Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Photo

Blunt Talk from Ownership

  • Please log in to reply
64 replies to this topic

#21 drjim

drjim

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,589 posts
  • LocationSt. Paul

Posted 18 July 2014 - 08:52 AM

They didn't add 90MM per year, I find that kind of talk a bit misleading. They didn't really add to the payroll at all, until they brought on Morales.

Where do you see that money being spent?


Starting pitcher, corner bat, catcher, extension for Dozier. I'm not sure if this will get them back to the same payroll as this season.

I don't think it is misleading to point out they guaranteed over $90 million in new contracts last offseason. It is a very factual response to complaints they don't do anything. The Twins really shouldn't have to apologize for clearing out bad contracts and for having financial flexibility while waiting for young talent to emerge.
Papers...business papers.

#22 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 16,587 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 08:56 AM

Catcher? What catcher could they add? You think they'll add a SP? Which of May, Meyer, Nolasco is not a starter next year in your opinion?

I don't know, it is a site to discuss sports, not airline safety.....maybe we should take it less seriously?


#23 drjim

drjim

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,589 posts
  • LocationSt. Paul

Posted 18 July 2014 - 08:58 AM

Catcher? What catcher could they add? You think they'll add a SP? Which of May, Meyer, Nolasco is not a starter next year in your opinion?


Either extend Suzuki or sign a veteran backup to Pinto. Nothing sexy.

May in AAA to start the season.
Papers...business papers.

#24 tobi0040

tobi0040

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 5,553 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 08:59 AM

They didn't add 90MM per year, I find that kind of talk a bit misleading. They didn't really add to the payroll at all, until they brought on Morales.

Where do you see that money being spent?


I completely agree. Payroll was about flat year over year. I would not be shocked if payroll is actually lower next year and that is not specifically because the Pohlad's are cheap. We just have CF, 3B, and SP x 2 that are going to be filled with rookies, at a minimum.

#25 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 16,587 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 09:02 AM

Either extend Suzuki or sign a veteran backup to Pinto. Nothing sexy.

May in AAA to start the season.


Thanks for the replies. I hope you are wrong on May. I think they need to try the young guys. I don't agree "two rookies is a recipe for disaster", but if it is, that is why one/both should be up this year.....

I don't know, it is a site to discuss sports, not airline safety.....maybe we should take it less seriously?


#26 brvama

brvama

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 393 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 09:05 AM

I am pretty sure nothing will change, unless TR retires. This is conjecture, but I'd guess they see the minors producing players next year and the year after, and nothing much changes. They aren't going to go out and buy elite players, they aren't going to suddenly trade prospects for proven players that aren't at the end of their careers.

I just don't think much changes. At least he's honest in his answers, I like that. And, to be clear, I don't have any issues with him not telling us what he might or might not do at the end of the year. That stuff should stay in house until it happens.


Mike I agree, and appreciate your objectivity, especially on the in house items.

Regarding the changing approach of their operations, it might just be the timing. Maybe, hopefully, their plan is to increase spending once the "prospects" start to fill the roster and to add the necessary components of a winner. Building a longer-term successful club requires both in-house and FA's. That is my take on what they are planning to do.

So, in a general sense, they are not changing the model, but have shown they are prepared to change their approach to FA signings as witnessed this past year. To be perfectly honest, this team is not ready for a major signing or two of elite players. I hope that when this team is close to a championship caliber team, they will add the necessary pieces without blinking.

#27 drjim

drjim

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,589 posts
  • LocationSt. Paul

Posted 18 July 2014 - 09:07 AM

Thanks for the replies. I hope you are wrong on May. I think they need to try the young guys. I don't agree "two rookies is a recipe for disaster", but if it is, that is why one/both should be up this year.....


If they both came up today they wouldn't technically be rookies but I would consider them so for the point I am making. It puts excessive strain on a staff to have two guys without the innings built up in the same rotation to start the year. It is not about performance per se, but consistent ability to go 5-6 innings for 30+ starts, 180+ innings. That is really hard to do.

Keep May in AAA, Pelfrey in bullpen, and Berrios close to ready in AA, and you are talking about legitimate quality depth to start the season.

Do that, add a bat or two, have a prospect or two emerge and you are on to something.
Papers...business papers.

#28 laloesch

laloesch

    Member

  • Members
  • 741 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 09:18 AM

Today Phil Miller has a thought provoking piece in which he quotes Jim Pohlad on the state of the team. Here are a few of the interesting nuggets:

On prospects:

On how close they are:

On the winning road trip relative to their overall success:

What are your reactions to these comments? Is Jim Pohlad just worn out from three years of losing and the cynicism shown through or is this just the kind of straight-forward, realistic talk many of us would like to see more of?


I think Jim is getting impatient and frustrated. They built Target Field with the intention of bringing in A LOT MORE revenue and just last season the new cable deal they signed has netted them an additional 25-30 million on top of that.

Money is no longer the obstacle to winning. Longtime fans have always known that the Twins Achilles heel for decades was the lack of revenues. That simply is not the case anymore. Sure we're not the Yankees, but there is more than enough revenue available for this team to compete and be a post season threat. If anything the Twins are still holding back for the right opportunity (they misjudged how close they were in 2007) to go all in as they operate on 49-54% of their revenues, which is extremely conservative compared to some franchises.

This exposes what I think is the issue. Jim Pohlad is now questioning his staff from Dave St. Peter on down. Is Terry Ryan the General Manager that you want running the show? What about Rob Antony his assistant? How about the field manager, Ron Gardenhire and his assistants? What about the director of scouting, Deron Johnson or VP of player personnel, Mike Radcliff? Jim's frustration is likely being directed at these guys because they can't hide behind the money issue anymore.

I have a sneaking suspicion that if things don't get better in 2015 that it will be the last season of Gardenhire and his posy (Anderson included) and Molitor will be promoted to interim manager.

I also think that Ryan will be pressured to start making changes related to player development or he will be on the hot seat as well. Especially if this current group of promising prospect don't work out (May, Meyer, Buxton, Gordon, Sano, Rosario, etc.).

Changes are definitely coming. They aren't going to stand fast like in the early 2000's when contraction was a threat and stadium negotiations were the focus of attention. Those excuses are long gone, it's time to produce.

Edited by laloesch, 18 July 2014 - 09:56 AM.


#29 jay

jay

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,503 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 09:18 AM

One key difference is Antony called out specific players, Pohlad was taking generally about the team. I think that distinction is pretty important.


Sure, but to what effect? I think you'd expect that given the differences in their roles.

#30 jay

jay

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,503 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 09:26 AM

Pohlad can give lip service to change, but he fired Bill Smith when it was suggested that the payroll go to about $130 million.


Hard to see how spending another $30M the last couple of years would have made this team competitive...

Twins unless lucky will need a couple of outfielders for a 2 year term, and high level free agent want more than 2 years. It makes no sense to add another pitcher unless you add an ace and eat Mike Pelfrey's salary for next year, and give some money to possibly trade Nolasco and open a spot for that ace. Adding an ace is no sure thing and will cost $20-$25 million a year. That should only be given to a pitcher that is around 26-28 so you pay for there most effective years.


I don't see anyone who fits that description, so I think you are saying they should not go sign any big contracts this offseason?

Edited by ChiTownTwinsFan, 18 July 2014 - 10:00 AM.


#31 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 11,326 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 09:30 AM

Sure, but to what effect? I think you'd expect that given the differences in their roles.


I would suggest that neither role warrants public humiliation of young players.

#32 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 10,892 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 09:34 AM

One key difference is Antony called out specific players, Pohlad was taking generally about the team. I think that distinction is pretty important.


As it should be. I doubt Pohlad is going to go full-Steinbrenner any time soon, but this recent interview is reminiscent of his tough talk and honest self-assessment last September. And the timing of the contents in this interview is interesting, seemingly, in terms of PR, the club should be slapping itself on the back and basking in the after-glow of the All Star Game successes both on the field and off. That Pohlad is willing to dish out a new round of tough talk at this point in time indicates to me that more significant changes are coming- up to and including, personnel moves going into the upcoming deadline, and then out to the next 120 days.

#33 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 10,892 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 09:36 AM

I would suggest that neither role warrants public humiliation of young players.


Consider the source on that one, a true novice in the acting GM role, demonstrating that he was in over his head.

#34 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    26th Man

  • Twins Mods
  • 12,529 posts
  • LocationNatick MA

Posted 18 July 2014 - 09:38 AM

Hard to see how spending another $30M the last couple of years would have made this team competitive...


Moderator's note: threads that get sidetracked into re-hashing the Bill Smith situation have not trended toward excellence, and we should stick to the topic here.

#35 DaveW

DaveW

    <3 Mark Derosa <3

  • Members
  • 10,748 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 09:39 AM

Pohlad was taking generally about the team. I think that distinction is pretty important.


Because he likely doesn't even watch the team, just another bad owner in the sad history of Minnesota sports owners. If he wanted to "fix" this team he should have figured this out years ago.

Norm Green the scum bag who couldn't keep it in his pants and moved the Wild from the State of Hockey!
Calvin Griffin the racist.
Carl Pohlad the man who tried to rob the city of Minnesota from its team. (But a better man by comparison as he was a WWII vet and never a criminal)
Ziggy Wilf- Crook, should be doing 15 years for fraud/Racketeering.

 "1 out of 17 ain't bad"


#36 ND_TROOPER_GUY

ND_TROOPER_GUY

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 5 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 09:46 AM

What are your reactions to these comments? Is Jim Pohlad just worn out from three years of losing and the cynicism shown through or is this just the kind of straight-forward, realistic talk many of us would like to see more of?


Typical passive aggressive MN talk. I'd almost prefer this talk versus most standard drivel that usually comes out.


On a side note how do you guys feel about Gardy's post game pressers? Open enough? To me he is almost Bill Belichekequske at times.
Hicksy? Why Ron Why?

#37 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 11,326 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 09:47 AM

Because he likely doesn't even watch the team, just another bad owner in the sad history of Minnesota sports owners. I


Is that why we have the same leadership for the last 20 years? Indifference? Not a ringing endorsement of Ryan and Gardy then. Plus I'm not sure bashing the owners personally here is constructive for any sort of dialogue.

#38 Boom Boom

Boom Boom

    Cham-Peen of the World

  • Members
  • 1,717 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 09:54 AM

After hearing Dozier and Perkins recently talk about how the Twins are much improved and have a real shot, it's a splash of cold water in the face. Kind of refreshing.

#39 jay

jay

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,503 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 10:42 AM

Moderator's note: threads that get sidetracked into re-hashing the Bill Smith situation have not trended toward excellence, and we should stick to the topic here.


Yeah, agreed. Sorry I took a nibble at the bait. The shiny spinner was so shiny.

#40 jay

jay

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,503 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 10:49 AM

I would suggest that neither role warrants public humiliation of young players.


We must have different definitions of humiliation. If the owner can talk about the team, I don't see why the GM can't talk about players when warranted. Otherwise, it's just more generalities without specific, individual accountability. That shouldn't be limited to the players and includes the rest of the staff... however, any staff statements need to be a multiple more cautious given how easy it is to start the "fire X" talk.