BP: Same Old Twins

[Major League Ready]

 

and yet you point out it took the Royals 30 years to do it their way, and how long did it take the Pirates? It isn't like going small always works either....how did that work when Ryan was last year, and he went small for a decade?

Wow, did you miss the point completely but I guess that helps illustrate the points I was making.  Let me try again. 

 

1. People are applauding the Royals when they failed repeatedly.  Ryan came back to a good team that fell apart and a depleted farms system.  I don’t think anyone was against them building around Mauer and Morneau but that just did not work. This FO has put the franchise in a very good position in a respectable period of time, yet they are characterized by some as incompetent and by a few characterized this way no matter what they do. 

 

2. They have changed some practices.  Not as much as I would like, especially in terms of sabermetrics but I also don’t really know the practices and therefore reserve judgement.  They have changed drafting practices and their FA spending is at least on par if not more assertive than other teams of their revenue level.  The Price or Grienke type FA signings that are used as a barometer here just completely ignore the fact that this type of signing is extremely rare or non-existent amongst teams of moderate revenue depending on how you interpret the facts.

 

3. Many here are calling for the type of trade the Royals made in 2013 but the Twins are by no means as far along.  This Twins team is really at the same point the Royals were in 2011.  As a matter of fact, the trades discussed would have depleted the very resources required to get to the point the Royals were in 2013.  IMO, some of the aggressive trades discussed here would be the death of what could be a sustained run of contention.

 

Once again you have demonstrated no objectivity.  You look at the fact that it took the Royals and Pirates 20 years to do what the Twins have done in 5 years and suggest the approach is flawed.  In the process you ignore the countless times the same process has succeeded in a reasonable period of time including most recently the Twins, Mets, Astros and Cubs.  Granted the Cubs also have a lot more revenue than the Twins and they utilized FA once the foundation was well-established.  Cleveland might prove to be in that category this year as well.

[Mike Sixel]

I have never said the Twins aren't better now. I have said I don't think Ryan deserves all the credit for Sano and Gibson, for example, since they were in the system before he came back.

 

it is also early to assume the rebuild has worked. We don't know that. We are all hopeful that they are going to be very good in the next few years, but we don't know that yet.

 

I have posted several times, the real tell on if the team is different is what they do in the next year or two, to close the gap. do they tread water and not add the ONE GUY to make a difference, now that they are supposedly good, or do they not act like they did last time they were good.

 

I have acknowledged about 100000000x that signing three mediocre pitchers to league average deals is a divergence from his previous regime. I have also said I'd rather they acquire one elite player than three mediocre ones.

 

Cleveland looks a lot like the Twins of earlier this decade. They won't/can't spend the money to close their holes. It is a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy on their part, though. At some point, the fans stop coming if you don't really try to win, no matter what the reason might be, in your control or not. Fans don't, and probably shouldn't, care about anything (assuming your team is ethical/moral) other than winning and trying to win.

[Mike Sixel]

Here is a list of hitters added to the system since Ryan came back that are on the roster:

 

the 2 catchers, Escobar, Park (assuming he is on the roster) (maybe Buxton, but maybe not at the beginning of the year). Other than Escobar, none of them are league average or really drove the team's success last year.

 

I'm not sure how much the team is better because of Ryan, on the hitting side, just yet......they are better because Dozier, Plouffe (and Escobar) are in their prime, and Sano is elite and Rosario is better than the guys they ran out before. All of those guys but EE were already in the system before the rebuild started.

 

Ryan has definitely made the SP better, but that's a low bar to get over. And, he's almost 100% done it in FA, a path I am told repeatedly is a bad idea to take. 

[Squirrel]

Wow, did you miss the point completely but I guess that helps illustrate the points I was making. Let me try again.

 

1. People are applauding the Royals when they failed repeatedly. Ryan came back to a good team that fell apart and a depleted farms system. I don’t think anyone was against them building around Mauer and Morneau but that just did not work. This FO has put the franchise in a very good position in a respectable period of time, yet they are characterized by some as incompetent and by a few characterized this way no matter what they do.

 

2. They have changed some practices. Not as much as I would like, especially in terms of sabermetrics but I also don’t really know the practices and therefore reserve judgement. They have changed drafting practices and their FA spending is at least on par if not more assertive than other teams of their revenue level. The Price or Grienke type FA signings that are used as a barometer here just completely ignore the fact that this type of signing is extremely rare or non-existent amongst teams of moderate revenue depending on how you interpret the facts.

 

3. Many here are calling for the type of trade the Royals made in 2013 but the Twins are by no means as far along. This Twins team is really at the same point the Royals were in 2011. As a matter of fact, the trades discussed would have depleted the very resources required to get to the point the Royals were in 2013. IMO, some of the aggressive trades discussed here would be the death of what could be a sustained run of contention.

 

Once again you have demonstrated no objectivity. You look at the fact that it took the Royals and Pirates 20 years to do what the Twins have done in 5 years and suggest the approach is flawed. In the process you ignore the countless times the same process has succeeded in a reasonable period of time including most recently the Twins, Mets, Astros and Cubs. Granted the Cubs also have a lot more revenue than the Twins and they utilized FA once the foundation was well-established. Cleveland might prove to be in that category this year as well.

Stop with the 'Wow, you don't get it' stuff when people disagree with you. You've made some very good points, leave it at that.

[USAFChief]

Wow, did you miss the point completely but I guess that helps illustrate the points I was making. Let me try again.

 

1. People are applauding the Royals when they failed repeatedly. Ryan came back to a good team that fell apart and a depleted farms system. I don’t think anyone was against them building around Mauer and Morneau but that just did not work. This FO has put the franchise in a very good position in a respectable period of time, yet they are characterized by some as incompetent and by a few characterized this way no matter what they do.

 

2. They have changed some practices. Not as much as I would like, especially in terms of sabermetrics but I also don’t really know the practices and therefore reserve judgement. They have changed drafting practices and their FA spending is at least on par if not more assertive than other teams of their revenue level. The Price or Grienke type FA signings that are used as a barometer here just completely ignore the fact that this type of signing is extremely rare or non-existent amongst teams of moderate revenue depending on how you interpret the facts.

 

3. Many here are calling for the type of trade the Royals made in 2013 but the Twins are by no means as far along. This Twins team is really at the same point the Royals were in 2011. As a matter of fact, the trades discussed would have depleted the very resources required to get to the point the Royals were in 2013. IMO, some of the aggressive trades discussed here would be the death of what could be a sustained run of contention.

 

Once again you have demonstrated no objectivity. You look at the fact that it took the Royals and Pirates 20 years to do what the Twins have done in 5 years and suggest the approach is flawed. In the process you ignore the countless times the same process has succeeded in a reasonable period of time including most recently the Twins, Mets, Astros and Cubs. Granted the Cubs also have a lot more revenue than the Twins and they utilized FA once the foundation was well-established. Cleveland might prove to be in that category this year as well.

I missed the point too.

 

You seem to be simultaneously claiming the Twins are two years from contention and shouldnt make trades while giving them credit for the impressive speed and completeness of the rebuild , in adjacent paragraphs.

 

Those seem like opposing points, which is it?

[Major League Ready]

 

I missed the point too.

You seem to be simultaneously claiming the Twins are two years from contention and shouldnt make trades while giving them credit for the impressive speed and completeness of the rebuild , in adjacent paragraphs.

Those seem like opposing points, which is it?

Yes, I can see you missed the point.  It would take 5-6 pages to do this the right way which would be to detail multiple future case scenarios so I will give the reader’s digest view.  .

The Twins had a very bad team and a depleted farm system 5 years ago.  Now ….

• Sano/Buxton/Rosario/Duffey are just getting started.  Two potential MVP types and two other solid contributors.  Duffey could even be a 2 or at least a strong 3.
• Kepler and Berrios, two more potential all-stars on the verge of their MLB careers
• Jay/Meyer/Burdi/Chargios are all getting close
• Park should be good at a minimum and potentially great
• Arcia/Walker are low probability but could be awesome
• Rodgers / Polanco will provide depth or trade value
• Murphy is not the chopped liver some like to suggest. 
• There is another wave of good prospects behind this group to provide trade assets for final pieces or  extend the period of contention.

 

This team is in a great position compared to where we were 5 years ago but that definitely does not mean they should be making the “all-in” moves some suggest.  The fact we are not there yet is no indictment of their rebuild effort.  It simply means the process is not complete.  Of course, the process not being complete does add a risk element.  However, we all know there are no guarantees with prospects or FA or even the players that have been great (Mauer) for that matter but this team is very well positioned for an extended run at contention.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Yes, I can see you missed the point.  It would take 5-6 pages to do this the right way which would be to detail multiple future case scenarios so I will give the reader’s digest view.  .

The Twins had a very bad team and a depleted farm system 5 years ago.  Now ….

• Sano/Buxton/Rosario/Duffey are just getting started.  Two potential MVP types and two other solid contributors.  Duffey could even be a 2 or at least a strong 3.
• Kepler and Berrios, two more potential all-stars on the verge of their MLB careers
• Jay/Meyer/Burdi/Chargios are all getting close
• Park should be good at a minimum and potentially great
• Arcia/Walker are low probability but could be awesome
• Rodgers / Polanco will provide depth or trade value
• Murphy is not the chopped liver some like to suggest. 
• There is another wave of good prospects behind this group to provide trade assets for final pieces or  extend the period of contention.

 

This team is in a great position compared to where we were 5 years ago but that definitely does not mean they should be making the “all-in” moves some suggest.  The fact we are not there yet is no indictment of their rebuild effort.  It simply means the process is not complete.  Of course, the process not being complete does add a risk element.  However, we all know there are no guarantees with prospects or FA or even the players that have been great (Mauer) for that matter but this team is very well positioned for an extended run at contention.

 

5 years ago the farm system was depleted because the GM 5 years previously had overseen some poor drafts.  That's the same guy you're crediting now.

 

I don't need all-in moves, but I'd like to see that 18M being spent on Suzuki and Nolasco contributing a lot more than it is now.  

 

And the real question is....if are about to embark on an extended run of contention, can Ryan do what it takes to augment this team further?  I have serious doubts based on a long track record of evidence.

[Mike Sixel]

Sano, Rosario, Kepler, Polanco, Arcia, were all on that depleted farm system, right?

[TheLeviathan]

 

Sano, Rosario, Kepler, Polanco, Arcia, were all on that depleted farm system, right?

 

And none of whom are the responsibility of Ryan.  And, to go further, all could be argued to have never even been Twins if Ryan was in charge at the time.  Certainly a case can be made about Sano.

[USAFChief]

It seems to me if the Twins are on the verge of an extended run, that is the exact time you make trades from the minors to augment the big league team.

 

and augment the payroll as I've been told they'll do when the time is right.

[lukeduke1980]

 

 

• Park should be good at a minimum and potentially great

 

Based on all we've seen so far- good at a minimum

[sane09]

As someone who must select baseball players from tryouts every year, let me say that there is a tremendous amount of luck involved.

I have picked super teams and I have picked stinkers, sometimes one year apart.

Psychiatrists tell me that my IQ can't possibly change that much, that quickly.

Having good or bad drafts doesn't make a GM good or bad.

Players' abilities change with time, age and maturity, and nobody in baseball that I know is a licensed Psychic. And I don't believe in Psychics.

[h2oface]

Can anyone show me a quote from ownership or management in which they claim the Twins were/are in a "rebuild"? The only statements I can remember is that they emphatically stated they were not in a rebuild. Is this something that people like to assume or say, even though those running the team claim is not true? It seems to be a popular thing to claim, even though it seems to be refuted by all team representatives. 

[ashbury]

Can anyone show me a quote from ownership or management in which they claim the Twins were/are in a "rebuild"? The only statements I can remember is that they emphatically stated they were not in a rebuild. Is this something that people like to assume or say, even though those running the team claim is not true? It seems to be a popular thing to claim, even though it seems to be refuted by all team representatives. 

I'm sure you're right. Somewhere in the recesses of my memory I have tucked away that Ryan once said "I don't like the word rebuild", but when I tried googling that today, I found the exact wording from Brewers GM Doug Melvin instead.

 

But whatever reasons (season ticket sales, etc) our FO might have for not embracing the word, I don't think I was the only one to believe that a full-on rebuild was underway the day they traded Denard Span for a high-ceiling prospect in the low minors. The ensuing trade of Revere wasn't confirmation, but continuation. You don't have to call something by its name, for it to be that thing.

[Major League Ready]

For starters, I thought the thread was about the organization.  Some of you change the question when the answer does not suit you.  The theme was changed to Terry Ryan instead of what are the facts associated with the Twins relative success in rebuilding.

 

I was answering this question from Chief.

 

"You seem to be simultaneously claiming the Twins are two years from contention and shouldnt make trades while giving them credit for the impressive speed and completeness of the rebuild , in adjacent paragraphs."

 

The players mentioned shows they organization rebuilt in a reasonable period of time.  Apparently, if the answer satisfies the question, the mode here is to change the question.

[Thrylos]

 

All I see here is revisionist history 101.  Ryan came back out of loyalty to his people as an outside GM would have brought in there own people and dismissed most of Ryan's. 

 

And is that a bad thing?  Why?   How many World Series have the Twins won since 1994 when Ryan and Co started being in charge?

[DaveW]

 

And is that a bad thing?  Why?   How many World Series have the Twins won since 1994 when Ryan and Co started being in charge?

They haven't even been to a world series, the closest they got was 3 wins away from winning the pennant.

 

Even the TWolves have gotten closer than the Twins in that time frame. Let that sink in for a minute.

[mikelink45]

I do not like the TR approach - trade CFs and accumulate DH/1B, etc, but most of all I think the Twins organization really need to look at their public relations.  TRs taciturn personality blunts enthusiasm, his inability to articulate the Twins strategies and bring us along with their philosophy is not a good way to market a product and it is a product.  At least get him a spokesperson!

[jimmer]

 

They haven't even been to a world series, the closest they got was 3 wins away from winning the pennant.

 

Even the TWolves have gotten closer than the Twins in that time frame. Let that sink in for a minute.

Even the Rockies have gotten farther than the Twins in that time frame.  Let THAT sink in. :-)

[Winston Smith]

As someone who must select baseball players from tryouts every year, let me say that there is a tremendous amount of luck involved.

I have picked super teams and I have picked stinkers, sometimes one year apart.

Psychiatrists tell me that my IQ can't possibly change that much, that quickly.

Having good or bad drafts doesn't make a GM good or bad.

Players' abilities change with time, age and maturity, and nobody in baseball that I know is a licensed Psychic. And I don't believe in Psychics.

It's a proven fact that a persons IQ does lower with repeated time on this blog.

[Monkeypaws]

 

Even the Rockies have gotten farther than the Twins in that time frame.  Let THAT sink in. :-)

Sorry, as a Minnesota sports fan since my birth in the 60s, the Twins stand alone and the ONLY major men's pro sports team to win the big one, and they've done it twice. Vikings, Wolves, etc. will never hold a candle to that accomplishment until they deliver a championship.

 

The Rockies? Let them bring home all the marbles once to compare them to the Twins: irony - they were founded the year of the last Twins championship.

 

Don't mean to pick on ya Jimmer, even though it looks like it.

[jimmer]

 

Sorry, as a Minnesota sports fan since my birth in the 60s, the Twins stand alone and the ONLY major men's pro sports team to win the big one, and they've done it twice. Vikings, Wolves, etc. will never hold a candle to that accomplishment until they deliver a championship.

 

The Rockies? Let them bring home all the marbles once to compare them to the Twins: irony - they were founded the year of the last Twins championship.

 

Don't mean to pick on ya Jimmer, even though it looks like it.

It's fine.  Don't feel picked on in the least.

[old nurse]

 

They haven't even been to a world series, the closest they got was 3 wins away from winning the pennant.

 

Even the TWolves have gotten closer than the Twins in that time frame. Let that sink in for a minute.

Over the same time period Toronto, Baltimore, Seattle, Oakland, Washington, Pittsburgh, The Cubs, Cincinnati, Milwaukee and the Dodgers have not been there. Big markets, small markets. Genius GM, not genius GM. Free spenders, tightwads. Hunnington has had 8 years with the Pirates. Is he a bad GM because he has not gotten his team to the Series.  Beane has been in Oakland since 1998.  By your criteria then are these bad Gms?

[DaveW]

Over the same time period Toronto, Baltimore, Seattle, Oakland, Washington, Pittsburgh, The Cubs, Cincinnati, Milwaukee and the Dodgers have not been there. Big markets, small markets. Genius GM, not genius GM. Free spenders, tightwads. Hunnington has had 8 years with the Pirates. Is he a bad GM because he has not gotten his team to the Series. Beane has been in Oakland since 1998. By your criteria then are these bad Gms?

So we are bottom third of the league team in this regard, not good. Can't imagine anyone is happy with that.

Nationals are a newish team I guess, but they are literally knocking on the door now, as are the Dodgers, Cubs, Pirates and Blue Jays.

 

Hard to argue the Twins are knocking on the door with the current roster: which puts us down there with cinci, brew crew, Seattle, and Baltimore. Yikes.

 

Also, none of those teams have had any GMs who have gotten 17 years or anything close to it, Beane was the closest. But even he was let go.

 

In fact bringing these teams up and their gms etc in some ways makes the Twins keeping Ryan and the whole front office around this long that much more absurd.

[h2oface]

 

I'm sure you're right. Somewhere in the recesses of my memory I have tucked away that Ryan once said "I don't like the word rebuild", but when I tried googling that today, I found the exact wording from Brewers GM Doug Melvin instead.

 

But whatever reasons (season ticket sales, etc) our FO might have for not embracing the word, I don't think I was the only one to believe that a full-on rebuild was underway the day they traded Denard Span for a high-ceiling prospect in the low minors. The ensuing trade of Revere wasn't confirmation, but continuation. You don't have to call something by its name, for it to be that thing.

 

I don't think there was a rebuild. And I have to believe "one of the most honest people in the world" that was one of the Twins brass that said there was not one. Many of the folks that are supposedly part of the rebuild and referenced by the rebuild claimers as part of the rebuild, were drafted before that trade you speak of, and while the Twins were competing and achieving playoff births (Sano, Rosario, Kepler to name a few.... others may know a more complete list) as a general matter of business. For me, a rebuild means gutted, purged, and starting over.  For a GM to sign aging average lower end to middle of the pack salary starting pitchers to 4 year contracts instead of going with youth and actually blocking youth...... this does not signal rebuild. For a GM to keep the high salaried Mauer instead of taking the hit and moving him somehow ... this does not signal rebuild. Houston went for a rebuild. Atlanta is rebuilding. Philadelphia is rebuilding now. 20 years of mediocrity (KC) is not a 20 year rebuild, it is just a bad team for 20 years.

 

Perhaps "you don't have to call something by its name, for it to be that thing", but perhaps one can also call something a name that it isn't, just because they want to, or that it may be popular with a group one wants to identify with. The lack of going with youth more aggressively, even if they lose all year (how much worse could it have been with 99 and 96 loss seasons), signals no rebuild. I would have loved to see a rebuild, personally. 

[Linus]

I don't think there was a rebuild. And I have to believe "one of the most honest people in the world" that was one of the Twins brass that said there was not one. Many of the folks that are supposedly part of the rebuild and referenced by the rebuild claimers as part of the rebuild, were drafted before that trade you speak of, and while the Twins were competing and achieving playoff births (Sano, Rosario, Kepler to name a few.... others may know a more complete list) as a general matter of business. For me, a rebuild means gutted, purged, and starting over. For a GM to sign aging average lower end to middle of the pack salary starting pitchers to 4 year contracts instead of going with youth and actually blocking youth...... this does not signal rebuild. For a GM to keep the high salaried Mauer instead of taking the hit and moving him somehow ... this does not signal rebuild. Houston went for a rebuild. Atlanta is rebuilding. Philadelphia is rebuilding now. 20 years of mediocrity (KC) is not a 20 year rebuild, it is just a bad team for 20 years.

 

Perhaps "you don't have to call something by its name, for it to be that thing", but perhaps one can also call something a name that it isn't, just because they want to, or that it may be popular with a group one wants to identify with. The lack of going with youth more aggressively, even if they lose all year (how much worse could it have been with 99 and 96 loss seasons), signals no rebuild. I would have loved to see a rebuild, personally.

Uh? Not sure what this means. I follow the Twins closely and the only thing I've ever heard TR comment on is "i try to improve each position each year however I can."

[sane09]

It's a proven fact that a persons IQ does lower with repeated time on this blog.

Yes, but does it ever increase?

Or fluctuate up and down rapidly?

Talent evaluation performance does those things because it is not a science; it is not an art; and is probably more like a crap-shoot.

[h2oface]

 

Also, none of those teams have had any GMs who have gotten 17 years or anything close to it, Beane was the closest. But even he was let go.

 

I don't see Billy Beane as "being let go". True, he is no longer the GM, but he chose the new GM, David Forst, who was Beane's right hand man and Assistant GM for some years, and the A's and Beane didn't want to lose him to enticing offers from other teams. Billy Beane is now the Executive Vice President of Baseball Operations, and still the man where the buck stops. The change of titles had been in the works for a couple of months before it was announced. This April, the Giants basically did virtually the same thing with Brian Sabean as executive vice president of baseball operations and Bobby Evans the team’s GM. I don't see the Giants as letting Sabean go, either, as both moves are considered promotions, and both Sabean and Beane are head of all baseball operations.

[beckmt]

Comments on Nolasco miss the fact that until 2 years ago the Twins had not even signed a mid level free agent and it was commented at the time the Twins had more than one offer out and Nolasco was the first pitcher to take it. Not every free agent signing works out.  2 years ago Twins needed depth in the starting rotation and signed what pitchers would take there offers.  It is hard to get a major free agent to sign with a bad team unless you significantly overpay them. 

Twins are still a midmarket team.  Draft rule changes made it much better than years before to sign drafted players, this has changed in the last 10 years.  Before this super agents would steer their draftable players with high upsides to big market teams by making it known how much it would take to sign the player. 

[Oldgoat_MN]

 

It's a proven fact that a persons IQ does lower with repeated time on this blog.

 

Huh?