Season is not over

[TheLeviathan]

When has Ryan ever gone for it at teh trade dealine? Are we saying from 2001-2007 it was never the right time to go for it?e

Since I specifically said he has missed opportunities to do so in the past, the answer is yes. But should he have done it every single year in that span? That's the problem I have with many of the complaints.

 

To me the price, the player, the team control, the teams contention window, and a myriad of other factors have to be weighed so the answer should vary. Not always be "yes".

[jimmer]

 

Since I specifically said he has missed opportunities to do so in the past, the answer is yes. But should he have done it every single year in that span? That's the problem I have with many of the complaints.

To me the price, the player, the team control, the teams contention window, and a myriad of other factors have to be weighed so the answer should vary. Not always be "yes".

My comment wasn't just directed at you. It's why I didn't quote you.

 

It's a pretty telling trend, IMO. IMO, he is just not the type of GM that will ever make big moves at the deadline, whether it's the right time or not.  Because he hasn't. 

 

Too many people are saying he didn't go for it because now wasn't the right time. Fine, but do we know that is the actual reason why he didn't go for it, or is it because it just isn't his nature to do so and, coincidentally, it happens to not be the time? I think his history makes the answer pretty clear.

[TheLeviathan]

My comment wasn't just directed at you. It's why I didn't quote you.

 

It's a pretty telling trend, IMO. IMO, he is just not the type of GM that will ever make big moves at the deadline, whether it's the right time or not.  Because he hasn't. 

 

Too many people are saying he didn't go for it because now wasn't the right time. Fine, but do we know that is the actual reason why he didn't go for it, or it it because it just isn't his nature to do so and, coincidentally, it happens to not be the time.

We know that he offered a competitive package for Soriano back in the day but refused to give Perkins or Garza. i do agree that he should be more daring/aggressive. I disagree that he HAS to because we are competitive this year (or any competitive year)

[Craig Arko]

I only agree 62.9%.

Equivocator.

[jimmer]

 

We know that he offered a competitive package for Soriano back in the day but refused to give Perkins or Garza. i do agree that he should be more daring/aggressive. I disagree that he HAS to because we are competitive this year (or any competitive year)

Trying isn't doing.  Offering a package TR and/or others think/say is competitive doesn't make it competitive.  And, in the end, it isn't the same as offering a package that actually makes the other GM say yes.

 

And of course he doesn't HAVE to be daring or aggressive because we are competitive this year or any competitive year because, clearly, that's exactly the case.  

[Badsmerf]

I've been as hard on Ryan as anyone, some cases harder. I'm not a fan of his. I've called him out and called for his termination. Not making significant moves at this trade deadline isn't a big deal to me. Trade deadlines are for twins trying to get over the edge like kc and San Francisco. He obviously didn't like any of the deals proposed, and can't fault him this season for not forcing it.

 

The main point of this thread, is that I am not ready to cash in the season, and neither should anyone else. I think this team is more than capable of playing above 500 to the end of the year, and that outs them in position for the wc game. That would be fun. This isn't a world series team, but it will be soon.

[jimmer]

'I think this team is more than capable of playing above 500 to the end of the year,

 

 

We've been below .500 in 3 of the 4 months played and our remaining schedule seems pretty rough.  Gonna be extremely hard for this team to play above .500 to finish the season and we've been sliding down hard.

 

Hope you are right.

[ashbury]

Equivocator.

Maybe.

[DaveW]

The twins play a lot of crappy teams down the stretch including a ton against the AL central which is pretty weak besides the Royals at this point. They definitely should be expected to go at least .500 the rest of the way.

 

The question is can they play another 7 over .500 the rest of the way to get to 87 wins.

[jimmer]

'The twins play a lot of crappy teams down the stretch including a ton against the AL central which is pretty weak besides the Royals at this point. They definitely should be expected to go at least .500 the rest of the way.'

 

58 games left.

 

These are against the teams who are winning the division and/or are serious playoff contenders:

 

Tor: 4

NYY: 3

Bal: 4

Hou: 6

KCR:6

LAA: 4Then

 

Then we have 5 games combined against TB and Texas who are both barely below .500.  That's 32 serious games.  

 

This was written in an article on MLB.com on July 16th:

 

'Twins: Minnesota's remaining opponents have a combined .511 winning percentage, the highest among any team that currently has a winning record. The most grueling stretch for the Twins comes during a 16-game stretch beginning on Sept. 4. That's the day that Minnesota begins a nine-game road trip, starting with three games against the Astros followed by three against the division-leading Royals.'

 

Yes, we've played some tough ones since that article was written, but it's still a rough schedule, including the part that is stated as being our most grueling stretch.

 

With that info, and the fact we did practically nothing (if not exactly nothing) to improve our team at the deadline, not only do I NOT think the Twins should be expected to play .500 ball or better, we should be happy and pleasantly surprised if they do. And that's before mentioning how we've been playing recently or have played every month but May.

 

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

Most people speculated a 3 way first, then him building value until the offseason, then a salary dump, etc.

 

That tells me no one can figure it out because it doesn't make sense. But, yes, we should have been in on it trying to beat it.

Actually Toronto and Colorado had discussed Tulo before, and the Rockies had previously been unwilling to accept Reyes. Not sure quite what that means, but it suggests there wasn't anything really special about the Toronto offer that other teams couldn't match. I think they were just aggressive enough to be in the right place at the right time.

 

Not suggesting anything crazy like we could have fobbed off Nolasco on them, but a willingness to simply eat Tulo's contract probably would have enabled us to land him with a fairly modest prospect package.

[TheLeviathan]

Actually Toronto and Colorado had discussed Tulo before, and the Rockies had previously been unwilling to accept Reyes. Not sure quite what that means, but it suggests there wasn't anything really special about the Toronto offer that other teams couldn't match. I think they were just aggressive enough to be in the right place at the right time.

Not suggesting anything crazy like we could have fobbed off Nolasco on them, but a willingness to simply eat Tulo's contract probably would have enabled us to land him with a fairly modest prospect package.

You may be right, I just can't make sense of their interest in that package. As I said initially, it was quite underwhelming.

 

But closing big deals isn't always as easy as we on message boards would like. People should remember that an empty deadline isn't always a bad thing or always the fault of the GM. Sometimes it is, but not always.

[diehardtwinsfan]

I really wish that we could get more insight into some of this after the fact, as I find it very fascinating.  Part of the problem is getting a package that both sides really like.  A team, for instance, could be much higher on a lower ranked prospect than every other MLB team.  It happens. 

 

I remember with the AJ trade happened that Cubs also had an offer on the table that most of the experts liked better.  It turns out that none of those guys ever panned out.  I'm sure if Saben had to do it over again, he'd have just hung up the phone.

[TheLeviathan]

Exactly diehard, just because we can imagine a better trade package we would accept doesn't mean that it's what the other team wants. Completing a trade in real life isn't a video game, there are a myriad of factors at play. Judging success or failure merely by whether a deal gets done or not is quite naive and unfair. And I'd say that is doubly so at the deadline.

[USAFChief]

Exactly diehard, just because we can imagine a better trade package we would accept doesn't mean that it's what the other team wants. Completing a trade in real life isn't a video game, there are a myriad of factors at play. Judging success or failure merely by whether a deal gets done or not is quite naive and unfair. And I'd say that is doubly so at the deadline.

Maybe.

 

But this ain't rocket science. Detroit announces they have players for sale and 48 hours later Price and Cespedes are in different uniforms. Holliday reinjures his quad and by morning St Louis has a new outfielder. We're talking trading baseball players, not nuclear negotiations with Iran. In the case of Tulo, it wasn't even a deadline deal...we know he's been for sale for months.

 

In any case, it really doesn't matter to me WHY TR can't ever make anything happen. Besides, If you're trying to tell me it's to complicated for him, I don't think that's any kind of good excuse.

 

Get the dang thing done. Excuses are only required to explain away failure.

[jimmer]

 

Exactly diehard, just because we can imagine a better trade package we would accept doesn't mean that it's what the other team wants. Completing a trade in real life isn't a video game, there are a myriad of factors at play. Judging success or failure merely by whether a deal gets done or not is quite naive and unfair. And I'd say that is doubly so at the deadline.

No doubt it's hard, but it's hard for every GM, not just TR, yet as deals fly every year, he's 0-career on making an deal where one could even come close to saying 'wow, that was aggressive. that player could truly male a difference.'  The biggest deal was when he bailed on his team by trading Castillo instead of trading for help during the 2007 trade deadline, but that was in a different direction.

 

We don't get players to help us on a playoff run just because he tried.  We also can't gauge whether or not he tried hard, at all.  We can figure that he isn't aggressive enough because he's never done one in his many, many years of being a GM. Sports is a result oriented business, no points for trying. Doesn't mean anyone who takes him to task for being unable to get it done thinks it's easy or can't understand it's complex.

[TheLeviathan]

I not defending his record, I'm taking issue with the meme that any season you compete you unload at the deadline and all that matters is if you get the deal done.

 

That's the absurdity we've reached at times and I would never want a real GM to take that approach. But their is a vast middle ground as well. If anyone but Ryan had stood still here we'd more easily understand it (as every national publication I've read has).

 

So let's focus on watching this group build to a point deserving a more aggressive tact IMO.

[jimmer]

• I was watching MLB Network quite a bit at the deadline and the night before the deadline they were shocked, based on where we were in the standings, that they was barely a whisper about the Twins and then they chuckled the next day at the signing we had saying that, apparently, the Twins are a juggernaut and don't need help.

[jimmer]

But yeah, there were plenty of experts saying it was fine he didn't really do anything.  Of course, I wonder how many looked at his history of deadline moves and wondered whether it's more about being timid than anything else.

[USAFChief]

 

I not defending his record, I'm taking issue with the meme that any season you compete you unload at the deadline and all that matters is if you get the deal done.

That's the absurdity we've reached at times and I would never want a real GM to take that approach. But their is a vast middle ground as well. If anyone but Ryan had stood still here we'd more easily understand it (as every national publication I've read has).

So let's focus on watching this group build to a point deserving a more aggressive tact IMO.

I thought we were talking about how hard it was to make trades.

 

 

[TheLeviathan]

I thought we were talking about how hard it was to make trades.

That's one of many factors that makes this notion impossible. "Just get it done regardless", in my eyes, is every bit as bad as a paranoid fear of losing prospects in part because of how unrealistic it is for this and many other reasons.

[DaveW]

This season is over if Perkins keeps pitching like this.

[jokin]

 

That's one of many factors that makes this notion impossible. "Just get it done regardless", in my eyes, is every bit as bad as a paranoid fear of losing prospects in part because of how unrealistic it is for this and many other reasons.

 

I'm sorry, but Ryan has demonstrated a history of risk-aversion that the only time he enters a bidding war is against himself  (Nolasco, Pelfrey, Suzuki, et al).  Doesn't a GM who has survived the negotiation battles in over a 20+ year track record have to "get it done regardless" more than once, just to have maintained his job credibility?  (And remember, this is a GM who, when asked about the Shannon Stewart as his greatest mid-season trade, instead focused on his salary dump trades, citing the Scott Erickson deal as his greatest trade in that context).

[TheLeviathan]

I'm not defending Ryan, his risk aversion is too extreme, but some critics here fail to be much better by sitting on the other extreme.

[Thrylos]

 

I like their chances if they replace Tommy Milone and Mike Pelfrey with Trevor May and either Tyler Duffey or Jose Berrios.

 

One of the two ain't bad.

[USAFChief]

 

I'm not defending Ryan, his risk aversion is too extreme, but some critics here fail to be much better by sitting on the other extreme.

I don't see much of the "other extreme," but if you're not defending Ryan, what exactly are you doing?

 

This started with a post saying trades are too difficult to execute.  Well, that's demonstrably false, so if they're too difficult for Ryan, that's a reason to fire him, no?

[TheLeviathan]

I don't see much of the "other extreme," but if you're not defending Ryan, what exactly are you doing?

 

This started with a post saying trades are too difficult to execute.  Well, that's demonstrably false, so if they're too difficult for Ryan, that's a reason to fire him, no?

Since it didn't start at all with that you may want yo go back and check. I think Ryan deserves criticism, but I also think much of it went off the rails.

[USAFChief]

 

Since it didn't start at all with that you may want yo go back and check. I think Ryan deserves criticism, but I also think much of it went off the rails.

"...just because we can imagine a better trade package we would accept doesn't mean that it's what the other team wants. Completing a trade in real life isn't a video game, there are a myriad of factors at play. Judging success or failure merely by whether a deal gets done or not is quite naive and unfair. And I'd say that is doubly so at the deadline."

 

I thought our exchange was about whether or not it's difficult to make trades.

 

[TheLeviathan]

Our exchange was part of a larger point I made at the outset.

[USAFChief]

 

Our exchange was part of a larger point I made at the outset.

OK, fair enough.  Sincere apologies.

 

I sometimes get too focused on the trees to see the forest.

 

I will say though that I still think explaining away the lack of trade activity to "too difficult" probably isn't true, and in any case isn't any kind of legitimate excuse even if it is true.