Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

The Store

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Recent Blogs

From MinnCentric


Photo

Keep in mind

  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#1 VodkaDave

VodkaDave

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 97 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 02:48 PM

Seen no less then 2 threads and about a dozen posters who are already calling for major changes, firings etc. The Yankees are 0-3 The Phillies are 1-2 The Mets are 3-0 The Braves are 0-3 The Red Sox are about to be 0-3 Worrying to much about such a small sample size of games is a pointless endeavor. The hitting will come around, always does.

#2 JB_Iowa

JB_Iowa

    Cynical Oldie

  • Members
  • 4,047 posts
  • LocationNorthwest Iowa

Posted 08 April 2012 - 03:39 PM

It isn't just the small size, though. It is how tremendously ugly they have looked in losing 3. Today was a slight improvement but overall, they have looked either ill-prepared or like they don't give a d*mn (take your pick). The one thing I'm waiting to see is whether any leadership emerges. Perhaps Carroll will really take charge or, if Justin continues to get his groove back, maybe we'll see some leadership (on and off the field). Given my non-expectations for this season, I'm content to wait and see what happens. "The hitting will come around, always does. " I really question that. I've been wondering where the Twins bats are for 2 or 3 years. (Please Bruno do a fabulous job at Rochester so you can unseat Joe Vavra).

#3 twinstalker

twinstalker

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 170 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:03 PM

Let's look at it in a Bayesian way. The prior, except for those who were inordinately and irrationally optimistic, was that the Twins hitting would mostly suck, and that their manager was not good at getting the team mentally prepared for seasons/postseasons. Then you get data. The data are to the wrong side of the prior, which makes the original rational hypotheses of Twins suckiness even stronger. Pitching? The prior was for even more suckiness. Nothing really to starting moving from that position. Even if this was much worse than the Twins will look on average this year, there was ZERO that gave any hope they might be better than expected, if you look at the hitting and pitching as wholes. The Yankees must have done badly in some ways this weekend, but the prior is that it's a 90+ win team, so the events occurring this weekend likely won't change it that much, and it's much more plausible to believe it's a hiccup. For one, the best closer of all time and best last year, too, blew a save. Either he'll be back to form, or two other pitchers that no Twin can come close to will take over. Even a couple of the relievers the Twins will have to count on (Burton and Maloney) could do nothing but suck. It's an ugly, ugly looking season for the Twins. That could change, yes, but it's improbable. Even the reasons for optimism that probably won't affect the season (Morneau hitting, Swarzak pitching) can't really be looked at as anything but noise around the Twins suckiness.

Edited by twinstalker, 08 April 2012 - 04:17 PM.
Completion


#4 Terry Tiffee

Terry Tiffee

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 16 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:09 PM

Those teams also don't have one of the worst playoff records in the last 10 years, either.

#5 Thrylos

Thrylos

    Yes

  • Members
  • 4,515 posts
  • LocationLehigh Valley, PA, USA
  • Twitter: thrylos98

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:10 PM

It's these 3 games that they looked really really bad, plus the whole last season, plus the GM (who built this 2012 squad) openly saying that he is concerned about the 'pen... The Red Sox did their changes last off-season for much less reasons.
-----
Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch
http://tenthinningst...h.blogspot.com/
twitter: @thrylos98

#6 Terry Tiffee

Terry Tiffee

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 16 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:12 PM

Also, I never called for it. Just asked when the team would consider it.

#7 Montecore

Montecore

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 121 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:30 PM

Tito brings two world championships to Boston and is fired. Gardenhire's Twins are playoff embarrassments year after year after year, and then last year. He gets rid of Papi, Garza, and Hardy. What - does he have lewd pictures of the Pohlads with kids? How has Tom Kelly remained silent all these years? It makes no sense.

#8 Thrylos

Thrylos

    Yes

  • Members
  • 4,515 posts
  • LocationLehigh Valley, PA, USA
  • Twitter: thrylos98

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:34 PM

Tito brings two world championships to Boston and is fired. Gardenhire's Twins are playoff embarrassments year after year after year, and then last year. He gets rid of Papi, Garza, and Hardy. What - does he have lewd pictures of the Pohlads with kids? How has Tom Kelly remained silent all these years? It makes no sense.


For fairness' sake it was Kelly and Ryan who got rid of Papi. Ryan was quoted to say that he did not have the $ to keep both LeCroy and Ortiz and he chose LeCroy.
-----
Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch
http://tenthinningst...h.blogspot.com/
twitter: @thrylos98

#9 Terry Tiffee

Terry Tiffee

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 16 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:37 PM

Ortiz was given plenty of opportunity here and didn't pan out... I don't really blame the Twins for that.

#10 Kneelb4zerg

Kneelb4zerg

    Member

  • Members
  • 42 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:40 PM

So the Twins have one bad season, and lose the first three games of the next season, in the wake of the most successful 10 year run in franchise history (one of the best runs in all of baseball), and the best the fans can come up with is 'Fire Gardy'. Well what in the hell is that going to accomplish??

#11 Terry Tiffee

Terry Tiffee

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 16 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:44 PM

That's the problem... People actually think the last 10 years have been a success. Winning garbage divisions and being embarrassed in the playoffs is a "success"?

#12 Thrylos

Thrylos

    Yes

  • Members
  • 4,515 posts
  • LocationLehigh Valley, PA, USA
  • Twitter: thrylos98

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:48 PM

So the Twins have one bad season, and lose the first three games of the next season, in the wake of the most successful 10 year run in franchise history (one of the best runs in all of baseball), and the best the fans can come up with is 'Fire Gardy'. Well what in the hell is that going to accomplish??


Thas has not been the 10-best years of the franchise. The years between 87-and the strike would be it. (if we are talking about the Twins' part of the Franchise because the Senators had some pretty incredible runs in the late teens and in the 30s)
-----
Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch
http://tenthinningst...h.blogspot.com/
twitter: @thrylos98

#13 Kneelb4zerg

Kneelb4zerg

    Member

  • Members
  • 42 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:50 PM

That's the problem... People actually think the last 10 years have been a success. Winning garbage divisions and being embarrassed in the playoffs is a "success"?


Umm yeah it is. Making the playoffs in baseball is the hardest thing in all of sports. The Royals haven't made the playoffs for almost 30 years for Chrissakes. Did you not have fun watching all this winning over the prior decade?

#14 Kneelb4zerg

Kneelb4zerg

    Member

  • Members
  • 42 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:51 PM

Thas has not been the 10-best years of the franchise. The years between 87-and the strike would be it. (if we are talking about the Twins' part of the Franchise because the Senators had some pretty incredible runs in the late teens and in the 30s)


Fair enough but the overall winning % is higher.

#15 Montecore

Montecore

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 121 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:58 PM

They need some kind of different mindset, an emotional lift of some kind. They won't get it with Gardenhire in the dugout. The playoff debacles point to a guy unable to get his players mentally prepared. Confidence is everything, and he doesn't inspire it. I've never understood what anybody saw in this guy. What is it - that he looks like Festus from "Gunsmoke" and somehow that's charming? Only a stubborn stuck in his ways imbecile would bat Jamey Carroll second. It's just a gross insult to the fans to keep this tic around.

#16 twinstalker

twinstalker

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 170 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 05:12 PM

Heh. I shouted as loudly as I could on these internet thingies that Ortiz was their best hitter, and that Ryan was an idiot if he got rid of him. I don't think losing Ortiz was anything but an ill-informed decision by the man who is supposed to be the most informed man in the organization. Ask him why they got rid of Ortiz, and he won't give you one good reason that really stands the test. It certainly wasn't statistical or his locker room presence. They would have been able to sign him for $1.5 million at most. These "little" decisions add up. At the same time I was screaming about this, I was screaming that they need to get rid of Jacque Jones. This was fall/winter 2002 when Jones was coming off what was predictably a season he wouldn't repeat, Ortiz was their best hitter, and Kelly had been gone for over a year (for the poster who blamed him). There are all sorts of efficiencies and inefficiencies at play in this game, and Ryan has consistently been oblivious to nearly every one.

#17 twinstalker

twinstalker

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 170 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 05:16 PM

Right now a new manager won't mean crap, but he's by far the biggest reason the teams given to him underachieved. He won't be around by the time the Twins are good again, but that's mainly due to how long it's going to take.

#18 Thrylos

Thrylos

    Yes

  • Members
  • 4,515 posts
  • LocationLehigh Valley, PA, USA
  • Twitter: thrylos98

Posted 08 April 2012 - 05:59 PM

Ask him why they got rid of Ortiz, and he won't give you one good reason that really stands the test. It certainly wasn't statistical or his locker room presence. They would have been able to sign him for $1.5 million at most.
.


The one reason I heard was that they could not pay both LeCroy and Ortiz and they decided to go with LeCroy.

On the other hand (and I am opening a can of worms) LeCroy is White and Ortiz Black Latino. Not sure how much that had to do with it, but the (post-MacPhail) Twins do not have (let's say) a great record of signing and extending many minorities or going above and beyond to keep them...
-----
Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch
http://tenthinningst...h.blogspot.com/
twitter: @thrylos98

#19 Kneelb4zerg

Kneelb4zerg

    Member

  • Members
  • 42 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 06:06 PM

The one reason I heard was that they could not pay both LeCroy and Ortiz and they decided to go with LeCroy.

On the other hand (and I am opening a can of worms) LeCroy is White and Ortiz Black Latino. Not sure how much that had to do with it, but the (post-MacPhail) Twins do not have (let's say) a great record of signing and extending many minorities or going above and beyond to keep them...


LOL. Good use of the race card!!

#20 roger

roger

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 322 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 06:14 PM

Tito brings two world championships to Boston and is fired. Gardenhire's Twins are playoff embarrassments year after year after year, and then last year. He gets rid of Papi, Garza, and Hardy. What - does he have lewd pictures of the Pohlads with kids? How has Tom Kelly remained silent all these years? It makes no sense.


At the time I recall that no one signed Ortiz until late spring, March I believe. Ortiz blossomed in Boston. Now the reasons why may be another discussion, but not signing him was not a mistake at that time.

#21 Seth Stohs

Seth Stohs

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 8,028 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 06:23 PM

come on everybody. play nice. We shouldn't have to tell people not to call each other names on these boards. we can be homers. We can be a realists. we can share of different opinions. there should be no name calling, no bashing of peoples intelligence. there are no absolutes in baseball. . Period. please, do not let this become just another negative, insulting, name calling forum. thank you for your consideration!

#22 VodkaDave

VodkaDave

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 97 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 06:43 PM

come on everybody. play nice. We shouldn't have to tell people not to call each other names on these boards. we can be homers. We can be a realists. we can share of different opinions. there should be no name calling, no bashing of peoples intelligence. there are no absolutes in baseball. . Period. please, do not let this become just another negative, insulting, name calling forum. thank you for your consideration!


I typically refrain from any name calling, but I stand by my statement fully. It's one thing to disagree with the Twins front office choices, it's a totally different thing to imply race was the factor behind many of those moves, not even your worst "shock jock" sports radio hosts would bring up that sort of argument.

Nobody argues that letting Ortiz go wasn't a bad move, but the reason they did it at the time was three fold.
1. He couldn't stay healthy
2. He had ZERO defensive value
3. He didn't get along with management.

He spent parts of six major league seasons with the Twins, and though he had some success for the Twins, he never put together any sort of numbers that even suggested what was to come in Boston (read: steroids/whatever), it was a cheap cost cutting move no doubt, a bad baseball decision, a bad judgement of talent etc, but they didn't get rid of him because he wasn't white.

Wow, I can't believe I actually took time to respond to that comment, I feel like I have been trolled...

#23 Seth Stohs

Seth Stohs

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 8,028 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 06:50 PM

I completely agree with you that race had no part of your ortiz decision. my comment was actually related to people call each other idiots. that said, there are certain words that we simply can't have on the site.

#24 VodkaDave

VodkaDave

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 97 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 06:51 PM

Heh. I shouted as loudly as I could on these internet thingies that Ortiz was their best hitter,


In his best year on the Twins (2002) Ortiz was still the 4th best player OPS wise, behind such mashers as Jones, Kielty and Hunter. (Koskie was 10 points behind him, but brough significantly more value since he could actually play a position) in 2001 he was the 5th best (keep in mind these were both pretty bad teams) Again, it was an obvious mistake to get rid of him bc at 1.5 million or whatever he was a no brainer to re-sign, but nobody knew, nor there was any reason to believe he would become the MVP type player down the road.

#25 Thrylos

Thrylos

    Yes

  • Members
  • 4,515 posts
  • LocationLehigh Valley, PA, USA
  • Twitter: thrylos98

Posted 08 April 2012 - 06:51 PM

At the time I recall that no one signed Ortiz until late spring[...] but not signing him was not a mistake at that time.


Nobody argues that letting Ortiz go wasn't a bad move


VodkaDave meet roger
-----
Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch
http://tenthinningst...h.blogspot.com/
twitter: @thrylos98

#26 powrwrap

powrwrap

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 451 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 06:58 PM

Those teams also don't have one of the worst playoff records in the last 10 years, either.


Why don't you put this in your sig and then it will be seen with every one of your posts and not just 75% of them?
[FONT=comic sans ms][COLOR=#000000]"Baseball is like church. Many attend, few understand." [/COLOR][/FONT]

#27 John Bonnes

John Bonnes

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 5,004 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 07:51 PM

As someone who was writing throughout the time that the Twins released Ortiz, I have always had trouble criticizing that move. I wrote about it several times per week for several weeks. At the time Ortiz had some serious flaws - he was hurt a lot, he couldn't hit lefties at all, he seemed like purely a DH and he was about to get expensive. Ryan went to the winter meetings clearly trying to trade him and came back frustrated that he couldn't find any takers. He released him and Boston ended up signing him (for just $1.25M) and a couple of other guys (Millar, Jeremy Giambi and someone else if memory serves) with those four guys fighting for two spots. Ortiz was clearly the last guy in the race coming into spring training. I can't remember how he worked his way into the lineup, but if you look at 2003, you'll notice he wasn't an everyday player until the end of April. It really was out of nowhere. Regarding a race discussion, I don't think that's out of bounds on this forum. I don't think Ortiz is an especially compelling data point for all the reasons I just listed. Bottom line: he wasn't the same guy here.

#28 CDog

CDog

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 856 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 09:37 PM

Ortiz... It certainly wasn't statistical


Over six years with time at the majors he'd accumulated fewer than 2.5 wins above replacement. Not to mention, his signing for $1.25M (as has already been pointed out) is an indication that not everyone else in the world knew all about this secret that he was going to be awesome.

#29 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,967 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 08:04 AM

As someone who was writing throughout the time that the Twins released Ortiz, I have always had trouble criticizing that move. I wrote about it several times per week for several weeks. At the time Ortiz had some serious flaws - he was hurt a lot, he couldn't hit lefties at all, he seemed like purely a DH and he was about to get expensive. Ryan went to the winter meetings clearly trying to trade him and came back frustrated that he couldn't find any takers. He released him and Boston ended up signing him (for just $1.25M) and a couple of other guys (Millar, Jeremy Giambi and someone else if memory serves) with those four guys fighting for two spots. Ortiz was clearly the last guy in the race coming into spring training. I can't remember how he worked his way into the lineup, but if you look at 2003, you'll notice he wasn't an everyday player until the end of April. It really was out of nowhere.

Regarding a race discussion, I don't think that's out of bounds on this forum. I don't think Ortiz is an especially compelling data point for all the reasons I just listed. Bottom line: he wasn't the same guy here.



Pretty much this.. Anyone in the league could have had him for a C level prospect, but didn't bite due to cost. Boston got him for far less then what he would have had if Minnesota had kept him... that's the down side to the CBA and arbitration. You can also argue that he would have never become what he is now had he stayed..

#30 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 10,124 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks

Posted 09 April 2012 - 08:48 AM

Hindsight is 20-20... It's obvious now that letting Ortiz go was a mistake but it wasn't obvious at the time. The Baseball Highways are littered with these things and and you can only see it looking through the rear view mirror. If you want to hang someone over Ortiz... Get a lotta Rope because there are baseball execs everywhere that deserve the noose in that context. The Twins got Ortiz from the Mariners. I'm sure the Mariners in hindsight should be kicking themselves as well. The Mariners also traded Shin Soo Choo to the Indians for not much. The Astros and Marlins are kicking themselves over letting Johan Santana go. The Dodgers would love to have Shane Victorino on the roster right now. They had him but he was a rule 5 selection by the Padres and returned to the Dodgers. Then he was a rule 5 selection by the Phillies and the Phillies tried to send him back to the Dodgers. This time the Dodgers said no and he remained in the Philly system. The Indians gave Brandon Phillips away to the Cincinatti Reds. The D-backs left Dan Uggla unprotected. The Orioles, Rays, Royals and Pirates all had Jose Bautista and the Blue Jays got him from the Pirates for next to nothing. The Rays would love to have Josh Hamilton and have nothing to show for him. The Giants would love to have kept Joe Nathan or Liriano. This is just what I can think of using the very top of my head. There are more out there. The baseball highways are littered. To be upset about David Ortiz is a tough grading curve.