Terry Ryan on Souhan Unfiltered

[Seth Stohs]

Yesterday (Wednesday 1/7), Jim Souhan was joined by Twins GM Terry Ryan on this week's Souhan Unfiltered. 

 

It's a fun talk about his playing days, moving into scouting, some on Tom Kelly and many other topics. Very interesting. I enjoy listening to Ryan talk. 

[nicksaviking]

I'll listen when I get a chance, but I have to say I'm a litle disappointed.  From the title of the thread, I thought Terry Ryan went on an uncharacteristic rant against Souhan. 

[Seth Stohs]

Some very interesting stuff about scouting, and getting Johan Santana as a Rule 5. But he also talked about the Molitor decision and here is how he ranked the finalists for the manager:

 

1.) Paul Molitor - Obviously since he's the manager.

2.) Gene Glynn - Said he was incredibly impressive.

3.) Torey Lovullo - said he was very impressive too.

4.) Doug Mientkiewicz - said basically that he just didn't think he was ready, but that he isn't far off and that he will be a very good MLB manager in the near future.

[James]

Thanks for posting.  This was interesting.

 

I always like hearing TR talk, and I think he was very open and honest about some things.  These aren't the normal press conference types of questions, so you get sine different answers.

 

The most interesting thing was the ranking of the managerial candidates.  That was pretty cool.  There is some fluff in there as well, but it kind of gives a little more insight into TR's thought process.  He talks about Sano and Buxton for a while too.  Not just athletic ability, but character as well.  It's worth a listen.    

[Pius Jefferson]

Listening right now and TR takes responsibility on passing on Mike Mussina.

[Thrylos]

Listening right now and TR takes responsibility on passing on Mike Mussina.

 

Ryan takes a lot of "responsibility" for a lot of things but nobody ever holds him accountable.  This is like saying, excuse me officer, I ran that red light and getting a warning.  Every single time.   And knowing that he will just only get that warning.

[twinsnorth49]

Ryan takes a lot of "responsibility" for a lot of things but nobody ever holds him accountable.  This is like saying, excuse me officer, I ran that red light and getting a warning.  Every single time.   And knowing that he will just only get that warning.

You're right, far better he blame others and maintain zero integrity.

[ashbury]

This is like saying, excuse me officer, I ran that red light and getting a warning. 

No, it's not really like that at all.  And it will be a struggle to replace it with some other analogy that also relates to daily life.  Because I'm pretty sure running a franchise isn't very much like daily life.

[Mike Sixel]

I think thrylos' point is that saying "I am responsible " means pretty much as much as me saying it. There are times I agree, and times I am not sure how I feel when he says this. But, they sound like empty words most of the time.

 

And, he fired the manager and coaches......actions that speak to he is not completely responsible.

[jimmer]

You're right, far better he blame others and maintain zero integrity.

It's probably easier to take responsibility when you have job security like he does. Job security he likely wouldn't have in any market that stressed winning.

[adjacent]

Well, you have job security until you don't have it any more. And if he has job security is because his bosses (Pohlads) don't think he is the main cause of the team lossing more than 90 games 3 years in a row. That is the opinion that counts for his situation. Of course saying he is responsible is only a way to address things publicly that is better than coming out blaming others. Bottom line: he did his evaluation of the people under him and decided some need to be replaced. The people that has to evaluate him decided that he should stay. That is it. He could resign, (it is not clear to me if Thrylos is suggesting that) but I don't think that will help much.

[Twins Twerp]

It's probably easier to take responsibility when you have job security like he does. Job security he likely wouldn't have in any market that stressed winning.

Ruben Amaro has job security like that. What market stresses winning more than philly? They booed Santa Clause. Cashmen has taken the easiest job in Baseball and turned the Yankees a laughing stock #arodstillhas3yearsleft

[jimmer]

Ruben Amaro has job security like that. What market stresses winning more than philly? They booed Santa Clause. Cashmen has taken the easiest job in Baseball and turned the Yankees a laughing stock #arodstillhas3yearsleft

I doubt Amaro has the same job security.  Just cause he hasn't been fired YET, there has still been rumblings.  On top of that, in his 6 year reign, they've only been bad twice and haven't lost 90 or more once.

[TheLeviathan]

Ruben Amaro has job security like that. What market stresses winning more than philly? They booed Santa Clause. Cashmen has taken the easiest job in Baseball and turned the Yankees a laughing stock #arodstillhas3yearsleft

 

This link indicates that he's got one more year at this point.  I like how candid Ryan can be and he strikes me as genuinely apologetic for mistakes.  To me it's a separate issue from his Ivory Tower the Pohlads and some fans have placed him in.

[h2oface]

I think thrylos' point is that saying "I am responsible " means pretty much as much as me saying it. There are times I agree, and times I am not sure how I feel when he says this. But, they sound like empty words most of the time.

 

And, he fired the manager and coaches......actions that speak to he is not completely responsible.

 

If he wanted to be responsible, he could have fired himself, eh? Actions, not words.

[gunnarthor]

It's probably easier to take responsibility when you have job security like he does. Job security he likely wouldn't have in any market that stressed winning.

It's probably easier to get job security like that when you've 1) won before 2) are well respected within the game and 3) have successfully rebuilt in worse situations.

 

Frankly, right now you should compare him to Lunhow and Hoyer.  If you think they deserve more time, then you should think Ryan deserves more time.  And if you're going to say "no, he was here under Bill Smith" then ... ugh.  And if you're going to say "He left the cupboard bare for Smith" relook at the cupboard first.

[jimmer]

It's probably easier to get job security like that when you've 1) won before 2) are well respected within the game and 3) have successfully rebuilt in worse situations.

 

Frankly, right now you should compare him to Lunhow and Hoyer.  If you think they deserve more time, then you should think Ryan deserves more time.  And if you're going to say "no, he was here under Bill Smith" then ... ugh.  And if you're going to say "He left the cupboard bare for Smith" relook at the cupboard first.

Was there somewhere in my post that suggested he didn't DESERVE the job security he has? Or did I just point out that when you have job security like that it is much easier to take the blame?

[ashbury]

Was there somewhere in my post that suggested he didn't DESERVE the job security he has? Or did I just point out that when you have job security like that it is much easier to take the blame?

I won't speak for Gunnar but when I saw "Job security he likely wouldn't have in any market that stressed winning" I thought it amounted to "undeserved job security", which in many discussions would be followed by "he should be fired".  Help me out here, since it's now sounding like you meant something different.

[jimmer]

I won't speak for Gunnar but when I saw "Job security he likely wouldn't have in any market that stressed winning" I thought it amounted to "undeserved job security", which in many discussions would be followed by "he should be fired".  Help me out here, since it's now sounding like you meant something different.

It has to do with pressure from local media types (media markets) that put pressure on teams by way of asking hard questions and writing critical articles for public consumption that can make owners make decisions in personnel they may not feel need to be made to calm the negative publicity.  And that's just local reporters. There are markets that get much more national attention as well that might play to the fans displeasure of a losing team more to put pressure on a team. Twins don't usually get that kind of press locally and certainly not nationally.

 

Minnesota reporters are a pretty softball-tossing bunch, with few exceptions and even the critical ones aren't normally overly so, even with all the recent losing. So having that kind of media market to deal with compared to many others, an owner is more likely to stick with someone they believe is up to the task because they aren't always getting slammed by reporter after reporter.

[ashbury]

It has to do with pressure from local media types ...

Fair enough.  Hopefully you can see how the shorter wording could be subject to misinterpretation. 

 

I'll offer in response to your view, that Ryan might not have made the same moves in a different market with a different franchise.  The expectations in that market might be proportional to the team's revenue, and maybe Ryan's plan would still have been to build up the farm system but slightly less aggressively (trading only one of his CF, say), and the answers to "how do we bridge to that coming wave of players" could have involved players different than Willingham and Doumit, for example.  His job security in that unnamed other market could well be about the same as here and now.

[jimmer]

Fair enough.  Hopefully you can see how the shorter wording could be subject to misinterpretation. 

 

I'll offer in response to your view, that Ryan might not have made the same moves in a different market with a different franchise.  The expectations in that market might be proportional to the team's revenue, and maybe Ryan's plan would still have been to build up the farm system but slightly less aggressively (trading only one of his CF, say), and the answers to "how do we bridge to that coming wave of players" could have involved players different than Willingham and Doumit, for example.  His job security in that unnamed other market could well be about the same as here and now.

Even accounting for misinterpretation of my post, which I don't really get since it makes assumptions on my reasoning for not thinking Ryan should keep his job (something I've never said) by saying things like , 'And if you're going to say "no, he was here under Bill Smith" then ... ugh.  And if you're going to say "He left the cupboard bare for Smith" relook at the cupboard first.'

 

Those assumptions would be based on practically no posting history on this site as to wear I stand on Ryan.  No matter what, it certainly didn't warrant the kind of response I got from gunnarthur in his second part of his post.

 

Additionally, even with your belief that Ryan may have acted differently if in another market, that's no quarantee those moves work giving him deserved extreme job security he currently has.

 

On top of that, it still doesn't change my actual point, that job security would likely not be so secure in a bigger more scrutinized market if losing like we have been was occuring. Your argument seems to be just be about how he would do different things in a bigger market, the team therefore would be better, and that he'd still have as strong of job security as he has here.  I doubt that's true and even if it was, the job security comment I had also referred to ownership being pressured by big market media because of losing.  Easier to have job security when winning.

[gunnarthor]

On top of that, it still doesn't change my actual point, that job security would likely not be so secure in a bigger more scrutinized market if losing like we have been was occuring. Your argument seems to be just be about how he would do different things in a bigger market, the team therefore would be better, and that he'd still have as strong of job security as he has here.  I doubt that's true and even if it was, the job security comment I had also referred to ownership being pressured by big market media because of losing.  Easier to have job security when winning.

The market pressure thing is overblown but again we can look at Hoyer in Chicago.  i suspect Ryan would have done many of the same types of moves and the media hasn't turned on Hoyer yet.  Actually, in baseball we've seen a surprising amount of stability in FO, esp in the big markets or with smart teams.  Alderson in NY (2010), Hoyer w/Cubs (2011), Kenny Williams w/White Sox (2000-2012 before promotion), Cashman in NY, Anthopoulos in Tor (2009), Zduriencik in Seattle (2008) etc.

[jimmer]

The market pressure thing is overblown but again we can look at Hoyer in Chicago.  i suspect Ryan would have done many of the same types of moves and the media hasn't turned on Hoyer yet.  Actually, in baseball we've seen a surprising amount of stability in FO, esp in the big markets or with smart teams.  Alderson in NY (2010), Hoyer w/Cubs (2011), Kenny Williams w/White Sox (2000-2012 before promotion), Cashman in NY, Anthopoulos in Tor (2009), Zduriencik in Seattle (2008) etc.

Media hasn't turned on Hoyer cause they hardly acknowledge he has the GM position.  They look to Epstein who is new to the organization and has won a couple W Series, the first breaking the media created 'curse'. They likely give him the benefit of the doubt, not unreasonably. It likely has a shelf-life though.

 

In any event, I NEVER SAID he doesn't deserve to stay GM.

[bird]

Well, you have job security until you don't have it any more. And if he has job security is because his bosses (Pohlads) don't think he is the main cause of the team lossing more than 90 games 3 years in a row. That is the opinion that counts for his situation. Of course saying he is responsible is only a way to address things publicly that is better than coming out blaming others. Bottom line: he did his evaluation of the people under him and decided some need to be replaced. The people that has to evaluate him decided that he should stay. That is it. He could resign, (it is not clear to me if Thrylos is suggesting that) but I don't think that will help much.

Precisely this.

 

Why is it so maddening to some that Pohlad sees Ryan's performance differently than they do? Why, when Ryan expresses his viewpoint that he wishes he had performed better, do the words ring hollow to some but to others resonate as a solid, sincere response, especially within the context of the conversation? Exactly how is he not manning up well enough to us fans? 

[jimmer]

Precisely this.

 

Why is it so maddening to some that Pohlad sees Ryan's performance differently than they do? 

That's a good question.  If I was one of the people maddened by it, I might have an answer.  Doesn't change the fact it's easier to man up when you have the kind of job security he has. 

[Linus]

OK, at the risk of mod rath....

 

You have no idea what Ryan's job security is and your assumption that you do is a misleading at best.  When it comes to "man up" (whatever that descriptive term might mean) I would consider that Ryan stayed with the Twins when they were subject to contraction when he had an opportunity to leave and go to Toronto.

 

He is honestly admitting his mistakes; if you are waiting for him to fall on some sort of a sword because he has made some mistakes (like any other GM) than you are being ridiculous.

[ashbury]

OK, at the risk of mod rath....

From the TD Comment Policy:

A minimal level of grammar and spell-checking is required.  

 

Nah, we'll let that slide. 

 

Oh, and yeah: the bickering and overly personal take on things.  The poster you (I think) were responding to has reiterated that he's not saying TR doesn't deserve to stay GM¹, so there's been no call for sword-falling etc.  It's a Terry Ryan thread, so some of this can be expected, but enough.  Time to dial it down a notch, everyone.

 

¹_{Double negative there, but I think I'm following the logic}

[jimmer]

OK, at the risk of mod rath....

 

You have no idea what Ryan's job security is and your assumption that you do is a misleading at best.  When it comes to "man up" (whatever that descriptive term might mean) I would consider that Ryan stayed with the Twins when they were subject to contraction when he had an opportunity to leave and go to Toronto.

 

He is honestly admitting his mistakes; if you are waiting for him to fall on some sort of a sword because he has made some mistakes (like any other GM) than you are being ridiculous.

Jim Pohlad's own words leads one to believe Ryan has serious job security. Perhaps his own words and actions are misleading, but he's given that impression. From an article on ESPN 1500, September 29th 2014, ' After that press conference to announce the contract extension, Twins owner Jim Pohlad said that as long as Ryan would like to be the team's general manager, the job will be his.He has the keys for life.' Ryan said he appreciated the words but wouldn't hold Pohlad to it. Glunn, a moderator here I believe, made a whole post about that interview and said he found that quote interesting:http://twinsdaily.com/topic/15098-interesting-interview-with-terry-ryan/

 

 

And as far as the phrase man up, it's a commonly used phrase.  Maybe 'own up' is better. Step up might be even better.  Pretty much the same thing.

 

And I will say, once again, I'm not saying he should be fired, like some have said. Some have said he doesn't deserve to stay GM, but I'm not one of them  I think it's a good thing he has admitted he has some fault in the problems.  I stand by the idea that when you know you aren't getting fired, that the owner has basically decided to follow your lead, it is much easier to admit mistakes.  

[gunnarthor]

This isn't a new side to Ryan, however.  He admitted to mistakes when he first started and had no job security.  In the horrible 90s, local writers were calling for his head, esp after the Travis Lee fiasco. And Ryan openly stated that the Lee thing was his fault.  He also admitted to bungling the relationship with Knoblauch. 

[Dman]

Even accounting for misinterpretation of my post, which I don't really get since it makes assumptions on my reasoning for not thinking Ryan should keep his job (something I've never said) by saying things like , 'And if you're going to say "no, he was here under Bill Smith" then ... ugh.  And if you're going to say "He left the cupboard bare for Smith" relook at the cupboard first.'

 

Those assumptions would be based on practically no posting history on this site as to wear I stand on Ryan.  No matter what, it certainly didn't warrant the kind of response I got from gunnarthur in his second part of his post.

 

Additionally, even with your belief that Ryan may have acted differently if in another market, that's no quarantee those moves work giving him deserved extreme job security he currently has.

 

On top of that, it still doesn't change my actual point, that job security would likely not be so secure in a bigger more scrutinized market if losing like we have been was occuring. Your argument seems to be just be about how he would do different things in a bigger market, the team therefore would be better, and that he'd still have as strong of job security as he has here.  I doubt that's true and even if it was, the job security comment I had also referred to ownership being pressured by big market media because of losing.  Easier to have job security when winning.

 

I think the reason assumptions were made is we have had this conversation on TD many times before and the camps typically line up for or against Ryan as GM.  You being new might not understand why Gunnarthor went the direction he did but for me and likely many others it makes perfect sense.  In fact to me at first glance it almost seemed like baiting.

 

I agree with the poster who said you have job security until you don't.  It just takes one mistake to blow things up and the pressure to build to be ousted from the job.  Doesn't matter what Jim Pohlad has said in the past if he needed to get rid of Terry he would.  Granted he likely wouldn't have to as Terry would resign or whatever.

 

I think the reason Mr. Pohlad made the statement about keeping Terry is that he is very respected in baseball and the team has been successful with him running it.  I for one believe the sincerity that Mr. Ryan has when he takes responsibility for things going wrong.

 

Having said all that yes I agree with you that it is easier to be honest about failing or making mistakes when you have greater job security.  Logically it is going to be easier as you likely have less to lose but at the same time I don't think it is easy to publicly admit your mistakes and take responsibility as it opens you up to tons of criticism.

 

Mr. Ryans moves as GM have been debated here many times and he has made good moves and bad ones.  I am not sure how much longer he really even wants to be the GM so for those who want to see him go they might not have wait too long.