Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Photo

Article: Dissension on Spending?

  • Please log in to reply
100 replies to this topic

#1 Nick Nelson

Nick Nelson

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 2,317 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 10:50 AM

You can view the page at http://twinsdaily.co...ion-on-Spending

#2 JB_Iowa

JB_Iowa

    Let's Keep Winning!

  • Members
  • 5,811 posts
  • LocationNorthwest Iowa

Posted 23 September 2013 - 11:12 AM

"But there's a large difference between contending and what we've seen unfold here for a third straight year. "

Amen.

#3 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 5,539 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 11:23 AM

GM's don't generally win a battle of wills with the owner.

#4 jm3319

jm3319

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 140 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 11:51 AM

GM's don't generally win a battle of wills with the owner.


I don't see how it's even a battle at this point. The owner is telling the GM to spend the OWNER's money......As a GM (or any person, really) how can it get any better than that?

Other team's GM's have to work on limited funds and would kill for a few extra million to play with. Now it seems Terry Ryan is refusing the spend, or spend very little. Blows my mind.

#5 ChiTownTwinsFan

ChiTownTwinsFan

    Moderation in all things ...

  • Twins Mods
  • 9,372 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 12:20 PM

I would think that an owner and a GM would be on the same page, or at least close to the same page. Ryan and Jim Pohlad seem to be talking from the opposite sides of the fence. That all makes me wonder what is going on internally. Why the mixed messages? Is this a bad cop/good cop routine? Or is there internal struggle? Can't see Ryan winning that if that is true. Or is this something that will all come to a head in the off season? I guess all one can do is wait and see. While the years have given me nothing to truly hope for, I still hope. Personally, if you want to change the internal culture of the organization, you need to start at the top. While I don't think Ryan will be out of a job, imo, he should be the first to go in making the changes needed to right the ship. The new GM's first job will be dealing with the manager. But, all this is just my wish for something better; it's still a waiting game.

#6 Wookiee of the Year

Wookiee of the Year

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 174 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 12:22 PM

I have to wonder if there's some Good Cop/Bad Cop going on here. Jim Pohlad wants to be seen as the benevolent owner, so he offers a quote suggesting a willingness to spend big. Meanwhile, Terry Ryan's job is to temper expectations, so he says that Free Agency isn't a silver bullet for the Twins. (Gardy, of course, just wants to keep his job, so tries to artfully deflect blame for a 90-loss season.)

Makes me think the truth lies in between--Pohlad and Ryan both know they're going to need to do a bit of spending this off-season, but it won't turn the team into play-off contenders in 2014. And if things go awry and there aren't any solid pitchers to be had for reasonable money (or fans are simply disappointed by the overall Free Agent haul), then at least Pohlad's been quoted announcing his financial commitment to the team and TR gets to look like the penny-pinching miser keeping the Twins from respectability.

#7 DuluthFan

DuluthFan

    Member

  • Members
  • 189 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 12:38 PM

It would be a very unwise negotiation strategy for any GM to say "We have an open checkbook. How much do you want?" The players would have the upper hand in the negotiations. It is the GM's job to get the best deal and field a team. He wouldn't be doing his job if he is just throwing money around. It's ok for the owner indicate that the team is looking to spend money. He will not be doing the negotiating. His statements are pointed more towards the agents to consider pointing their clients towards the Twins. If the Twins are going to go against their usual free agency dealings, the free agents need to know that considering the Twins as an option will be worth at least a call or two.

#8 Winston Smith

Winston Smith

    Old Geezer

  • Members
  • 1,688 posts
  • LocationOceania

Posted 23 September 2013 - 01:06 PM

" While the Twins have limped to three straight 90-plus loss seasons,...." more like:
Posted Image

#9 SpitefulRabbit617

SpitefulRabbit617

    Member

  • Members
  • 63 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 01:06 PM

Pfft, I'll believe Terry Ryan any day over a Pohlad. Terry Ryan isn't the one who sold us on funding a new stadium so we could increase revenue. All big name pitchers on 1 year deals. Its not like we can do any worse.

#10 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 5,539 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 01:40 PM

It would be a very unwise negotiation strategy for any GM to say "We have an open checkbook. How much do you want?" The players would have the upper hand in the negotiations. It is the GM's job to get the best deal and field a team. He wouldn't be doing his job if he is just throwing money around. It's ok for the owner indicate that the team is looking to spend money. He will not be doing the negotiating. His statements are pointed more towards the agents to consider pointing their clients towards the Twins. If the Twins are going to go against their usual free agency dealings, the free agents need to know that considering the Twins as an option will be worth at least a call or two.


I actually would disagree. Last year Ryan complained that free agents didn't want to come to Minnesota. Many people around here didn't buy it, believing that Ryan simply didn't put the best offers out there. If Ryan was being honest last year (or partially honest) then the Twins need to be out front this year with a big sign saying "Open For Business."

It's going to take an image change to attract free agents. If free agents don't want to come here due to the losing, the Twins need to be advertising that the culture has changed and they are willing to do what it takes to win. Cleveland did it last year and they didn't have trouble courting free agents.

#11 Oxtung

Oxtung

    I don't skinny dip. I chunky dunk.

  • Members
  • 1,570 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 01:49 PM

I think there are 2 reasons to believe the Pohlad's might be willing to spend. First, Jim, Robert and William might want to step out of the "cheap" shadow that Carl created with his spending habits. If that is true than what better time to show you're willing to spend than on a 90 loss team with huge holes?

Second, none of the remaining Pohlads have won a World Series. There might be a desire to bring home a championship even if it means spending to do so. Remember Carl won two early on in his tenure of ownership. Do the kids want to show they can follow in dad's footsteps?

#12 cmb0252

cmb0252

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,887 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 01:56 PM

Hicks, Arcia, Gibson, and Pinto all were able to get their feet wet in the majors this year and all should play bigger roles next year. It isn't outside of possibility that Sano, May, Meyer, Rosario, and Buxton could do the same next year. Prospects don't just bring talent to the mlb club but a huge amount of financial flexibility. The pohlads could easily sign several FAs to 3-4 year deals that will help now but won't interfere with signing the prospects which turn out to be good mlb players long term.

#13 Kwak

Kwak

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,855 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 02:00 PM

I believe there isn't any disagreement. Pohlad states a willingness to spend--as long as its according to conditions that wouldn't be agreeable. The real plan (by management) is slash payroll, feed the public the same old "ya never know" BS, and hope that somehow they can draft, develop, and "luck-out in the dumpster" before the public completely tires of their song-and-dance. It would be a real pity to build a winner years after the public has lost interest and find that TF will have crowds like Tampa Bay, Oakland, and Cleveland have today.

#14 Thrylos

Thrylos

    Yes

  • Members
  • 5,228 posts
  • LocationLehigh Valley, PA, USA
  • Twitter: thrylos98

Posted 23 September 2013 - 02:17 PM

Over time for Ryan to go.

#15 twinsnorth49

twinsnorth49

    Moderately Moderate

  • Twins Mods
  • 5,267 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 02:21 PM

Pfft, I'll believe Terry Ryan any day over a Pohlad. Terry Ryan isn't the one who sold us on funding a new stadium so we could increase revenue. All big name pitchers on 1 year deals. Its not like we can do any worse.


No TR is the one who told us he was going to get a serious starter for the rotation last winter and sold us Kevin Correia and Mike Pelfrey,

Pelfrey was a 1 yr deal (thank god), I hope to hell we can't do any worse than that.

#16 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 5,539 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 02:22 PM

I believe there isn't any disagreement. Pohlad states a willingness to spend--as long as its according to conditions that wouldn't be agreeable. The real plan (by management) is slash payroll, feed the public the same old "ya never know" BS, and hope that somehow they can draft, develop, and "luck-out in the dumpster" before the public completely tires of their song-and-dance. It would be a real pity to build a winner years after the public has lost interest and find that TF will have crowds like Tampa Bay, Oakland, and Cleveland have today.


The fans will always come back and the Pohlads know it. The end years at the Metrodome were packed despite the emptiness which allowed my unimpeded ability to snag seven batting practice balls one game I went to in the late 1990's. I went to a game once where the promotion was to give away unused tickets to Eric Milton's no-hitter because they actually had tens of thousands left that they did not issue.

#17 Rosterman

Rosterman

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,444 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 02:30 PM

The money is there to spend -- wisely, of course. Terry Ryan, use you skills to target arbitration eligible folks who may be jettisoned by their own teams, but the Twins can afford. Take a chance on some of those guys entering the overpayed years if teams cut them loose.

The joys of free agent signings is that you get players just for money, you seldom, with the new rules, lose anyone. You also have to be willing to forget your past (being the good guy giving people long contracts and NOT trading them) and do that if the opportunity arises.

You spend money. You lose on many, you win on some. Some you take the opportunity to jettison (like Willingham...let him walk to Baltimore and take that $7 million a reinvest in another comparable player).

You hear Jim Pohlad talk about spending on free agents, and he totally misses step one of the new Target Field -- "We will be able to keep our own free agents in the future" was said, I believe.

Part of the Twins problems right now is that they did let Nathan, Kuble, Cuddyer, Hunter and others walk. They weren't able to turn around Young, Pavano, Capps, Pelfry for worthwhile players. They were forced into a corner trading Santana and Liriano because they didn't want to cough up bucks to keep them...thinking hometown players would rather stay and be underpaid than leave and get paid more than you feel is responsible.

The Twins set a budget for draftee, international signing, and major league payroll. They can spend within that window, and if attendance and such rises (because you win) can spend more, but more often than not it is based on last year's revenue rather than next year's predictions. But us fans get mad when the money isn't spent and start to make up places where it does flow (owner's pockets).

Yes, they are getting up to a $25 million windfall this year from MLB. They have extra monies to spend, even more if they didn't have Correia, Willingahm and Doumit -- all three replaceabe by similar and possibly more productive others.

Beyond those three there are no trading chips that won't mortgage the Twins future. Those chips have to show if they can play in the majors and suddenly make a Hicks or Dozier or Rosaio part of a package for an arbitration-eligible overpayed potential superstar or not. Then you start dealing your minor league depth, because soon that catches up on you when you can't keep guys on the 40-man or add them because you are just too rich in potential.

I know I'm just rambling and this disappointing season comes to an end. I think the Twins need a total overall -- bring in a new general manager and manager team, revamp the whole front office, especially if ownership and team management aren't on the same page. Stop being nice. It is a business and you need to put butts, like my own, into the seats.

#18 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,905 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 02:37 PM

The quote says near and long term. In solving the club's needs that fit both criteria it would be unlikely that free agency would be a fix. Ashburyjohn had posted the interview. Ryan never said he wasn't going to sign free agents. Their top prospects they would hope to be career Twins. Long term fix for a position when they work out. He later in ashburyjohn's post said that there would be people that they would pursue. Hopefully they have learned the market. The free agent is a short term fix. Look at what is available as a free agent. Someone generally over 30. Not a long term fix in the drug testing era. Not a long term fix. Ryan wants to fix things long term. There are people he will go after. It would be looked at as a short term fix. Willingham was a short term fix until one of the young outfielders were ready. Hopefully he has learned there is little value or gain in signing 5th starters as free agents.

#19 Oldgoat_MN

Oldgoat_MN

    Afraid my optimism will damage me somehow

  • Members
  • 726 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 02:54 PM

Once upon a time I went shopping with my daughter. We were buying a shirt for my brother. I told her that I was looking for a shirt for $20. They were charging $40 for that type of shirt.
My daughter said, "Dad, that's what those shirts cost now".

Is that where Terry Ryan is now? He just is really not clear what it costs to get really quality players?

I wonder about that.

#20 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 03:00 PM

Once upon a time I went shopping with my daughter. We were buying a shirt for my brother. I told her that I was looking for a shirt for $20. They were charging $40 for that type of shirt.
My daughter said, "Dad, that's what those shirts cost now".


So, you couldn't even give your money away at that store? :-)

I bet you could go down to the dollar store and buy a few shirts and pocket the rest of the money...
Just remember: You put the lime IN the coconut. Only THEN, can you drink it all up.