Souhan's Questions

[The Wise One]

So the FO is 100% responsible for this?

 

 

 

Let's try some hypotheticals:

 

Player A - goes from batting .325 to .285 but raises his OBP from .340 to .350. He regressed in BA but progressed in OBP - which matters more, did he progress?

 

Player B - Raises his OPS from .742 to .755 but goes from passable defense to horrific defense - did he progress?

 

I could come up with dozens of these and none of them can solely be tied to the work of the manager or the field staff. The might be facts insofar as "these happened" but they are not facts insofar as "these happened because of Ron Gardenhire". For example, if Hicks comes back and hits .300 all of September in the big leagues...does Gardy get credit for that?

 

The problem is that you believe interpreting facts is objective, when what you are describing is most definitely subjective. It's in the very nature of how you lay out your criteria and define "progressing". And most certainly it comes about in how you determine who is credited.

 

The scouts who recommend the players, the scouting director who drafts them, the farm director who maps a timetable that is not met, the medical profession for not having a way to identify who will break down, the player who quits working hard, the pro scouts and director who recommend players, God for designing a body that is not a machine and breaks down unexpectedly, whoever noticed something in a pitcher's mechanics or motion and thought they could make them a better pitcher, John McDonalds knee, players having the option of wan't to play where they want, Liriano's psychologist, maybe even the snow in Vermont

Is that clear that it is many people's fault

 

I don't care about hypotheticals

 

 

 

Given the same group of players, how could a different manager made the record 342-239?

[JB_Iowa]

The scouts who recommend the players, the scouting director who drafts them, the farm director who maps a timetable that is not met, the medical profession for not having a way to identify who will break down, the player who quits working hard, the pro scouts and director who recommend players, God for designing a body that is not a machine and breaks down unexpectedly, whoever noticed something in a pitcher's mechanics or motion and thought they could make them a better pitcher, John McDonalds knee, players having the option of wan't to play where they want, Liriano's psychologist

Is that clear that it is many people's fault

 

I don't care about hypotheticals

 

 

And all that gives you is an excuse for no one EVER being responsible for ANYTHING.

[TheLeviathan]

Is that clear that it is many people's fault

 

As JB said, when everyone is responsible for everything - no one is responsible for anything.

 

I don't care about hypotheticals

 

You don't care....but then proceed to post one of your own? Huh?

 

In any case, the hypotheticals hopefully showed you how objective data stops being objective when you interpret and purposefully apply it subjectively. So that high ground isn't there in your argument.

 

As for your hypothetical, you're once again conveniently propping your argument with the ridiculous flip of expectations. It'd be nice if we could just talk about the merits of what you're proposing rather than constantly repeating arguments that are pristine examples of using confirmation bias. Or hiding from the consequences of what you propose.

[Badsmerf]

You can't make the argument that a manager can't be held accountable for W/L when they are directly responsible for who plays and who doesn't. Sure, the 25-man roster hasn't be good and its highly unlikely a different manager would have made any of those teams a .500 team. The problem is, you and I don't know that for sure. What I do know, is what I've seen from him over the years. You can't simply "throw out" past occurrences.

 

If you don't want any blame put on Gardy, fine. Put it on Terry Ryan then. And take him out of his role. I say they both deserve blame and both need to be let go after the season.

[The Wise One]

As JB said, when everyone is responsible for everything - no one is responsible for anything.

 

 

 

 

You don't care....but then proceed to post one of your own? Huh?

 

In any case, the hypotheticals hopefully showed you how objective data stops being objective when you interpret and purposefully apply it subjectively. So that high ground isn't there in your argument.

 

As for your hypothetical, you're once again conveniently propping your argument with the ridiculous flip of expectations. It'd be nice if we could just talk about the merits of what you're proposing rather than constantly repeating arguments that are pristine examples of using confirmation bias. Or hiding from the consequences of what you propose.

 

You blame the manager for the record. All I asked you then what a different manager could have done to have reversed the record. You like hypotheticals and wanted to play the game. I gave you one you could not answer. So then there really isn't anything a manager could have done to change the record as you don't answer the question.Shoot the questioner.

It would be nice, to talk merits of something. Please by all means, start anytime.

[TheLeviathan]

You blame the manager for the record. All I asked you then what a different manager could have done to have reversed the record.

 

Yes, because a 100 game improvement is a reasonable hypothetical. My hypotheticals were asking you to explain how you could objectively decide between performance differentials and the truth is you can't. The ground erodes a bit more and here we are again.

 

I don't blame Gardenhire for the record. I blame him, IN PART, for the record. A distinction I've made repeatedly that you have repeatedly misconstrued. A better manager might have been able to win an extra 20 or so games (Which amounts to 4-5 wins different per season) with shifts, more aggressive baserunning, better lineups, platooning, etc. Basically utilizing modern managerial strategies. It's subjective, which I fully admit.

 

The awful record - that's an objective fact. One I believe he shares some responsibility for. If you want to talk merits I'd still like you to explain the following:

 

The Twins have been adding talent (Hughes, Willingham, Suzuki, Nolasco, etc.), Gardenhire has apparently been progressing the majority of the young talent, and yet we've been in a four year cycle of non-improvement. How is that possible?

[The Wise One]

And all that gives you is an excuse for no one EVER being responsible for ANYTHING.

 

People are responsible for the job they do.

Has there been changes in people's jobs over the last few years? Different scouts on the amateur and pro level? Different scouting directors? A change in the general manager position in the last few years. Different trainers and or medical advisers. Somebody, with the changeover in personnel, has been held responsible for the job they do. Some things that really impact an organization no one can be held responsible for, like a knee to Morneau's forehead, the blowout of an arm.

 

Different people through the years have made critical mistakes. The time to correct them is much longer than it is to make them. Bad drafts take years to show their effect, as do good ones.

SO I kind of take offense to your statement. People want to blame one person and every thing will be all well. Get rid of this one person and all will be well.

Ultimately if falls on the owner who hired the club president, who hired the vice presidents, who hired .....

[TheLeviathan]

People want to blame one person and every thing will be all well. Get rid of this one person and all will be well.

Ultimately if falls on the owner who hired the club president, who hired the vice presidents, who hired .....

 

Who has said this? Everyone you are responding to has said he's partly responsible. Why the scarecrow?

 

Also, your last sentence betrays the rest of your point. You don't assign any responsibility when you spread it among everyone. That's not how any organization has effectively worked ever.

[Guest USAFChief]

I'm going to ask everyone to review TD posting policy. Long, protracted arguments between two posters are better handled through PMs, and/or by just letting it drop.

 

The world will not end if someone else gets the last word in.

[drjim]

I'm going to ask everyone to review TD posting policy. Long, protracted arguments between two posters are better handled through PMs, and/or by just letting it drop.

 

The world will not end if someone else gets the last word in.

 

I've quite enjoyed the elaborate mating ritual. In public for all of us to see.

[70charger]

Whatever. Pick, Nitpick, Forget the concept and bicker

 

Heh. What, are you new here?

[glunn]

Intelligent debate is fun and informative for everyone.

 

Bickering turns off a lot of readers. There are plenty of Twins sites where bickering is plentiful. If you like bickering, please go to one of them, then come back here if you want to read or participate in a respectful, intelligent debate.

 

What I would like to see is for someone to take this thread back on track. We are all Twins fans and we are better than this thread might suggest.

[oldguy10]

glunn, good points about bickering especially about the players but what about ownership and management? Personally I think we all should come down hard on ownership that promised big increases in payroll after Target Field was in place and then did not deliver. How do we parse that out intelligently without being too out of line or actually bitter?

[AlwaysinModeration]

I don't know how much of the Twins success/failure can be attributed to Gardy or Ryan. However, the 3.5 years of poor performance provide an opportunity for change in leadership, and I hope that the ownership takes it. I think that Gardy has some clear flaws that I hope would change with a new manager--most notably the lack of platoons, and the reliance on typecast batting orders. I also am not sure he is the right guy to manage a bunch of young players, as he seems to have a deep distrust of rookies/overconfidence in veterans. I think there are a lot of intangibles with Gardy--like the clubhouse, loyalty, and maybe even willingness to get ejected--that might all be missed. However, the Twins will hire an internal replacement, so some of those things will be retained, undoubtedly.

 

As for Ryan, I think his strength is gathering prospects, although some of his successes have simply fallen in his lap (Nats pursuit of Span comes to mind). I haven't been overly impressed by his utilization of the budget--the free agents he has targeted, or his efforts to sell assets at peak value, or lock up the right players at the right time. (He could have extended Mauer for cheaper before his MVP year, for example.) In general I also haven't loved the roster management (25 or 40)....it doesn't seem like he has tried to maximize the caliber/upside at every (precious) spot on those rosters. I hope Ryan trades at least some of the team's several expiring assets in the next week and leaves the cupboard bursting as much as possible. He would get credit for the Twins' future wave of success.

 

So I would like to see both Gardy and Ryan go. To replace Gardy, I think Molitor is the obvious likely choice, but I think I would prefer Mientkiewicz. As for Ryan's replacement, I would not like Antony, and would hope that they do an extensive external search.

[TheLeviathan]

I don't know how much of the Twins success/failure can be attributed to Gardy or Ryan. However, the 3.5 years of poor performance provide an opportunity for change in leadership, and I hope that the ownership takes it.

 

Well said.

[bird]

Would Terry Ryan have signed Miguel Sano?

Bill Smith offered 3.15 million dollars which was a club record for an International Player. Smith had outbid a number of Teams for Sano.

 

I believe the Twins would have signed Sano. Smith didn't make that call in a vacuum.

[old nurse]

Billy Bean built a winning team that became a losing team for a few years and was not fired. He rebuilt and won

Sabean in San Fran, same thing

Dombroski in Detroit, not as sustained the first time through

 

The only GM that built a winner from rubble in the last couple decades that was fired might be Jockety

 

A GM that has built a winning team has a longer leash. I would doubt Ryan is going anywhere.

[old nurse]

I believe the Twins would have signed Sano. Smith didn't make that call in a vacuum.

 

The year before they signed Arcia and Santana under Ryan's watch. Ryan did have IFA signings in his first tenure. The question would be would Ryan spend top dollar on a chance. I do not know if he had to outbid people for the talent he signed, so the answer would be, one will never know.

[Badsmerf]

Billy Bean built a winning team that became a losing team for a few years and was not fired. He rebuilt and won

Sabean in San Fran, same thing

Dombroski in Detroit, not as sustained the first time through

 

The only GM that built a winner from rubble in the last couple decades that was fired might be Jockety

 

A GM that has built a winning team has a longer leash. I would doubt Ryan is going anywhere.

Billy beanne has had 4 losing seasons in 16 years, and those were 2011, 09, 08, 07. He has won over 90 games 10 times and 100 twice.

 

Sabean has two world series championships in a little less time than Terry Ryan has had. You really want to compare the two?

 

Dombroski has been to the playoffs 5 times, alcs 4 times and world series 2 times. His budget is high and it remains to be seen how much longer the tigers will be good. Still, more successful than Terry Ryan.

 

You picked these gm's off the top of your head, and I'd prefer two thirds over Ryan. Ryan has had 5 years with more than 90 wins. I'm considering him responsible for the 2010 team. Glad you asked how many losing seasons. This is going to be his 12th.

 

The farm system for the twins looks good right now, but it did before the twins run of mediocrity too. In fact, those twins teams had a lot of talent. The problem was Terry Ryan couldn't adequately fill holes on the roster, or you could blame gardy, but since gardy is still the manger he doesn't.

 

The twins can cry about small markets all they want. Other teams have found ways to win. Plus, they have the ability to spend now. The fact is there needs to be a change.

[diehardtwinsfan]

glunn, good points about bickering especially about the players but what about ownership and management? Personally I think we all should come down hard on ownership that promised big increases in payroll after Target Field was in place and then did not deliver. How do we parse that out intelligently without being too out of line or actually bitter?

 

I'll address this, and if other mods/owners want to chime in, please do... However, I think I'm speaking for all of us:

 

No one saying you cannot come down hard on ownership and management. This particular thread is certainly appropriate for it given the context, so that there's no issue here with hijacking it. Likewise, as you can see, there's plenty of agreement that ownership/mgmt has some responsibility, though there seems to be quite a bit of disagreement over who owns some/all of it. That all is fine.

 

THAT SAID, we are saying that this discussion can be done in a professional manner like what would be expected of us in most of our workplaces. There's no need to assail other posters, call them out, refer to their opinions as clueless, insane, stupid, whatever adjective you prefer. There's no need to bicker. Having the last word is not a requirement, especially once it's real clear you aren't going to be changing anyone's mind and that problem is not that a communicatiosn issue. Say what you want to say, but when you find yourself constantly re-saying it or getting frustrated, it's probably time to just bury the dead horse.

 

At the end of the day, this type of behavior will tend to drive a lot of people away, and for those that came from BYTO, that site is a great case study for this. But when people are leaving (or not joining), ad revenue disappears, and when that happens there will be no more TwinsDaily. Please keep that in mind.

[diehardtwinsfan]

A GM that has built a winning team has a longer leash. I would doubt Ryan is going anywhere.

 

I'd take this a step further. Would Ryan and Gardy be out of jobs long if they were to be handed their walking papers? I think it's a fair question. Honestly, I think both would be employed again in 2015, and rather quickly. That tells me that the industry is not in agreement with us fans.

 

Personally, I'll reiterate that I don't think Gardy is the right man for the job RIGHT NOW. With Ryan, I think he's got another year or two, at which point the job description is going to change out of his strengths (scouting, rebuilding, etc) into an area where he has not been historically as good (namely trading prospects for vets and plugging holes via FA). I realize there were budget issues in his past with some of this, so it's possible he'd still be the right guy, but that's where I sit.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Billy Bean built a winning team that became a losing team for a few years and was not fired. He rebuilt and won

Sabean in San Fran, same thing

Dombroski in Detroit, not as sustained the first time through

 

 

The only GM that built a winner from rubble in the last couple decades that was fired might be Jockety

 

 

A GM that has built a winning team has a longer leash. I would doubt Ryan is going anywhere.

 

 

I agree with you too. Much more continuity in baseball offices than on the ball fields -- that includes both players and coaches. There is nothing unusual about any of that. But team owners do not change the front offices frequently, or lightly. Pohlad is obviously not going anywhere. Ryan likely not going anywhere either, nor St. Peter. Souhan's article I believe is basically asking "isn't it time for a new manager?" Like it or not, that's the only question that really matters to many people come the end of the season (again). The GM's you cite above have all cycled through different managers periodically. This organization boasts that they are all as close as family, and they mean it. So it's been a more difficult question than it should be. If Gardy had offered to step down after last year or the year before, I bet everyone in the front office on up would have been a little wistful, but ultimately relieved and would have let him go, and been able to give him a glowing reference to boot.

[old nurse]

I agree with you too. Much more continuity in baseball offices than on the ball fields -- that includes both players and coaches. There is nothing unusual about any of that. But team owners do not change the front offices frequently, or lightly. Pohlad is obviously not going anywhere. Ryan likely not going anywhere either, nor St. Peter. Souhan's article I believe is basically asking "isn't it time for a new manager?" Like it or not, that's the only question that really matters to many people come the end of the season (again). The GM's you cite above have all cycled through different managers periodically. This organization boasts that they are all as close as family, and they mean it. So it's been a more difficult question than it should be. If Gardy had offered to step down after last year or the year before, I bet everyone in the front office on up would have been a little wistful, but ultimately relieved and would have let him go, and been able to give him a glowing reference to boot.

 

Other than Gardenhire, Sciosia would be the only other current manager that has won, had losing seasons, and kept his job. 100% speculation on my part is that after winning it would be reasonable that the manager does not like losing. A rift occurs. The old line about easier to fire the manager than the players line comes out. Followed by an off season or two of roster upheaval

[Badsmerf]

Old nurse, we obviously have different opinions on Ryan's impact. He left Bill Smith in a bad position. The farm system was bad, Hunter leaving and Santana leaving was a tough position. Also, while Bill Smith made some bad decisions, he also drastically increased talent in the low minors. Plus, Terry Ryan was still involved in those bad decisions. The current state of this team is still Terry Ryan's responsibility, he is, after all, the gm and is going on his 4th season of a terrible product.

 

I feel like you want to give him a pass because he wasn't calling all the shots for 3 years. You have to remember he is the one that appointed Smith. And if it takes a few years too get talent to the major leagues, it takes a few years for lack of talent to show. Smith made terrible trades, but who were the people telling him to pull the trigger?

 

I don't want to beat this topic to death. I'm under the impression you are on board with Ryan as a gm and I'm trying to provide evidence to show why it's time to move on. If you still feel I'm on the wrong side, I'd love to see evidence to counter mine.

[Badsmerf]

I'd also like to point out some flaws against gardy. I've got off topic slightly with Terry Ryan, but gardy is not blameless either. I put a lot of fault on gardy for his 6-21 playoff record. Sure, there were years when Ryan didn't fill holes adequately and he didn't have much of a chance. However, there were also years when the twins under performed greatly.

 

I don't think 27 games, or 7 series, is a small sample size. The manager is responsible for preparing and making in game decisions. Both were bad by gardy. The playoffs magnified what many already felt during the regular season.

 

I don't hate gardy and want him gone because if it. I think he could be successful in other teams. I'm not sure that I'd ever trust him in the playoffs though. The game changes and I doubt feel like gardy has embraced the evolution of the game.

[old nurse]

Old nurse, we obviously have different opinions on Ryan's impact. He left Bill Smith in a bad position. The farm system was bad, Hunter leaving and Santana leaving was a tough position. Also, while Bill Smith made some bad decisions, he also drastically increased talent in the low minors. Plus, Terry Ryan was still involved in those bad decisions. The current state of this team is still Terry Ryan's responsibility, he is, after all, the gm and is going on his 4th season of a terrible product.

 

I feel like you want to give him a pass because he wasn't calling all the shots for 3 years. You have to remember he is the one that appointed Smith. And if it takes a few years too get talent to the major leagues, it takes a few years for lack of talent to show. Smith made terrible trades, but who were the people telling him to pull the trigger?

 

I don't want to beat this topic to death. I'm under the impression you are on board with Ryan as a gm and I'm trying to provide evidence to show why it's time to move on. If you still feel I'm on the wrong side, I'd love to see evidence to counter mine.

 

I doubted that Ryan would be fired. That should in no way be construed as a statement in support or against.

Not in defense of Ryan but I think what determines Ryan career longevity is not where the club has been or done but the direction it is going. Bill Smith ran the club for 3 years. At the end of 3 years the club was in far worse shape. Ryan was interim. Had the powers that be not liked the job, he would have received a thank you and been replaced.

You can pile up all of what you think what is and the way it should be. It has entertainment value. If the discussion is about what you think the club will do, then there are different ways to look at it. A GM will get a chance to rebuild what he built once before if it was successful in the eyes of the owner. Do you think 2002-2007 was a success in Pohlad's eyes? Hint, attendance in the metrodome doubled. Target field was approved during that time.

[glunn]

glunn, good points about bickering especially about the players but what about ownership and management? Personally I think we all should come down hard on ownership that promised big increases in payroll after Target Field was in place and then did not deliver. How do we parse that out intelligently without being too out of line or actually bitter?

 

If you post this in a relevant thread and in a factual manner, then that will not be a violation of TD policy.

[glunn]

I'll address this, and if other mods/owners want to chime in, please do... However, I think I'm speaking for all of us:

 

No one saying you cannot come down hard on ownership and management. This particular thread is certainly appropriate for it given the context, so that there's no issue here with hijacking it. Likewise, as you can see, there's plenty of agreement that ownership/mgmt has some responsibility, though there seems to be quite a bit of disagreement over who owns some/all of it. That all is fine.

 

THAT SAID, we are saying that this discussion can be done in a professional manner like what would be expected of us in most of our workplaces. There's no need to assail other posters, call them out, refer to their opinions as clueless, insane, stupid, whatever adjective you prefer. There's no need to bicker. Having the last word is not a requirement, especially once it's real clear you aren't going to be changing anyone's mind and that problem is not that a communicatiosn issue. Say what you want to say, but when you find yourself constantly re-saying it or getting frustrated, it's probably time to just bury the dead horse.

 

At the end of the day, this type of behavior will tend to drive a lot of people away, and for those that came from BYTO, that site is a great case study for this. But when people are leaving (or not joining), ad revenue disappears, and when that happens there will be no more TwinsDaily. Please keep that in mind.

 

Well said, diehard.