It might be a good idea, assuming the Twins are going to stick with Ryan/Gardy/Anderson until they quit on their own, to have some interview/face time with the coaches before acquiring a player. I wonder if they do that.
I woke up (West Coast time) to a thread that already had exploded. I read through it, and this is the comment that comes closest to my view.
Worley's case is similar to some cases for the Twins in the past, going across the regime of two GMs (related lineage of course), sitting at the intersection between Player Evaluation and Coaching. Coaching involves evaluation of course, independently of the evaluation that has to go on for acquisitions.
Cases like JJ Hardy, Carlos Gomez, Delmon Young, seem with retrospect to be where the scouts/evaluators said "this is the guy to get", the GM confers and pulls the trigger, and then somehow the on-field guys some time later say in effect "I don't know what to do with this guy". There's some success, there's some time in the doghouse, and ultimately the player is dispatched. I realize two of the names above were traded for each other; it's the process I'm concerned about.
Part of being a GM is Systems Analysis. From an outsider's perspective like mine, there is a disconnect between talent evaluation and coaching. They need to become more on the same page than they are at least showing. I'm going to stick my neck out and guess that the difference is in views on the players' makeup and mental approach.
It's not working, apparently, for the GM to tell the manager and his coaches, "here are the guys you have to work with this year, get the most out of them". There needs to be more buy-in, somehow, so that players aren't thrown under the bus when they don't succeed for a time. I don't know the solution, but it's an identifiable problem, and probably a solution exists without blowing up the organization.
Edited by ashburyjohn, 08 July 2014 - 05:08 PM.