About that farm system..

[drjim]

We don't know that... they have (likely) set up new metrics, new ways of evaluating talent and put that to work, given players an opportunity while evaluating, and keeping tabs on what other minor league organizations have differently. Just because we haven't seen a ton of transactions doesn't mean things aren't completely different.

Several new front office hires too. Lots of shifting under the radar.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I guess I see people discussing with more nuance a blunt point made in the original post.

 

Fair. Not sure I completely agree, but fair. We can read the same thing, and see different messages....(something STNG taught us, and I learned in working in internal communications).

[whydidnt]

We don't know that... they have (likely) set up new metrics, new ways of evaluating talent and put that to work, given players an opportunity while evaluating, and keeping tabs on what other minor league organizations have differently. Just because we haven't seen a ton of transactions doesn't mean things aren't completely different.

 

I agree these guys are probably doing things a lot differently. I just think they are being awfully slow about making significant changes, and keeping the scouting department mostly intact does not make sense in the context of recent performance.

[Seth Stohs]

 

On that tangent, it's interesting to think that none of the recent roster/personnel moves would have been out of place with TR at the helm.  Castro, Gimenez, Adrianza, Belisle, Breslow, Haley, Tepesch, Wilk, Duffey to the pen, etc.  Even dismissing Brunansky as hitting coach.

 

I think this speaks more to the fact that most (if not all) organizations sign and claim these types of players and make these types of moves. Check out all team's offseason organization transactions and find a team that doesn't find stopgaps or big parts with minor league signings... and probably 1/4 to 1/3 of teams keep their Rule 5 picks... And teams value defense behind the plate and around the diamond... and veteran leadership means something to all organizations.  

 

Sometimes is more of the means of evaluating which players to target might be slightly different, but the teams all sign players from a variety of places. 

[Mike Sixel]

 

Saying the farm system is fine is not the same as saying it shouldn't be better than it is.

 

Also fair, but is that what people posted? If so, I apologize for missing that nuance. 

 

edit: and if it should be better, should we be happy most of the scouts are the same? That was actually the OP's point, I think. Should we trust the FO, if they are relying on mostly the same people, to improve the farm system?

 

And, as I said in my post, we don't have enough data since they've largely just signed old guys and not made a trade for prospects.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I agree these guys are probably doing things a lot differently. I just think they are being awfully slow about making significant changes, and keeping the scouting department mostly intact does not make sense in the context of recent performance.

At times, we need to step back and take a look at the scope of an organization as large as an MLB team and then couple that with the extremely limited talent pool available at any given moment.

 

The Twins have, what, 50 scouts? More? And how many qualified scouting directors are available in November? Never mind the not-scouts who work under the director.

 

And that's just the scouting department. Multiply those numbers through analytics, administration, coaching, etc.

 

When large organizations see turnover, it's rarely fast and furious. It happens over a period of time as talent (or lack thereof) is identified, promoted, demoted, fired, and hired.

 

I've worked in large organizations that saw management turnover. They didn't walk in and fire everyone on day one because the organization would literally stop functioning the moment that happened. You need to grandfather in the current staff, identify strengths and weaknesses, change philosophy, and then make adjustments. Firing everyone when you walk in the door sounds like a good plan but would lead not only to failure but catastrophic failure.

[Brock Beauchamp]

edit: and if it should be better, should we be happy most of the scouts are the same?

One truncated offseason is not enough time to build a scouting department or even identify the problem areas.

 

I know you've worked in large organizations, Mike. Imagine someone coming in and firing an entire department. Nothing would work if that happened and the department would stop functioning because no one knows the password for the friggin' PDF that contains all the internal scouting reports.

 

Never mind that it's highly unlikely every scout in the Twins organization should be fired in the first place. If 40% of a department is badly run but that 40% has louder voices than the rest, you've just needlessly fired 60% of a good department and it's unlikely you'll replace that 60% with equally qualified candidates (as we all know, even many "good" hires end up failing). This is basic management stuff here.

 

As I've said many times in the past, if fans of baseball teams worked for companies that ran the way the fan wanted their sports franchise to operate, they'd scream bloody murder and cry management incompetence (which would be deserved, frankly).

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I think it's a bit unfair to say Ryan would have acquired this catching corps for the reasons Falvey acquired them.

The others? Yeah, hard to see a lot of difference there but I think it's a mistake to assume the process is the same because the result is similar.

Hard to say on the catching front.  Castro and Gimenez aren't strictly "hidden framing treasures" -- Castro was one of the top FA catchers on the market, and probably the best fit for the Twins for a number of reasons (health, durability, willingness to sign a reasonable deal with a losing ballclub).  And Ryan certainly would not have trusted Garver or Murphy for 2017 either, so he would have been looking for a veteran backup, and Gimenez probably fit just as well as any, given his history and cheap price.

 

I'm not necessarily saying the process is the same, but I do wonder if we didn't over-state (or over-expect?) their differences in many areas.  (And perhaps we're over-stating some of the catcher effects too? The Twins had a lot of bad luck in 2016, it was natural to expect some of that to neutralize.)

[whydidnt]

I've worked in large organizations that saw management turnover. They didn't walk in and fire everyone on day one because the organization would literally stop functioning the moment that happened. You need to grandfather in the current staff, identify strengths and weaknesses, change philosophy, and then make adjustments. Firing everyone when you walk in the door sounds like a good plan but would lead not only to failure but catastrophic failure.

It's also quite rare to promote the two guys who were overseeing that complicated area that hasn't been doing too well. Sure, Scouting Directors don't grow on trees, but both Falvey and Levine have been in the FO of major league teams for several years. They get hired into positions of high responsibility and don't know anyone from 30 other organizations that they could bring in to help implement their plan? Every reorg I've ever been involved in typically didn't include promoting people just because they were there already.

 

I think we are letting the Twins orginization off the hook buy just saying it can't happen over night. Of course it can't, but that doesn't mean you don't start making clear decision based upon available facts as soon as possible.

 

My opinion is the Pohlads and St. Peter have way more control of the baseball side of things than anyone is willing to admit, and they have handcuffed the new leadership, which is why we haven't seen more significant change in areas that were in obvious need of improvement. Again, just my opinion from miles away.

[bluechipper]

8 out of the top 11 prospects on this list are international signings. This is the area the Twins need to get better at, as they haven't had much success since the Sano, Polanco, and Kepler group.

[Mike Sixel]

 

One truncated offseason is not enough time to build a scouting department or even identify the problem areas.

I know you've worked in large organizations, Mike. Imagine someone coming in and firing an entire department. Nothing would work if that happened and the department would stop functioning because no one knows the password for the friggin' PDF that contains all the internal scouting reports.

Never mind that it's highly unlikely every scout in the Twins organization should be fired in the first place. If 40% of a department is badly run but that 40% has louder voices than the rest, you've just needlessly fired 60% of a good department and it's unlikely you'll replace that 60% with equally qualified candidates (as we all know, even many "good" hires end up failing). This is basic management stuff here.

As I've said many times in the past, if fans of baseball teams worked for companies that ran the way the fan wanted their sports franchise to operate, they'd scream bloody murder and cry management incompetence (which would be deserved, frankly).

 

that wasn't the question.

 

NO place have I ever said they should turn over the employees w/o first working with most of them. Indeed, I've said that would be wrong and bad leadership.

 

I'm talking about what the OP asked, how confident should we be that this draft will be better, and that this farm system will be much better?

 

And, I've said that we don't have enough data, but having the same scouts should maybe make us nervous.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I think this speaks more to the fact that most (if not all) organizations sign and claim these types of players and make these types of moves. Check out all team's offseason organization transactions and find a team that doesn't find stopgaps or big parts with minor league signings... and probably 1/4 to 1/3 of teams keep their Rule 5 picks... And teams value defense behind the plate and around the diamond... and veteran leadership means something to all organizations.  

But there's also a lot of clubs willing to sign guys like Holland and Storen to potentially shore up a mediocre pen.

 

Also a lot of clubs willing to promote relief prospects.

 

Also a lot of teams that almost exclusively look for bullpen upside in Rule 5.

[Brock Beauchamp]

It's also quite rare to promote the two guys who were overseeing that complicated area that hasn't been doing too well. Sure, Scouting Directors don't grow on trees, but both Falvey and Levine have been in the FO of major league teams for several years. They get hired into positions of high responsibility and don't know anyone from 30 other organizations that they could bring in to help implement their plan? Every reorg I've ever been involved in typically didn't include promoting people just because they were there already.

 

I think we are letting the Twins orginization off the hook buy just saying it can't happen over night. Of course it can't, but that doesn't mean you don't start making clear decision based upon available facts as soon as possible.

 

My opinion is the Pohlads and St. Peter have way more control of the baseball side of things than anyone is willing to admit, and they have handcuffed the new leadership, which is why we haven't seen more significant change in areas that were in obvious need of improvement. Again, just my opinion from miles away.

Actually, promoting and expanding is a classic way for new management to infuse a department with new people and ideas, especially if the department isn't toxic (which is one of the few times you need to change culture, though it burns in the short term).

[yarnivek1972]

I'm of the school of thought that believes that player development, not drafting and scouting, are the bigger issues for the Twins organization.  Every baseball GM and scout knows who has the best talent.  There may be some slight slot disagreement, but if you take all 30 GMs and ask them to put down the top 50 players in the draft, probably going to see the same 45 names on everyone's list.

 

But the Twins have been largely unable to turn these raw, talented athletes into MLB players.  Why?  I wish I knew.  It could very well be the philosophy of the old regime: pitch to contact and hit the ball the other way.  If you have uber raw talent, odds are you don't pitch to contact or hit the ball the other way very often.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I'm of the school of thought that believes that player development, not drafting and scouting, are the bigger issues for the Twins organization. Every baseball GM and scout knows who has the best talent. There may be some slight slot disagreement, but if you take all 30 GMs and ask them to put down the top 50 players in the draft, probably going to see the same 45 names on everyone's list.

 

But the Twins have been largely unable to turn these raw, talented athletes into MLB players. Why? I wish I knew. It could very well be the philosophy of the old regime: pitch to contact and hit the ball the other way. If you have uber raw talent, odds are you don't pitch to contact or hit the ball the other way very often.

I'd say this certainly applies to pitching but it's hard to say the Twins have done a poor job of developing position players.

[Seth Stohs]

 

I agree these guys are probably doing things a lot differently. I just think they are being awfully slow about making significant changes, and keeping the scouting department mostly intact does not make sense in the context of recent performance.

 

I mean, there was a change at the top of the scouting department, the front office has brought them all together (including with coaching staffs and such) to all get on one page, and 2-3 scouts left and they've brought in a couple more. A few have moved around. 

[yarnivek1972]

I'd say this certainly applies to pitching but it's hard to say the Twins have done a poor job of developing position players.

Recently, sure. But I'm an old man. I remember David McCarty, Scott Stahoviak, Matt Moses and even some guys that did well that never really lived up to the hype. Like Hicks, Plouffe, Matt LeCroy.

[Guest]

The Twins' top two prospects won't be in the organization until June (#1 pick) and July (assuming they get Marte). The farm currently has some "OK" prospects, but few who project to be difference makers. Maybe Gordon, but after him it's a lot of hope and projection in players like Arraez, Diaz, Javier and Kirilloff. Unfortunately, for pitchers. the Jay and Stewart picks don't look too good, but this really isn't news any longer, and there has been a tremendous number of injuries and other disappointments. The good news is that three lucky breaks in drafting, development or trades can quickly turn around a pitching staff, but those can take a couple of years.

 

Looking at other turnarounds, like the Cubs, Tigers and Indians, it seems to have taken a few years to see real improvement under leadership like Epstein, Dombrowski and Antonetti, respectively, so the best thing to do is be patient and not panic when fewer than forty games have been played under new management.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Recently, sure. But I'm an old man. I remember David McCarty, Scott Stahoviak, Matt Moses and even some guys that did well that never really lived up to the hype. Like Hicks, Plouffe, Matt LeCroy.

Sure, I remember those guys too. But I don't think we should hold up old philosophies the Twins haven't used in years as evidence of current failure.

 

Out of the guys you listed, only Hicks and Plouffe had anything to do with the past few seasons. Plouffe turned out okay, Hicks was a big miss. And even those guys date back 4+ years. The current crop of players are hard to fault. They pull and elevate the ball, they show discipline, and are modern hitters.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I mean, there was a change at the top of the scouting department, the front office has brought them all together (including with coaching staffs and such) to all get on one page, and 2-3 scouts left and they've brought in a couple more. A few have moved around. 

But to me, those seem like the kinds of incremental changes any team might do.  Even an "old school" one after a 103 loss season.

[jimmer]

Our farm system was over-rated for quite some time and it's not worthy of being rated well now.  Drafting a bunch of relievers in the hopes of converting them to quality starters was bad strategy and predictably backfired.

[drjim]

The Twins' top two prospects won't be in the organization until June (#1 pick) and July (assuming they get Marte). The farm currently has some "OK" prospects, but few who project to be difference makers. Maybe Gordon, but after him it's a lot of hope and projection in players like Arraez, Diaz, Javier and Kirilloff. Unfortunately, for pitchers. the Jay and Stewart picks don't look too good, but this really isn't news any longer, and there has been a tremendous number of injuries and other disappointments. The good news is that three lucky breaks in drafting, development or trades can quickly turn around a pitching staff, but those can take a couple of years.

 

Looking at other turnarounds, like the Cubs, Tigers and Indians, it seems to have taken a few years to see real improvement under leadership like Epstein, Dombrowski and Antonetti, respectively, so the best thing to do is be patient and not panic when fewer than forty games have been played under new management.

Marte won't even be in the top 10 this offseason.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Our farm system was over-rated for quite some time and it's not worthy of being rated well now.

Can you honestly say that when the lineup currently has one star and four acceptable-to-good starters under 26 years old? That seems like a pretty unreasonable standard you're setting.

[drjim]

Our farm system was over-rated for quite some time and it's not worthy of being rated well now. Drafting a bunch of relievers in the hopes of converting them to quality starters was bad strategy and predictably backfired.

Drafting relievers was a mistake, but considering the position players that recently graduated it was not overrated recently.

 

But the bad draft strategies and lack of other talent acquisition has not backfilled to the level that was needed.

[drjim]

My opinion is the Pohlads and St. Peter have way more control of the baseball side of things than anyone is willing to admit, and they have handcuffed the new leadership, which is why we haven't seen more significant change in areas that were in obvious need of improvement. Again, just my opinion from miles away.

Not saying you're wrong but this would be pretty stunning. And no chance Levine would stick around.

[jimmer]

 

Can you honestly say that when the lineup currently has one star and four acceptable-to-good starters under 26 years old? That seems like a pretty unreasonable standard you're setting.

Well, Meyer was highly rated (which helped the rankings).  Stewart was highly rated (which helped the ratings) and a few other pitchers (like Jay) who went plop too (May got jerked around). Berrios might make it, might not, but likely is a #3 at best in the majors.  Buxton may never be the player that deserved the ratings he had for years. Rosario isn't a starter in the long term, Sano is a beast of a hitter and Kepler is likely going to be a quality regular.

 

All teams have players in their system that become starters

[Brock Beauchamp]

Well, Meyer was highly rated (which helped the rankings). Stewart was highly rated (which helped the ratings) and a few other pitchers (like Jay) who went plop too (May got jerked around). Berrios might make it, might not, but likely is a #3 at best in the majors. Buxton may never be the player that deserved the ratings he had for years. Rosario isn't a starter in the long term, Sano is a beast of a hitter and Kepler is likely going to be a quality regular.

 

All teams have players in their system that become starters

I get your point about pitching but you're really diminishing the quality of the Twins positional players, IMO. It's impressive to call up over half a lineup in basically two seasons. I know you're down on Rosario but the guy just does his job. It's unlikely he'll ever be way above average but he's the guy with the lowest ceiling out of five players and his ceiling is still "pretty good player, above average overall".

 

It seems pretty backhanded to say Rosario isn't a starter and then complain about bad outfield defense. He certainly has warts but he does a damned fine job of rounding out an extremely talented outfield defensive alignment.

[jimmer]

 

I get your point about pitching but you're really diminishing the quality of the Twins positional players, IMO. It's impressive to call up over half a lineup in basically two seasons. I know you're down on Rosario but the guy just does his job. It's unlikely he'll ever be way above average but he's the guy with the lowest ceiling out of five players and his ceiling is still "pretty good player, above average overall".

It seems pretty backhanded to say Rosario isn't a starter and then complain about bad outfield defense. He certainly has warts but he does a damned fine job of rounding out an extremely talented outfield defensive alignment.

When did I complain about OF defense?  I was higher than most on Kepler's defense (when many were down on it) and I've never had issues with Buxton's or Rosario's defense.  But Rosario can't gete on base and his rookie season was boosted by a triples count not able to be maintained, which I expressed consistently.

 

People want to complain about Mauer not producing like a 1B, but you know, LF is supposedly to produce similar to 1B as well.  I can't see Rosario's ceiling as 'Above average overall'. I see quality defender suited to 4th OF.  I've been saying that forever and nothing has changed for me.

[Brock Beauchamp]

When did I complain about OF defense? I was higher than most on Kepler's defense (when many were down on it) and I've never had issues with Buxton's or Rosario's defense.

Sorry, I was speaking more about the lamenting of past defensive alignments and the undervaluing of how Rosario can easily play the "Jacques Jones" role in the outfield. Yeah, he'll be irritating to watch at times but he brings value to the team as a starter.

[jimmer]

 

Sorry, I was speaking more about the lamenting of past defensive alignments and the undervaluing of how Rosario can easily play the "Jacques Jones" role in the outfield. Yeah, he'll be irritating to watch at times but he brings value to the team as a starter.

yeah, when Sano, Grossman, Santana and Escobar would be put out there quite often (though not at the same time, though that might have worked. :-)

 

I never compared Rosario to Jacque defensively, though Rosario does/did have brainfarts on where to throw the ball sometimes which is irritating. I haven't seen much of that this year.

 

Jacque kept losing the ball in the roof.