Thread: Why Don't the Twins Re-Sign Minority Players

Originally Posted by John Bonnes

I didn't get that from the story at all. I thought it tried very hard to point out what a couple of posters have pointed out; if there is any racism, it's almost completely subconscious. I think it's worth considering, that our background influences us all on a gut level. And that gut level impacts how much we connect to people. How much we connect to people influences how desperately we cling to them.

While hyperbolic, I don't think I misrepresented the article that much. Mauer is a unique case. Aside from that, I don't see that the decision making about re-signing players has to do with the fact that they look like Minnesotans. The Twins have happened to sign some bad players in the first place. Not re-signing Hunter, on the other hand, was more about the years to devote to the guy at 32 or whatever he was. The Twins DID offer him more than what they paid Nathan, right?

Originally Posted by TheLink

Why is this thread topic so bad? Isn't point of forum to talk about different observations, opinions, or thoughts? Just because a thread topic is started doesn't mean you are required to read or comment. I mean doesn't it get tiring talking about Twins rotation after awhile.

I know. I cannot stand it when someone basically says "you shouldn't have posted that." Um, ignore if you don't like the topic.

Originally Posted by John Bonnes

I don't.

Initially, I pointed out the inconsistencies which I assume you're referring to. (I forgot about Stewart, but that's why we talk these things out.) But I was struck by the Santana/Hunter vs. Mauer/Nathan dichotomy, particularly Hunter/Nathan. There may have been particulars behind the scenes in each that made the difference, but from a general standpoint, they look very similar. To be honest, I still haven't seen a reply that totally satisfies my question as to why the situations between those four players were so cut and dried different. Or maybe it is coincidence.

You want to know why I asked the question? Because several times per year I'm privately asked various questions about the Twins and race, that's why. Some of that may be left over from Calvin Griffith years, where it was an awfully touchy subject. But when it's a thoughtful question (or accusation), and I don't have a great answer, rather than play the Outrage Card, I choose to say "I don't know" and think about it. Or even to dare to discuss it out loud.

Which is what I did today. But now it's time for bed. I think I'll sleep OK.

Clearly I agree with the direction of this post, but what about my analysis of Nathan/Hunter don't you like? I may be wrong, but I thought that the Twins offered Hunter 3/45 and they ended up paying Nathan 3/34? I know the latter is true for sure. Nathan, while old, is in a role that doesn't crash due to age (look at Rivera and before him Trevor Hoffman), but OF is a very different story. Torii wanted 4 years. The value in paying $12 million plus for aging OF is pretty low.

Of course this also has to do with the fact that the Twins have a closer fetish. And not in the innocent "oh your feet turn me on" way. Its in the "proven closers turn me on" way.

The article wants to point out that we like "our own" more. That is true when it comes to relationships. I believe that the order of preference is race, economic class, and religion (could be wrong). But our mates are not our ball players. Minnesotans loved Torii. They will REALLY LOVE Sano. Hell, they love Revere.

There is some value to the original article, yes. But it is only in opening discussion not in actually being truthful. And clearly that is worthy of discussion.

I'm sorry, but this piece is ridiculous. Yes, racism is still real, and it is a sensitive and complex topic. But just because racism is a serious topic does not mean that we are required to take every accusation of racism seriously.

I do not see a shred of evidence that MLB front offices are, as the author suggests, more focused on constructing a team that mirrors the racial makeup of the local fan base so that they'll spend more money than in fielding the best team possible within their budget.

Plenty of counterexamples have already been provided to refute the claim that there is a pattern with the Twins.

Certainly, there can be individual cases like Mauer where the fact that he's a beloved local boy plays into the equation. But would if Mauer were black, would he not be here anymore? Would the Twins have traded him or let him walk? We'll never know, but I seriously doubt it. Puckett was beloved by the fan base.

And suppose Hunter were white. Would the Twins have coughed up that kind of contract to keep him? I doubt it. And it's not like Hunter was replaced by a white guy. In fact, they traded for Delmon Young at least in part because they felt they needed another right-handed bat in the lineup to replace Hunter's production.

I read about half of the first page before realizing the rest aren't worth my time.

I would like to add that, as a white American, I am a little offended when the Twins never shell out big bucks to white Americans during the international signing period.

Sense the sarcasm, and let's move on.