It's not that I missed your point. It's that your point is a flawed, straw man argument and that you failed to back it up with relevant examples. And now you've done so again, but at least you switched to bad baseball examples, so that's something. You found two examples of relatively unsuccessful outside hire GMs. And? Given that just based on odds alone, GMs in general are not successful in MLB, what does that prove, especially when I can effortlessly name two recent outside hire GMs that are currently among the more successful in MLB? So my previous question remains unanswered. How many MLB teams have hired a GM from within who was a part of a run of futility like the ones the Twins have seen since 2010? And if it is in fact a rarity to promote an assistant GM or the like from within an endemic culture of failure, why is Antony the man to break out of that pattern and set a new precedent? The only reason I can imagine would be his ability to bring something new to the table, like... oh, maybe the rigorous application of new analytical tools to player evaluation. Antony's most notable difference from his peers, by contrast, is probably his apparent disinterest in analytics.