Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

The Store

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Photo

When the window's open........

  • Please log in to reply
156 replies to this topic

#1 Kenneth Kitsom

Kenneth Kitsom

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 15 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 11:46 PM

With the next group of prospects coming up, will Ryan add the final piece when they're ready to contend? He pretty much wasted Mauer and Morneau's prime years when that window was open. Instead he chose to hoard his prospects and predictably none of them turned out anyway.

In 2004 the team could have used a bat and and arm. Instead they went to the postseason with Lew Ford and the terrified rookie Jason Kubel at DH, and the hittable sinkerballer Silva as the 3rd starter.

In 2006, Ryan's major acquisition was Phil Nevin to join Jason Tyner as quite possibly the worst DH platoon ever assembled. Not to mention nothing done to bolster a pitching staff with Brad Radke's shredded shoulder hanging on by a thread.

In 2007 he said they were buyers and instead traded Castillo for nothing. That was officially the moment where Santana basically said "get me the hell out of here".

When you're good, you trade prospects and go for broke. When you're bad, you trade veterans for prospects and rebuild. The Twins? They do neither. They just kind of wallow around in the middle, unsure of what the hell they want to do, so they just do nothing. NO DIRECTION WHATSOEVER. Doesn't there just come a time where you gut the front office and coaching staff and start over? I've never seen an organization so stale. So behind the times. They need new blood. New ideas. New philosophies. IT'S TIME.

Edited by Kenneth Kitsom, 18 June 2013 - 11:48 PM.


#2 howieramone1406390264

howieramone1406390264

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 715 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 12:56 AM

I don't think the Twins are for sale.

#3 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 9,411 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 06:40 AM

When you're good, you trade prospects and go for broke. When you're bad, you trade veterans for prospects and rebuild. The Twins? They do neither. They just kind of wallow around in the middle, unsure of what the hell they want to do, so they just do nothing.


There are plenty of teams that don't "go for broke" every time they have a winning season. Those teams also seem to maintain a pretty high level of competition year in and year out. That's hardly a coincidence. You can be the Brewers or you can be the Cardinals. Which would you prefer? An all-out shot at glory for 1-2 seasons (that can still ultimately fail) or a steady hand getting to the playoffs every season and then seeing what happens from there? I'll take the latter every time, as we've seen how often those "go for broke" teams fail in the playoffs.

And your idea of "wallowing in the middle" is vastly different from mine. The Blue Jays perennially wallow in the middle. The Twins, on the other hand, went to the playoffs six times last decade. Would I have liked to see them walk away with a ring? Yes. Would I have liked to see a few more aggressive trades? Sure, if they made sense.

This team is very conservative. But that's not only a weakness, it's also a strength and part of the reason why they were so successful in the 2000s. You may disagree with their actions but that doesn't mean the front office is stupid.

#4 jimbo92107

jimbo92107

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 554 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 07:30 AM

This is a good example of firing your gun without really aiming at anything. I do it myself, but I try not to type it and post it without a bit more research into specifics.

Sure, there may have been moves Terry Ryan could have made that would have worked out better, but which ones, and would they not have required more than a few tough predictions, especially about the future?

Remember Jason Marquis? Man, what a bust. That guy couldn't pitch his way out of... Oh, wait, now he's pitching great, a year after we had him. Not to mention RA Dickey, that worthless knuckleballer... Oh wait, he won 22 games the year after we let him go.

It goes on and on, and every one reading this could probably cite at least a couple examples of guys that should have been at least good, but flopped here, then went elsewhere and played great.

However, there's a more than a little selective memory going on, too. Most of the guys the Twins got rid of did not go on to have monster seasons with other teams.

When you want to take grouchy shots at Twins executives, you should consider the constraints they work under. Cheapo owners, players that don't want to come here, and just bad luck with guys like Marquis and Dickey. You should also acknowledge that despite the bad luck and low-end payroll, this team won its division several times not long ago, with a pretty good style of team baseball.

Even teams with $200 million dollar payrolls don't always win the Series. Imagine the abysmal stupidity it takes to fail with that kind of money. Makes the whole business look like a crap shoot.

#5 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,542 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 07:37 AM

In 2007 he said they were buyers and instead traded Castillo for nothing. That was officially the moment where Santana basically said "get me the hell out of here".



For nothing?! For nothing?! If not for that trade we would not have fan favorite Drew Butera.

I'm not big on trading away the prospects, I'd rather the team predicted team needs better and filled the holes in free agency. Even so, there are times to make these trades like early this century when the Twins had outfield prospects everywhere with Torii Hunter and Jacque Jones as mainstays and Michael Cuddyer, Michael Restovich, Michael Ryan, Garrett Jones, Brian Buchanan, Dustin Mohr and Bobby Keilty all fighting for their chance to play.

Ryan ended up making nice trades flipping Kielty for Shannon Stewart and Buchanan for Jason Bartlett. You'd think he would have realized he could keep dealing from his OF surplus but he didn't. Restovich was such a highly rated prospect and there was never going to be room for him. Considering what Buchanon and Kielty brought back, Restovich might have landed a really nice player.

#6 drjim

drjim

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,546 posts
  • LocationSt. Paul

Posted 19 June 2013 - 07:44 AM

There are plenty of teams that don't "go for broke" every time they have a winning season. Those teams also seem to maintain a pretty high level of competition year in and year out. That's hardly a coincidence. You can be the Brewers or you can be the Cardinals. Which would you prefer? An all-out shot at glory for 1-2 seasons (that can still ultimately fail) or a steady hand getting to the playoffs every season and then seeing what happens from there? I'll take the latter every time, as we've seen how often those "go for broke" teams fail in the playoffs.

And your idea of "wallowing in the middle" is vastly different from mine. The Blue Jays perennially wallow in the middle. The Twins, on the other hand, went to the playoffs six times last decade. Would I have liked to see them walk away with a ring? Yes. Would I have liked to see a few more aggressive trades? Sure, if they made sense.

This team is very conservative. But that's not only a weakness, it's also a strength and part of the reason why they were so successful in the 2000s. You may disagree
with their actions but that doesn't mean the front office is stupid.


You bring up two important things here.

The Cardinals are definitely the model the Twins should strive for and attempt to copy going forward. They are good in all aspects of being a strong, consistent organization that should have sustained success.

The second point was about the Twins being conservative. Yes. And as you said this can be good and bad and also frustrating for a fan. I personally wish they were more progressive and strategic over conservative and methodical but both methods can and do work.

#7 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 7,400 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 07:52 AM

This is the delta between McPhail and Ryan.....Andy did go for it when the team was close.

#8 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,542 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 07:55 AM

You bring up two important things here.

The Cardinals are definitely the model the Twins should strive for and attempt to copy going forward. They are good in all aspects of being a strong, consistent organization that should have sustained success.

The second point was about the Twins being conservative. Yes. And as you said this can be good and bad and also frustrating for a fan. I personally wish they were more progressive and strategic over conservative and methodical but both methods can and do work.


I agree the Twins should emulate the Cardinals but they aren't conservative. I can't think of any team that is successful on the field consistantly and conservative in as many aspects of the game that the Twins appear to be. Maybe the A's and Rays in terms of financial conservatism but that is due to those teams being in terrible financial situations. Those teams make up for it by not being conservative on the trade fronts. Those are wheeling and dealing GM's who have a proven track record when it comes to drafting and developing pitchers, who they later will have no qualms about agressively trading.

I'm not in favor of trading away a bunch of prospects, but then the team needs to fill it's holes in free agency. Because there WILL be holes. Always.

Edited by nicksaviking, 19 June 2013 - 07:58 AM.


#9 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 07:59 AM

With the next group of prospects coming up, will Ryan add the final piece when they're ready to contend?


I'm not sure the window will be open any time soon. We don't know how many of our valued prospects will flourish or how many will bust. If they flourish, they certainly won't all flourish right away. Adjustment times will be needed for most if not all.

There seems to be a growing assumption that our guys will come up, all succeed and we'll have this strong group for 5, 6 years or so. There are no guarantees. That's one reason why it's so frustrating to see when people defend the lack of spending by saying wait a couple years till we are contenders. First, you always try to improve your club, especially when the spending won't hurt in the future, and second, where's the guarantee we'll be contenders in a couple years? Heck even if a majority of our prospects end up being good major leaguers, it's not going to be right away.

Edited by ThePuck, 19 June 2013 - 08:15 AM.


#10 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 5,889 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 08:11 AM

I partially agree with you here Kenneth, my quarrel with your point is about the "all-in" and dealing prospects. One of the things I like best about Ryan is that he won't sacrifice the long-term strength of the organization for rentals. That strategy isn't the golden ticket to World Series titles that some seem to think and it can badly damage the future product.

However, where Ryan worries me greatly is in using FA and cash resources. Not moving prospects is wise because they are the foundation of the future for a club, but available cash is nothing but pocket-stuffing for ownership. That resource should be used to it's fullest available extent to make the team better so long as the team won't horde it for future mega-spending. Ryan is public about loathing any deal that is 4 years or more (especially for pitching) which basically takes you out of playing with the big boys.

That has to change in the next 3-4 years, or we may be making a list much like you did ten years from now.

#11 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 9,411 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 08:12 AM

I'm not in favor of trading away a bunch of prospects, but then the team needs to fill it's holes in free agency. Because there WILL be holes. Always.


This is why last offseason was so frustrating. Hey, I understand the reasoning to not pursue Anibal Sanchez or Edwin Jackson. The Twins were a long way from competitive and they could spend $30m+ to waste 2-3 years of those players' prime years.

But that doesn't mean you don't spend any money.

And when this team is competitive again, they damned well better open that checkbook. There's simply no reason not to do it.

I agree with the premise of "strong farm equals strong franchise". I don't believe in going for broke most of the time and rolling the dice on a single season. On the other hand, if you're not going to trade away prospects, you damned well better buy from free agents, especially if you have the money to do it.

And the Twins have the money to do it.

#12 Tibs

Tibs

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 805 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 08:38 AM

I wonder what the Twins would be like if they let the fans run the organization. That would be an interesting concept.

#13 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 7,400 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 08:41 AM

I wonder what the Twins would be like if they let the fans run the organization. That would be an interesting concept.


I wonder what it would be like if Ryan had done what McPhail did. Neither your fantasy or mine will come true though.

What I just typed is probably an opinion, not a fact. I mean, I'm usually right, so you should maybe assume it is or will be a fact soon, but that's up to you. :)


#14 jay

jay

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,252 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 08:56 AM

I wonder what the Twins would be like if they let the fans run the organization. That would be an interesting concept.


Our active roster would consist of 9 albatross contracts and 16 19-year-old prospects that we want to develop at the MLB level.

#15 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,542 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 09:00 AM

I wonder what the Twins would be like if they let the fans run the organization. That would be an interesting concept.


The reply is a harsher dig on Terry Ryan than I'd prefer to give but since you wanted to play this game:

I wonder what the Twins would look like if they let Andrew Friedman, Brian Sabean, John Mozeliak, Dave Dombrowski, Frank Wren, John Daniels or Billy Beane run the organization.

#16 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 5,160 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 09:02 AM

Based on the fan posts I've seen here, the fans cannot even agree how to run the organization.. Half of them would spend 300M on any available free agent, and the other half would trade off the farm for a few marginal upgrades.

I tend to agree with Brock and Levi, there's definitely some room on the FA side of things, but given where the Twins are right now, strengthening the farm is a priority. Trading off prospects for established players right now can only be described as foolish. Even signing free agents might make the team more competitive, but hurts them in the draft/international FA market as well. As it stands today, I think we pick 7th next year... A few more wins and that might be 10th. A few more losses and we are back in the top 5, and when picking that high, there's a huge difference between what we get. I see the FA market as a way to fill in the gaps as the next wave hits; I'm not sure it makes sense during a rebuild. Some guys won't cut it or we will still have postions of need, and FA can plug that hole, but not until then.

I realize that the farm is stocked now, but rushing the rebuild will deplete it quicker and give us less time at the top (and potentially less elite teams to win a WS).

#17 Guest_USAFChief_*

Guest_USAFChief_*
  • Guests

Posted 19 June 2013 - 09:05 AM

I wonder what the Twins would be like if they let the fans run the organization. That would be an interesting concept.


I wonder what the Twins would be like if ownership was committed first and foremost to winning, rather than financial security.

#18 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 7,400 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 09:07 AM

Who here suggested trading prospects, now? I think the OP asked if Ryan would trade prospects when the MLB team is good, and needs to fill holes. I think he asked if they would sign free agents to fill holes when they are good, not now. Based on his history, the answer is no, he will not.

What I just typed is probably an opinion, not a fact. I mean, I'm usually right, so you should maybe assume it is or will be a fact soon, but that's up to you. :)


#19 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 09:12 AM

Who here suggested trading prospects, now?


In fairness, it's hard to slam an opposing view if you don't use extremes to make a point...

#20 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,542 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 09:16 AM

As it stands today, I think we pick 7th next year... A few more wins and that might be 10th. A few more losses and we are back in the top 5, and when picking that high, there's a huge difference between what we get.


Especially with the excitement of the draft still lingering this is always something fun to think about, but at some point the goal is for the Twins first pick to be #30. As 1991 demonstrated it certainly is possible to go from a top 5 pick to #30 but it's unlikely. At some point you likely have to methodically start increasing your win total. From the current standings, the Twins look to be drafting at #9 right now. I'd like a top 5 pick, but it would probably be better for the development of the young players at the MLB level that they don't get accustomed to losing.

#21 jay

jay

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,252 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 09:20 AM

I wonder what the Twins would look like if they let Andrew Friedman, Brian Sabean, John Mozeliak, Dave Dombrowski, Frank Wren, John Daniels or Billy Beane run the organization.


A number of those options are based off how the team has performed recently. Not far in the past, fans of those clubs were calling for their GMs to be fired. Sabean (2005-2008), Dombrowski (2005, 2008) in specific. It wasn't too long ago that the Twins were the model franchise and receiving praise from the front office on down.

#22 jay

jay

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,252 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 09:22 AM

I wonder what the Twins would be like if ownership was committed first and foremost to winning, rather than financial security.


More like the Tigers, except with a better farm system?

#23 Tibs

Tibs

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 805 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 10:06 AM

I wasn't trying to play a game, or take a jab at the front office or any of the posters here. It's clear that people don't agree with what Terry Ryan and the rest are doing, but it's also clear that there are some far-fetched ideas being thrown around. I was just wondering what it would be like if the fans had a say in the organization.

#24 stringer bell

stringer bell

    Front office apologist

  • Twins News Team
  • 4,679 posts
  • LocationZumbrota MN

Posted 19 June 2013 - 10:15 AM

I'll try to find middle ground here. There has been a giant failure for two years--players let go that should have been kept, players brought in that don't belong in MLB, and I think the Twins acknowledge this. I was OK with putting a few bandages on in 2012 and they mostly worked, at least among the position players (Willingham, Doumit, and Carroll), but the pitching hasn't been addressed satisfactorily from outside the organization. More later.

#25 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 9,411 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 10:18 AM

Our active roster would consist of 9 albatross contracts and 16 19-year-old prospects that we want to develop at the MLB level.


Only nine albatross contracts? Hell, I can think of a few posters who have advocated more than that by themselves.

#26 jay

jay

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,252 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 10:24 AM

Only nine albatross contracts? Hell, I can think of a few posters who have advocated more than that by themselves.


Tis true!

I was thinking there'd be some kind of financial limitations in place and nine would probably get us there. Then for the other 16 spots, we wouldn't consider anyone over 27 who isn't an all-star because they are AAAA filler. We'd definitely want that great prospect on the roster who could benefit next year from MLB time this year because service time (nor proper development) are even anywhere near a concern.

#27 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 9,411 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 10:26 AM

A number of those options are based off how the team has performed recently. Not far in the past, fans of those clubs were calling for their GMs to be fired. Sabean (2005-2008), Dombrowski (2005, 2008) in specific. It wasn't too long ago that the Twins were the model franchise and receiving praise from the front office on down.


Ding ding ding. Winner, winner, chicken dinner.

Ask Giants fans what they thought of Sabean from 2005-2008.

Or Tigers fans what they thought of Dombrowski in the early 2000s.

Or As fans what they thought of Beane in the late 2000s.

This argument is based on survivorship... Basically, the examination of success stories only at the time they are succeeding.

Four years ago, the Twins would have been included on that list? Why? Because they were winning. That list is not constructed by philosophy, attitude, or any other metric not called "winning".

Which is the wrong way to compile a list. Because winning is fleeting for anyone with tenure and a GM you would have considered good at his job three years ago is now bumped off that list because his team stopped winning. Or, in the case of Brian Sabean, that GM was the laughing stock of much of baseball after the Pierzynski trade, had a handful of losing seasons, was considered a failure, and now is on that list due to recent success. Was he an awful GM in 2004 and is now a great one? Unlikely.

#28 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,280 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 10:29 AM

Keep in mind that any of these "big trade splashes" would have meant us trading multiple top prospects back in the day, guys such as Liriano, Morneau, Kubel etc just for a rental.

#29 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 7,400 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 10:36 AM

Not all prospect trades are for rentals. And, even if they were, would you trade 4 years of decent/goodness, followed by this mess, for 1 or 2 WS championships? It's not like keeping all those great draft picks in the mid-2000s has led to a great team right now.....

Not all prospects turn out.....what if they had dealt, say, Joe Benson when he was a good prospect?

How is TX doing, signing all those FAs and making all those trades? And, before we write off the Jays as "proof" that going for it is a bad idea, we may want to wait until the fall......

What I just typed is probably an opinion, not a fact. I mean, I'm usually right, so you should maybe assume it is or will be a fact soon, but that's up to you. :)


#30 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 9,411 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 10:39 AM

And, before we write off the Jays as "proof" that going for it is a bad idea, we may want to wait until the fall......


Then use the Brewers. Or the Dodgers. Or any number of teams that have banked everything on 1-2 years and absolutely collapsed because of it.

The failures are far more common than the success stories.