Ding ding ding. Winner, winner, chicken dinner. Ask Giants fans what they thought of Sabean from 2005-2008. Or Tigers fans what they thought of Dombrowski in the early 2000s. Or As fans what they thought of Beane in the late 2000s. This argument is based on survivorship... Basically, the examination of success stories only at the time they are succeeding. Four years ago, the Twins would have been included on that list? Why? Because they were winning. That list is not constructed by philosophy, attitude, or any other metric not called "winning". Which is the wrong way to compile a list. Because winning is fleeting for anyone with tenure and a GM you would have considered good at his job three years ago is now bumped off that list because his team stopped winning. Or, in the case of Brian Sabean, that GM was the laughing stock of much of baseball after the Pierzynski trade, had a handful of losing seasons, was considered a failure, and now is on that list due to recent success. Was he an awful GM in 2004 and is now a great one? Unlikely.