a managing general partner." Baer: "They're employing me to come in and run the thing. I'm accountable to the board. Everybody has bosses. If you're a CEO, you have a board and you serve at the pleasure of the board. But they have zero interest in coming in and being in active management'' (SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS, 9/16). In S.F., John Shea notes Baer "didn't rule out longer-term contracts for premier free-agent hitters in the wake of this season's run-producing woes." Baer: "One thing that hopefully has been learned over the last few years and is recognized by the fans is that to contend, we have to be open to any possibility" (S.F. CHRONICLE, 9/16). In Sacramento, Marcos Breton writes, "No disrespect to Neukom, but the day Baer is shown the door is the day Giants fans might start to worry about franchise instability" (SACRAMENTO BEE, 9/16).
COMMUNICATION ISSUES: In San Jose, Tim Kawakami writes, "The dysfunction was implied, suggested and carefully re-spun as healthy discourse. But, while other details remained unclear, it was obvious after Thursday's news conference that the ouster of ... Neukom was all about communication breakdowns and some dysfunction at the highest levels." The Giants "love to speak of continuity, yet they've now deposed their No. 1 executive twice in three years." Kawakami: "That speaks to dysfunction and instability." It is "safe to assume that the big investors -- probably involving the largest stakeholders, Trina Burns Dean and Tori Burns -- will run this team much more like a corporation than before" (SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS, 9/16). In S.F., Gwen Knapp in a front-page piece writes Neukom's departure "came too soon and too sloppily, with too little respect for franchise stability and for Neukom's accomplishments in the three seasons he ran the club." The Giants' major investors were trying to "fix something that wasn't broken." Whatever "conflicts arose, they should have patiently tried to repair the damage" (S.F. CHRONICLE, 9/16). In Oakland, Monte Poole notes, "The issue, it seems, was less Neukom's decisions than his unwillingness to always fully share plan discussed with his baseball people" (OAKLAND TRIBUNE, 9/16).
ACROSS THE BAY: The Giants' opposition toward the A's moving to San Jose and into the Santa Clara County territory held by the S.F. club is firmly unchanged. "There is no change whatsoever there," Baer said. "It's a position Bill's had, the board has, and one, obviously, I have" (Fisher). In San Jose, Carl Steward notes that view "didn't surprise A's owner Lew Wolff, who continues to await a decision on the matter" from MLB. Wolff: "It wouldn't make any difference to me whether Bill was there, or Larry, or the Ayatollah, whoever. This is a decision that should have been made by now. I think it will be made whether Bill stayed on or not" (SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS, 9/16). ESPN.com's Buster Olney noted Neukom is an "accomplished lawyer with a long history of court battles, and if MLB had tried to shove Oakland's move to San Jose down the throat of the Giants ... then Neukom could have reacted with a lawsuit." The "perception in some front offices is that Major League Baseball, which is already dealing with organization brush fires with the Dodgers, Mets and Rays, did not want to pick a legal fight with Neukom" (ESPN.com, 9/15).
