Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Photo

If you were the Owner of the Twins for One Day ....

  • Please log in to reply
59 replies to this topic

#1 JB_Iowa

JB_Iowa

    Let's Keep Winning!

  • Members
  • 5,973 posts
  • LocationNorthwest Iowa

Posted 07 July 2014 - 08:41 AM

Yesterday in the game thread, Glunn posed the following question:

If you could be the owner of the Twins for one day, and could fire the GM, would you do it? If so, who would you try to hire as the new GM?

Since it looks like the Worley thread is taking a turn in this direction, I thought I'd post it here.

Just to get the discussion rolling, I'll post my answer from the game thread. I'd probably refine it a little but I'm feeling lazy this morning so I'll start with it as it was:

I would fire him. My primary basis for doing so would be the stagnant nature of the front office staff and the field staff over the past few years. Other than the 3 token coaching terminations, we haven't seen anything that would lead us to believe that there was any change in the "business as usual" nature of the FO decisions. Yes, they spent a little more in free agency this year but they certainly didn't spend near their limit.

I felt -- and continue to feel -- that Gardenhire needed to be gone before this season. As I've mentioned before, I think he may well be a good manager elsewhere. There is just too much same old, same old to keep him (and Rick Anderson) with the Twins. And I think someone from outside the organization should have been hired for the manager's job. Perhaps the move would be more symbolic than effectual but at some point, I think you need to show that you are serious about changing the culture.

I'm lousy at questions of who to hire plus as we are seeing elsewhere, there are the questions of who would take the GM job. But again, I would be looking for someone from outside the organization and I would empower that person to make whatever changes need to be made including replacing whatever front office and field staff needs to be replaced.

That type of change isn't easy and sounds pretty hard-hearted. And the decision to do so would be difficult when you look at the prospects that the Twins have coming up. But I'm reminded again that prospects are just that -- prospects. We haven't seen them prove anything yet and there are a lot of decisions that need to be made about how to make some of those prospects flourish in the majors.

I've been ready for a change for some time.




Let the furor begin.

#2 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 12,166 posts

Posted 07 July 2014 - 08:42 AM

I'd almost certainly fire Anderson. If Gardy didn't like that, I'd probably ask him to resign as well.

Then I'd promote Cuellar to pitching coach and Molitor to manager.

#3 JB_Iowa

JB_Iowa

    Let's Keep Winning!

  • Members
  • 5,973 posts
  • LocationNorthwest Iowa

Posted 07 July 2014 - 08:47 AM

I'd almost certainly fire Anderson. If Gardy didn't like that, I'd probably ask him to resign as well.

Then I'd promote Cuellar to pitching coach and Molitor to manager.


Here's the problem. To me, firing the pitching coach isn't the owner's job. It's the GM's job.

And Ryan's failure to take action is, for me, reflective of the "old boys club" atmosphere that permeates this franchise. And that's pretty much why I think a new GM who can evaluate what is working and not working -- and WHO should keep their job and not keep their job is necessary.

A fresh perspective.

#4 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 10,159 posts

Posted 07 July 2014 - 08:50 AM

I agree with everything you just said. I can't name a name, but I'd look for this:

1. Someone that embraces both scouting and numbers/big data
2. Someone that can say what they want in a manager, in terms of bunting, pinch running, use of relievers, pinch hitting, use of starters and pitch counts.....all those things a manager does on field.
3. Someone that believes in signing a legit FA a year, while the team is bad, in an attempt to get better.
4. Someone that can tell me how he would/would not change how MiLB players are fed, housed, coached, and otherwise prepared for being MLB
5. Someone that can tell me where the maket inefficienices are in the game today, and how we can be competitive with teams that spend twice as much money as me (and talks that way)
6. Someone that can name other GMs and coaches/managers he admires, and what he likes about them.

That's off the top of my head, I'm sure there is more.

#5 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 10,159 posts

Posted 07 July 2014 - 08:51 AM

Here's the problem. To me, firing the pitching coach isn't the owner's job. It's the GM's job.

And Ryan's failure to take action is, for me, reflective of the "old boys club" atmosphere that permeates this franchise. And that's pretty much why I think a new GM who can evaluate what is working and not working -- and WHO should keep their job and not keep their job is necessary.

A fresh perspective.


This. 100% this.

#6 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 12,166 posts

Posted 07 July 2014 - 08:51 AM

Here's the problem. To me, firing the pitching coach isn't the owner's job. It's the GM's job.

And Ryan's failure to take action is, for me, reflective of the "old boys club" atmosphere that permeates this franchise. And that's pretty much why I think a new GM who can evaluate what is working and not working -- and WHO should keep their job and not keep their job is necessary.

A fresh perspective.


No, it's generally not the owner's job to fire coaches but it's certainly within an owner's scope to sit down the general manager and say "convince me why I shouldn't fire half the coaching staff right now".

And by making this argument, you basically asked "would you fire Ryan?" because if everything else is outside the scope of ownership, that's the only decision to make.

#7 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,091 posts

Posted 07 July 2014 - 09:15 AM

Yesterday in the game thread, Glunn posed the following question:

If you could be the owner of the Twins for one day, and could fire the GM, would you do it? If so, who would you try to hire as the new GM?

Nope, Ryan's a very good GM.

#8 Hosken Bombo Disco

Hosken Bombo Disco

    Toledo Mud Hens

  • Members
  • 2,826 posts

Posted 07 July 2014 - 09:21 AM

Ryan and Gardenhire ought to have the decency to independently submit their resignations/retirement. As it exists now, there's this daisy chain of "for as long as I'm owner, Ryan will be my GM... for as long as I'm GM, Gardy will be my manager... for as long as I'm manager..."

It's run its course. :)

I'm probably in the minority, but I'd want to keep Ryan as GM but would hire some outside blood as a potential successor GM one day.

#9 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Twins Mods
  • 5,758 posts

Posted 07 July 2014 - 09:29 AM

If you get a new GM, he's going to want to bring in his own on and off field staff. So I'd assume a new GM would almost automatically mean a clean house.

Of course that's if they step outside the country club and if they don't, well what was the point of replacing the GM to begin with?

#10 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 12,166 posts

Posted 07 July 2014 - 09:33 AM

I'm probably in the minority, but I'd want to keep Ryan as GM but would hire some outside blood as a potential successor GM one day.


This is how I feel as well. While I think Ryan has made some pretty big mistakes with the MLB club, he has done a bang-up job with drafting and trading (outside of Worley but even then, they still got May).

I think Terry Ryan is a good GM. I'm not convinced Antony will be a good GM, though I'm not ruling it out either.

#11 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 10,159 posts

Posted 07 July 2014 - 09:42 AM

He is not in charge of the draft, though he does hire the scouting director. They are having good drafts because the team is terrible right now, when they drafted later in the draft, they did not have much success (see their lack of young talent right now as proof). So, is it that they are drafting better, or that they are just terrible, and therefore getting good prospects?

#12 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 12,166 posts

Posted 07 July 2014 - 09:49 AM

He is not in charge of the draft, though he does hire the scouting director. They are having good drafts because the team is terrible right now, when they drafted later in the draft, they did not have much success (see their lack of young talent right now as proof). So, is it that they are drafting better, or that they are just terrible, and therefore getting good prospects?


The Twins don't have a top three farm system solely because they had high picks. Guys like Berrios and Thorpe are becoming jewels of the system and they were picked up later in the draft or for a pittance in the international pool.

Sure, Buxton and Stewart are great but they won't get you the best farm system in baseball. It requires smart pickups further down the draft board and smart international signings to do that.

#13 Boom Boom

Boom Boom

    Hydraulic Choppers

  • Members
  • 1,423 posts

Posted 07 July 2014 - 09:50 AM

I'm not sure how much credit you can give to Ryan for drafting well the last couple years. The Rays had a lot of good young players coming up for a while, talent they never would have had the chance to pick up if they hadn't been terrible for several years previous.

Firing RickRon AnderGardenhire is inextricably tied to firing Ryan, IMO... if you leave the GM in tact after firing the coaches, you're still giving the GM free reign to bring in some of the same personalities he was always drawn to.

#14 Badsmerf

Badsmerf

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,912 posts

Posted 07 July 2014 - 09:51 AM

I wouldn't fire jr mid season. I would tell him this is his last year and start searching for a replacement. I'd want a replacement right away in the off-season to get to work on evaluating and cleaning house. Although, I don't think jr would go for another gm job so he might just resign. I'd target up and coming organizations as well as the cardinals fo people for the job.

#15 JB_Iowa

JB_Iowa

    Let's Keep Winning!

  • Members
  • 5,973 posts
  • LocationNorthwest Iowa

Posted 07 July 2014 - 10:15 AM

I'd have no problem with Ryan being a senior advisor as long as the NEW GM is given authority and comes from OUTSIDE the organization.

This might not have been necessary if the organization had blended in some talent from the outside over time. But their primary modus operadi seems to be to hire interns and keep promoting them.

#16 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,091 posts

Posted 07 July 2014 - 10:27 AM

He is not in charge of the draft, though he does hire the scouting director. They are having good drafts because the team is terrible right now, when they drafted later in the draft, they did not have much success (see their lack of young talent right now as proof). So, is it that they are drafting better, or that they are just terrible, and therefore getting good prospects?


Again, this isn't really Radcliff/Ryan's fault. They stopped drafting in 07 but they had solid drafts. 07 they picked #28 and then, b/c of all the supp picks that year, they didn't draft again until the 90s. Revere was a good pick. The 06 draft was a bad draft but Parmelee is actually #16 in WAR among the 44 first round picks (and Benson was a solid prospect for a long while. Robertson got to the majors). Garza was a good pick in 05 (as were Slowey and Duensing in later rounds). 04 was rough - Plouffe and Perkins are ok and Swarzak is a decent 12th pitcher but injuries hurt everyone that was drafted by the Twins. 03 they missed on Moses but hit on Baker. 02 got Span, Neshek and Crain. Pretty solid. Those Ryan/Radcliff drafts weren't horrible - if you want to complain, you should be complaining about Deron Johnson and his changed drafting philosophy.

But I've always felt, and still do, that baseball is usually cyclical. A team like the Twins can't always be at the top of the division. They had one losing season between 01-10. Drafting that late catches up with you, which is what we saw. They got some nice talent in a lot of those drafts but not enough, esp with the reported draft budgets Pohlad had put in place.

#17 birdwatcher

birdwatcher

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,821 posts

Posted 07 July 2014 - 10:40 AM

The Twins don't have a top three farm system solely because they had high picks. Guys like Berrios and Thorpe are becoming jewels of the system and they were picked up later in the draft or for a pittance in the international pool.

Sure, Buxton and Stewart are great but they won't get you the best farm system in baseball. It requires smart pickups further down the draft board and smart international signings to do that.


I've been hearing the argument repeatedly for years that Bill Smith gets direct credit for what he accomplished in the absence of Ryan. And also that Ryan is responsible for previous poor drafts with zero, and I mean zero mention of their draft order. And now, Ryan isn't to be credited too much and the primo position in the draft order accounts for much of the organization's recent success.

So finally, maybe we're getting it right. Having a top 10 choice is huge. Absent this, you get Plouffe, Gibson, and Parmelee types. The better systems generally have those top choices anchoring the ranking.

#18 birdwatcher

birdwatcher

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,821 posts

Posted 07 July 2014 - 10:42 AM

Again, this isn't really Radcliff/Ryan's fault. They stopped drafting in 07 but they had solid drafts. 07 they picked #28 and then, b/c of all the supp picks that year, they didn't draft again until the 90s. Revere was a good pick. The 06 draft was a bad draft but Parmelee is actually #16 in WAR among the 44 first round picks (and Benson was a solid prospect for a long while. Robertson got to the majors). Garza was a good pick in 05 (as were Slowey and Duensing in later rounds). 04 was rough - Plouffe and Perkins are ok and Swarzak is a decent 12th pitcher but injuries hurt everyone that was drafted by the Twins. 03 they missed on Moses but hit on Baker. 02 got Span, Neshek and Crain. Pretty solid. Those Ryan/Radcliff drafts weren't horrible - if you want to complain, you should be complaining about Deron Johnson and his changed drafting philosophy.

But I've always felt, and still do, that baseball is usually cyclical. A team like the Twins can't always be at the top of the division. They had one losing season between 01-10. Drafting that late catches up with you, which is what we saw. They got some nice talent in a lot of those drafts but not enough, esp with the reported draft budgets Pohlad had put in place.


This is a factual and fair-minded assessment.

#19 tobi0040

tobi0040

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,733 posts

Posted 07 July 2014 - 10:56 AM

Nope, Ryan's a very good GM.


I agree. But I think Terry is a better low budget GM than mid to high budget GM. I think he is either stubborn or finds bargain bin type deals as exciting or a fun game.

I honestly believe the single best thing the Twins could do is keep TR as the GM but set a minimum payroll of say $110M to $120M. Force TR to spend that amount.

#20 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,091 posts

Posted 07 July 2014 - 10:58 AM

I agree. But I think Terry is a better low budget GM than mid to high budget GM. I think he is either stubborn or finds bargain bin type deals as exciting or a fun game.

I honestly believe the single best thing the Twins could do is keep TR as the GM but set a minimum payroll of say $110M to $120M. Force TR to spend that amount.


I think that's a good question but better to wait a few years. After Sano and Buxton are up, if Ryan is still dumpster diving instead of using all of payroll to help, I'd agree. Right now, I don't really care about payroll but in a few years, we'd better be back up there.