Can we put down the pitchforks?

[jimbo92107]

 

I would like to see everyone who hates Terry Ryan and the front office try to take on the job. Any of you seriously think you could do a better job? I doubt it.

I'm sure I could do a worse job, but I don't have the inside information TR has about scouting reports, team budget considerations, or the short-, medium- and long-term plans of the organization.

 

One thing for sure is that nobody in Ryan's position would pay much heed to Twins Daily, where every decision is second-guessed in every way possible, including selling the farm for Troy Tulowitzki and maybe one reliever. Every possible bad decision has been voiced on this site as a can't-miss idea, sometimes by me.

 

Since none of us has complete access to all information inside the organization, we speculate a lot about moves they should or shouldn't make based on assumptions that simply may not be true. Are the Twins really interested in winning this year? As in, winning it all? Absolutely not is my assumption, or they would have sold the farm for Tulo and whoever else they could grab.

 

Instead, I'm assuming they are trying to keep fan interest with some minor reshuffling while they wait for young talent to bubble up from the minors. However, in the meantime they have to put a respectable team on the field, which is why they got Torii Hunter, Suzuki, Hughes, Nolasco, Pelfrey, etc. Keep the team somewhat respectable while awaiting the arrival of the future stars from AA and A.

 

Problem is, sometimes the veterans get hurt, like Nolasco, Hughes, and now Perkins. If your respectable veterans go down, you're not left with much to avoid a total implosion. That's why I'd recommend saying, "Screw this season, let's bring up all the kids and see which ones can play a little baseball."

 

It's not so much a good PR move at this point, it's more like a long shot that's your only shot to keep fans interested. Limping along for the rest of this season with broken down veterans isn't much of an option.

[Boom Boom]

Just to put to rest the "let's see you do a better job" argument...

 

If I see a bad movie, am I not allowed to criticize it because I've never made one? If I have a bad experience eating out, can I have a bad opinion of the place if I've never run a restaurant myself?

 

You don't need to be an expert in a field to identify lousy work.

[SF Twins Fan]

 

I've been reading less at this site because it's starting to sound like a fifth grade home room - the name calling and hyperbole is getting out of control. I'm not a "front-office lover", just bored with smug second guessers.  

 

The Twins are performing about as expected. Next year should be better yet.  Ryan and his organization have put this team in great position for the next five years. They've drafted well and signed some fine international free agents.

 

Do I think Ryan should stay? No - I don't think he's the best person to make the trades that are needed this offseason (among other reasons). Is Ryan an idiot? Not at all. You think Ryan should've sold the farm this year for big money veterans? Great. The point can be made without the shallow name calling - especially of those here who disagree.

 

Thankfully, the senior contributors write consistently solid articles and, along with many of the fans here, provide fine forum commentary (even if they disagree with me).   

I think this is one of the most thought out, level headed comment I've read on TD. I think people are forgetting the Twins weren't supposed to be good this year and they really haven't been if you looked at  first half numbers. Their record was way above their actual on field play. This was supposed to be the year the Twins brought up the first big wave of talent, which so far they have. And so far the talent is playng well.  Hopefully by seasons end Berrios, Buxton, Keplar and Vargas will be promoted so they can get experience. I'm more excited for this offseason than I have been since 2009 and 2010.  If TR can make a tradeor sign a FA catcher and add some bullpen help (Not mediocre National League players) I think the Twins could be a good and potentially playoff team. 

Outfield: Rosario, Buxton and Hicks.

Infield: Plouffe, Polanco, Dozier and Mauer. 

Catcher: FA.

DH: Sano

Bench: Escobar, Vargas, Suzuki and FA outfielder. 

SP: Santana, Hughes, Gibson, May and Berrios.

Bullpen: Perkins, O'Rourke, Rodgers, Jepsen, Graham, FA, FA. 

 

To me that has the makings of a good team. You also have Duffey and Nolasco as potenial replacements for th starting rotation.  

[Hrbowski]

 

So the idea is to just blame the players and not the level of talent put on the roster year after year?

 

And who do these discussions drive away, Front Office fans?

These "discussions" drive people away because they are sick of people who whine and complain because they think they know more about baseball than TR and company, and when people are acting like that nobody wants to stay around because both sides start acting immature. At least that is my view on it.

[LimestoneBaggy]

I'll go on record (as I did earlier this year) to say that at the beginning of the season, I thought I saw Ryan's plan. Be good enough to keep the fans interest, develop the farm a bit more, and see what you have going into the off-season. I wasn't against this plan at the start of the year because I didn't think this team had a cold chance of being good. Better, but not good. 

 

I give TR (JR) the 2016 season to pass judgment. I think he's done some things and stuff, but if I see his plan, it starts in 2016. 

 

But honestly, the bullpen and roster management are points I would love to have a sit down and ask him about why they continually maintain below average talent on the 40-man, but dump guys with a proven minor league record who may (in hindsight would) have been good in spot roles (Colla..bench bat/Hendriks...reliever). Also, not a Jepsen fan, but we'll see.

[twinsnorth49]

 

These "discussions" drive people away because they are sick of people who whine and complain because they think they know more about baseball than TR and company, and when people are acting like that nobody wants to stay around because both sides start acting immature. At least that is my view on it.

I think it drives as many people away having to listen to people constantly defend a FO with the track record this one has had the last 5 years. It's unfortunate any people decide to leave this site because a particular viewpoint doesn't fit their own, there is lots of sound, solid discussion that goes on here, maybe people just have to have a little more conviction in what they think and allow others the same courtesy.

[spinowner]

 

I think this is one of the most thought out, level headed comment I've read on TD. I think people are forgetting the Twins weren't supposed to be good this year and they really haven't been if you looked at  first half numbers. Their record was way above their actual on field play. This was supposed to be the year the Twins brought up the first big wave of talent, which so far they have. And so far the talent is playng well.  Hopefully by seasons end Berrios, Buxton, Keplar and Vargas will be promoted so they can get experience. I'm more excited for this offseason than I have been since 2009 and 2010.  If TR can make a tradeor sign a FA catcher and add some bullpen help (Not mediocre National League players) I think the Twins could be a good and potentially playoff team. 

Outfield: Rosario, Buxton and Hicks.

Infield: Plouffe, Polanco, Dozier and Mauer. 

Catcher: FA.

DH: Sano

Bench: Escobar, Vargas, Suzuki and FA outfielder. 

SP: Santana, Hughes, Gibson, May and Berrios.

Bullpen: Perkins, O'Rourke, Rodgers, Jepsen, Graham, FA, FA. 

 

To me that has the makings of a good team. You also have Duffey and Nolasco as potenial replacements for th starting rotation.  

Very similar to my hopeful projection. I'd hope Arcia would be there instead of the FA outfielder and I don't have specific bullpen names in mind. The only concern I have is that from what I read there really isn't a great FA catcher coming onto the market. A trade might be a better option. I'd also like to see a lefty in the rotation. Again, a trade may be the most likely way to accomplish that.

[jimmer]

 

I think it drives as many people away having to listen to people constantly defend a FO with the track record this one has had the last 5 years. It's unfortunate any people decide to leave this site because a particular viewpoint doesn't fit their own, there is lots of sound, solid discussion that goes on here, maybe people just have to have a little more conviction in what they think and allow others the same courtesy.

This!

[SF Twins Fan]

 

Very similar to my hopeful projection. I'd hope Arcia would be there instead of the FA outfielder and I don't have specific bullpen names in mind. The only concern I have is that from what I read there really isn't a great FA catcher coming onto the market. A trade might be a better option. I'd also like to see a lefty in the rotation. Again, a trade may be the most likely way to accomplish that.

I'd agree. I'm hoping at the end of the season it comes out that Arcia has been trying to play through an injury, because if not then he's taken a major step back in his development. More than likely the Twins will have to trade for a catcher. I just hope it's not Norris unless the Twins can trade for him by himself.  I don't want to take on the Shields contract even if the Twins are able to get rid of Nolasco. I'd prefer to go after one of the Mets young catchers.  I'd like to have a lefty in the starting rotation as well, the Twins just don't have great left handed prospects.  I'd hope Milone is traded this offseason as part of the package for a catcher.  I just don't think he's consistant enough and he'd just take up a starting rotaton spot from Berrios or Duffey or Meyer if he ever figures it out.

[Dman]

I guess I am with the poster on this one.  I don't mind a bash the front office forum but when it gets dragged into almost every article it just gets old. I look past it but I do get sick of the same tired rhetoric. 

 

That being said I am more of a FO apologist than I probably should be but personally i think it is my over reaction to others overreaction. I do love to second guess with the best of them but I also realize that I have the benefit of hindsight in many cases and often times what I would have done was worse than what the FO did.  I think TR's patience will pay off and many of us will be eating crow.

 

If you look at things optimistically then we had a great first half and still have a shot at a top ten draft pick or if we stay in the hunt a shot at wild card spot.  Anyway you look at it we are in a good spot so FO must be doing something right. 

[Craig Arko]

http://globe-views.com/dreams/pitchfork.html

[HitInAPinch]

 

Personally I would have liked to see the Twins either a) make a serious effort to make this team a playoff team, or b ) sell off as much as they could to reload.

I don't understand the Jepsen trade at all. If they really thought they had a shot this year, it didn't take a great scouting mind to tell that it wasn't going to be enough. And if they knew the 2015 team was a May mirage, then it doesn't make sense to trade even mid-level prospects for a veteran reliever. They could have waited until free agency and gotten two or three Jepsens without trading anything.

In summation, my issue was that the Twins couldn't decide one way or another.

Actually, I believe the Jepsen trade was for next year, not this one and done to calm down the fan base.  A look at the performances of several of the RP call-ups would lead me to start planning for next year.  Jepsen can be an asset.  Ryan can try to unload as much as he can, but I think you'll find there won't be many takers, again. 

[bird]

 

So is it negative for me to say that when the Twins start marching out the bullpen, I take a Valium, washed down with a Scotch on the rocks

 

 

To your AA group, yes. 

[formerly33]

I'm guessing that somebody has already said this or something to this extent, but I don't really want to read 4 pages of bantering on whether we should continue the pitchfork meme or not just to see for myself.

 

My takeaway is this: those who argue that the FO bashers turn away members are correct. However, those who take up the stance that those who protect the FO turn away just as many people are also correct.

 

Why is this? And how?

 

Because nobody (myself included) wants to be professional. Well, that, I am sure, is an exaggeration, but the word "nobody" is being used as a figure of speech here. The one side bashes the FO. The other side bashes the bashers for being bashers. That's why we both potentially turn away our audience. We all sit around and bash somebody or something instead of addressing situations professionally. At least, we've all been there. At least, most of us. 

 

I don't think that we need to lay down the pitchforks altogether (though I will press the point that it is over the top), but I also think that people have every right to defend the FO. It's a free country we live in! The key is probably to just tone it down a wee bit and not try to tell other people how to behave. It's one thing to express displeasure with something, but to bash is taking it too far. Even (or especially) if you're bashing someone for bashing.

 

Now here I am telling people (myself included, btw - I'm a huge offender) to stop telling people what to do. Can't win in any situation. But I meant well ... just going to hit the "post" button for the heck of it.

[Jham]

Dozier was drafted during Smith's time as GM and Ryan signed him through the time frame we had him anyway. There were no free agent year bought out.

 

As far as finding Hunter? How hard was that? He went and overpaid for a former Twins star who would fill seats. Hunter's been predictably poor on defense and on offense he's batting .235/.288/.413. 18th out of 19 qualified players in OPS at the RF spot. So, basically, one of the worst starting RF in the game today.

 

And Boyer, only one relief pitcher has allowed a higher % of inherited runners to score and no one on the team has allowed more actual inherited runners to score.

 

I know you mentioned Hunter and Boyer only for the first half, but they still play for us and their whole body of work for this season counts when evaluating a signing.

Are you saying the Perkins and Dozier signings aren't going to save us money? Do don't think they send the right messages to other young players in our organization?

 

Hunter's value is somewhat debated. Same boyer. They have contributed and hurt the team somewhat at times. If the criticism is for staying with them too long with no help (as opposed to over use) then give him credit for the time they helped.

[Thrylos]

Got a couple simple questions for everyone who is defending Terry Ryan:

 

Rewind to June 16th.  The Twins were 34-30, after losing 9 out of 11, and ask yourselves: Did at that point Ryan had the best 25 men in the organization playing for the Twins?  

 

How about last week, in that bullpen game:  Why have the hottest pitcher in the organization (Berrios) pitch at Rochester, while burn 5 arms in MN?

 

2 days ago:  The Yankees burned their bullpen after the accident, and what did Cashman do?  He got a couple of fresh arms from AAA.  When was the last time that Ryan did something like this?

 

Simple stuff.  And I am not even going to talk about improving the team.  Just get the best 25, 5, and 9 up and playing would do wonders for this team.  For some reason it seams that Ryan refuses to accept this concept...

[jimmer]

 

Are you saying the Perkins and Dozier signings aren't going to save us money? Do don't think they send the right messages to other young players in our organization?

Hunter's value is somewhat debated. Same boyer. They have contributed and hurt the team somewhat at times. If the criticism is for staying with them too long with no help (as opposed to over use) then give him credit for the time they helped.

Save US money?  What does saving the Pohlads some money have to do with it? I could see where that argument would be a big plus for the Pohlads, but makes no difference for the fans.  Maybe they saved some money on Dozier but they were going to have him that same amount of time, period.  Good for the Pohlads they likely got a deal.  I'm of the opinion Perkins should have been dealt, myself and yeah, Perkins gave the Pohlads a deal, but still.  Why does it matter?  It's not money that's the problem.  And I don't care if the Pohlads, who were given most of a stadium by taxpayers, saved some money.

 

As far as a message to the young players (I don't say OTHER young players because neither Dozier or Perkins is a young player), what kind of message do you think was sent by Ryan's inaction at the deadline while they still had a playoff spot all to themselves?

 

As far as Hunter and Boyer, like all players, they should be evaluated on the whole season/contract, not cherry picking time frames..

[DocBauer]

OK...deep breath...here I go tossing in my buck and change.

 

I am NOT a FO apologist. But I am also not knee jerk either. I'll be honest here....I think TR is actually doing a pretty good job last year and this year. There is very little I can truly knock him on. (The couple years before that I have larger issues). BUT, I have been very vocal about HUGE toe-stubbing blunders in CF, as well as the handling of the bullpen before this season even began. Without spitting vitriol, I have been pretty clear on my CF stance and my response to the Stauffer signing since day one, as examples.

 

As to my arguements for why I actually think Ryan is doing a pretty good job overall these past two seasons? Well, that's not really the point of this particular forum now is it? So I will leave that alone for now.

 

I think the entire point here is, YES, you can bash Ryan on something...(I have)...and personnel moves, etc. it's your right and the reason a forum like this exists in the first place. NO-ONE is saying don't have an opinion, or only have MY opinion, they're just saying...do some of these opinions have to shouted from the rafters repeatedly in every post?

 

I was and am a big fan of Gardy. I listened to a ton of arguements against. I fought for and said why I did. When last season was over, I felt it was time. And I said so, and I said why I thought so. I listened, and I opinionated with logic and respect.

 

Respectfully, I repeat, I don't believe Ryan should be fired at this time. I don't believe he's uncaring, stubborn, or the least bit incompetent. As someone mentioned earlier, I believe I see the plan unfolding. I believe I see the gears working. And for the most part, I am pleased. (Again, I have voiced my opinion when I have disagreed) Has he missed the target at times? Yep. Has he also had some really bad luck on the ML and milb level the last two years with injury that has hurt not only the team but his plan? Yep.

 

When this season first began, the question was put to the readers whether or not this year's version of the Twins could be a .500 team. Except for some tongue-in-cheek responses, opinions varied from another 90 loss team to possibly .500, to maybe a few games over if things broke right. Shame on the Twins, they did something they weren't supposed to do this year: they won. And they played well enough, for a time, and won often enough, for a time, and were in a playoff position, for a time, enough that they teased.

 

For the most part, there is the making of a really nice team here. There is so much to be excited about, IMHO. In fact, I don't think they are all that far away. And I have to wonder, if this team was playing .500 ball all year, would there be as many, and as loud of disapproving screams over Ryan, the FO, and Molitor?

 

I am looking for some things to happen the rest of this year, this winter, and even spring training next season. If I see some or all of these things take place, I'll be pretty satisfied. If I don't, I may also be calling for Ryan to finally move on. As I stated, I believe I see the workings of a plan. If those gears starting grinding roughly, no good WD40 can't fix it reason why, my pitchfork will remain in the barn. But my torch will burn brightly as I discuss...with logic and respect...why Ryan should go.

[Thrylos]

 

When this season first began, the question was put to the readers whether or not this year's version of the Twins could be a .500 team. Except for some tongue-in-cheek responses, opinions varied from another 90 loss team to possibly .500, to maybe a few games over if things broke right. Shame on the Twins, they did something they weren't supposed to do this year: they won. And they played well enough, for a time, and won often enough, for a time, and were in a playoff position, for a time, enough that they teased.

For the most part, there is the making of a really nice team here. There is so much to be excited about, IMHO. In fact, I don't think they are all that far away. And I have to wonder, if this team was playing .500 ball all year, would there be as many, and as loud of disapproving screams over Ryan, the FO, and Molitor?

 

Here is the problem with this:

 

You think that a team that might be a .480-.500 team, until it is not.  When you find yourself 32-21 on June 4, as a GM, you have to really grab the opportunity by the hair and go all out and improve your team to sustain this, because, those things have not happened for a while, and you don't know when they will happen again.

 

Ryan did not seize the opportunity.   And at that point, the expectations of the fan base were that he would.  But he didn't.  Unlike Houston and the Mets (pretty much at the same boat as the Twins to begin the season.)

 

That is the problem.  A good GM, like a good airliner pilot, is not tested flying on the autopilot, he/she is tested when things don't go the way they seem to go.

 

And what Ryan did (or did not) do, took this team to a nosedive

 

[jimmer]

we have won 33% of our games since the All Star break.  That's 30 games or almost 20% of a whole season.

[Twins7]

Let me ask a hypothetical question, in good spirit, on how we should judge the front office. Just a fun thought experiment, I really don't intend to challenge anyone.

 

The twins continue to lose this year, and finish below .500. Let's say that the twins don't make any major moves next year, and stick with the youngsters, who have varying levels of success. The twins go .500, and stick with TR for another year (again hypothetical scenario). In 2017, Sano breaks out for a 950-1000 ops with 45 HRs, buxton steals 40 bases and wins a batting title, and berrios pitches 200 innings at a 2.00 era. Guys like Rosario, hicks, dozier, Arcia, Kepler, Hughes, Gibson, and may have above average seasons in at least one or two facets of the game. Perhaps we hide turner on the bench, or sign a FA C. But we win the World Series in 2017.

 

We all will undoubtedly have differing opinions as to the likelihood of this sort of scenario (which might play into our "positions" on the FO, if we have one). Just for the sake of argument, ignore the likelihood of this scenario playing out. Would you say that the FO has been successful in its rebuild, even if it took 7 years? I think that you could argue either way... I think it depends on your own opinion of what success is for a baseball franchise.

[Thrylos]

 

Let me ask a hypothetical question, in good spirit, on how we should judge the front office. Just a fun thought experiment, I really don't intend to challenge anyone.

The twins continue to lose this year, and finish below .500. Let's say that the twins don't make any major moves next year, and stick with the youngsters, who have varying levels of success. The twins go .500, and stick with TR for another year (again hypothetical scenario). In 2017, Sano breaks out for a 950-1000 ops with 45 HRs, buxton steals 40 bases and wins a batting title, and berrios pitches 200 innings at a 2.00 era. Guys like Rosario, hicks, dozier, Arcia, Kepler, Hughes, Gibson, and may have above average seasons in at least one or two facets of the game. Perhaps we hide turner on the bench, or sign a FA C. But we win the World Series in 2017.

We all will undoubtedly have differing opinions as to the likelihood of this sort of scenario (which might play into our "positions" on the FO, if we have one). Just for the sake of argument, ignore the likelihood of this scenario playing out. Would you say that the FO has been successful in its rebuild, even if it took 7 years? I think that you could argue either way... I think it depends on your own opinion of what success is for a baseball franchise.

 

You cannot judge the FO on future scenarios

 

It is 'what have you done for me lately", and for the Twins the "lately" has been since 1992.  

 

Look at Boston for example.  Look at the Tigers for example. This is how winning franchises deal when expectations are not met.

[Vanimal46]

Let me ask a hypothetical question, in good spirit, on how we should judge the front office. Just a fun thought experiment, I really don't intend to challenge anyone.

The twins continue to lose this year, and finish below .500. Let's say that the twins don't make any major moves next year, and stick with the youngsters, who have varying levels of success. The twins go .500, and stick with TR for another year (again hypothetical scenario). In 2017, Sano breaks out for a 950-1000 ops with 45 HRs, buxton steals 40 bases and wins a batting title, and berrios pitches 200 innings at a 2.00 era. Guys like Rosario, hicks, dozier, Arcia, Kepler, Hughes, Gibson, and may have above average seasons in at least one or two facets of the game. Perhaps we hide turner on the bench, or sign a FA C. But we win the World Series in 2017.

We all will undoubtedly have differing opinions as to the likelihood of this sort of scenario (which might play into our "positions" on the FO, if we have one). Just for the sake of argument, ignore the likelihood of this scenario playing out. Would you say that the FO has been successful in its rebuild, even if it took 7 years? I think that you could argue either way... I think it depends on your own opinion of what success is for a baseball franchise.

Sure it'd be successful because the end goal always is to win it all. In this hypothetical, it sounds like we don't even need a GM. The pieces are in place, set it to auto-pilot and WS champs here we come

[Jham]

Save US money? What does saving the Pohlads some money have to do with it? I could see where that argument would be a big plus for the Pohlads, but makes no difference for the fans. Maybe they saved some money on Dozier but they were going to have him that same amount of time, period. Good for the Pohlads they likely got a deal. I'm of the opinion Perkins should have been dealt, myself and yeah, Perkins gave the Pohlads a deal, but still. Why does it matter? It's not money that's the problem. And I don't care if the Pohlads, who were given most of a stadium by taxpayers, saved some money.

 

As far as a message to the young players (I don't say OTHER young players because neither Dozier or Perkins is a young player), what kind of message do you think was sent by Ryan's inaction at the deadline while they still had a playoff spot all to themselves?

 

As far as Hunter and Boyer, like all players, they should be evaluated on the whole season/contract, not cherry picking time frames..

Seriously? You don't think Buxton, sano, and "truly" young players are concerned with their future contracts already? Appearances matter.

 

As for "cherry picking" I'm the one asking to look at BOTH tr's and boyer and hunters successes and failures, instead of cherry picking the failures. If you think boyer and hunter were bad signings, fine. I think they were good, and the failure was not their signings, but in their over use and inability to bring in other players at the deadline. That's fair isn't it?

[Riverbrian]

I think Terry Ryan's position is more complex than simply finding 25 players for a MLB Roster. That's just the part that we see. 

 

I don't have enough information to say he should go or say.

 

I just know that I was tremendously disappointed by the failure to address the bullpen.The need was alarming so I can't understand it. 

 

I can understand passing on higher priced acquisitions... But a decent bullpen arm has proven to be not that expensive. 

 

Would I fire him if I was the owner. I assume it would be easier to answer as the owner because I'd have more information. 

[TKGuy]

You know what, I am frustrated, but then I think about a couple of things. We are playing meaningful games in August, and we have also seen Sano, Buxton, Rosario and Hicks breaking in or breaking out. Duffey is getting his chance and Berrios won't be far behind. I also hope to see Meyer and Kepler before the end of the year.

[DocBauer]

Here is the problem with this:

 

You think that a team that might be a .480-.500 team, until it is not.  When you find yourself 32-21 on June 4, as a GM, you have to really grab the opportunity by the hair and go all out and improve your team to sustain this, because, those things have not happened for a while, and you don't know when they will happen again.

 

Ryan did not seize the opportunity.   And at that point, the expectations of the fan base were that he would.  But he didn't.  Unlike Houston and the Mets (pretty much at the same boat as the Twins to begin the season.)

 

That is the problem.  A good GM, like a good airliner pilot, is not tested flying on the autopilot, he/she is tested when things don't go the way they seem to go.

 

And what Ryan did (or did not) do, took this team to a nosedive

Totally understand and appreciate your response. In fact, it's probably the most logical, well thought and succinct response in this column. Along with my own, of course. Lol!

 

But here is where I think the conversation may diverge. And the answer may not be a popular one, but I think it's worth examing.

 

If I may paraphrase, there comes an apex, and unexpected apex, where you as the GM...Ryan in this case...has to make a crucial decision. Essentially it is this: "do I believe ENOUGH in the potential of this team...HERE AND NOW...that with some moves made, we have a real chance to win it all? Not a guarantee, but a real chance?"

 

Now, if the answer is yes, then you need to make some really hard decisions and some really big moves because you are definitely going to lose players and prospects to make moves. Now, if your honest answer is: "No. I just don't think we're quite ready yet. And fun as this is, as much as I want this to happen, I simply can't sacrifice what it would take to make these kinds of moves NOW, when I think this team will be ready tomorrow, and these kinds of moves should be made THEN."

 

Now before anyone jumps all over me about saying tomorrow, tomorrow, tomorrow and never actually going for it, that is NOT what I am saying. I am talking about an honest, gut-check evaluation of your team, how it's constructed, strengths and weaknesses, veterans, young veterans, newly arrived prospects, close to arriving prospects, trade depth on all levels I can work with...etc...and deciding your best window is not the painted shut one just popped...but the next one over that you expect to open wider, and more easily.

 

To me, THAT is a more worthwhile discussion and debate, along with the overall NOW vs LATER principle.

[Teflon]

 

I'm sure I'll get burned for this, but every thread doesn't need to turn into the front office being fired.  Things can STILL be discussed beyond that.  Player's can still perform on their own without being a complete fault of the GM.  It gets old.  It's driving people away.  

 

That worked well, I thought.

[jimmer]

 

Seriously? You don't think Buxton, sano, and "truly" young players are concerned with their future contracts already? Appearances matter.

As for "cherry picking" I'm the one asking to look at BOTH tr's and boyer and hunters successes and failures, instead of cherry picking the failures. If you think boyer and hunter were bad signings, fine. I think they were good, and the failure was not their signings, but in their over use and inability to bring in other players at the deadline. That's fair isn't it?

What happened to your argument about saving us money?

 

And yes, appearances matter.  Like, say, when a GM, whose team is holding down a playoff spot, does nothing to help his team at the deadline?.  How do you think the whole team, young and old, feel about that?  Think they'll wonder about that when it's contract time.  Hunter did.  Santana did.

 

I am sure the young players are concerned with their future contracts, but those are also a long ways out.   I'm sure Buxton's bigger concern is about getting on and staying on the 25 man roster as opposed to being service timed by the team.

 

And yes, cherry picking. I am talking about evaluating them on what they have done the whole season for our team.  When did I point out just their bad months in our discussion? I'm talking whole season of work which includes the good and the bad.

 

As far as Hunter.  You want to say it was a good signing.  That paying him 10M (which is an overpay, BTW) was a good idea and then also say we should have limited the playing time for a guy we are paying 10M to?  That's very confusing.  You pay a guy 10M, you should expect him to be able to play a full season. If he can't, maybe it wasn't a good signing.  

[Thrylos]

 

Totally understand and appreciate your response. In fact, it's probably the most logical, well thought and succinct response in this column. Along with my own, of course. Lol!

But here is where I think the conversation may diverge. And the answer may not be a popular one, but I think it's worth examing.

If I may paraphrase, there comes an apex, and unexpected apex, where you as the GM...Ryan in this case...has to make a crucial decision. Essentially it is this: "do I believe ENOUGH in the potential of this team...HERE AND NOW...that with some moves made, we have a real chance to win it all? Not a guarantee, but a real chance?"

Now, if the answer is yes, then you need to make some really hard decisions and some really big moves because you are definitely going to lose players and prospects to make moves. Now, if your honest answer is: "No. I just don't think we're quite ready yet. And fun as this is, as much as I want this to happen, I simply can't sacrifice what it would take to make these kinds of moves NOW, when I think this team will be ready tomorrow, and these kinds of moves should be made THEN."

Now before anyone jumps all over me about saying tomorrow, tomorrow, tomorrow and never actually going for it, that is NOT what I am saying. I am talking about an honest, gut-check evaluation of your team, how it's constructed, strengths and weaknesses, veterans, young veterans, newly arrived prospects, close to arriving prospects, trade depth on all levels I can work with...etc...and deciding your best window is not the painted shut one just popped...but the next one over that you expect to open wider, and more easily.

To me, THAT is a more worthwhile discussion and debate, along with the overall NOW vs LATER principle.

 

I think that part of the reason here is about drawing the line at a point that you say this FO has had about 20 seasons of tomorrows (since 1995) that they have proven that they cannot make it happen "tomorrow".  Some of us would say that it was about 10 seasons too many... 

 

But they have had their chance and they blew it.