Does the Front Office owe us an explanation?

[ewen21]

 

You don't work for the parents of your district. Did they hire you? Can they directly fire you? I get what you're saying, but do you get what I mean? I'm being very literal. 

 

And the questions you've laid out, especially the one about building the stadium, is definitely something that should be aimed at ownership, or maybe Dave St. Peter at least, but not the baseball operations guys.

 

Let's just say they're hanging on to the veterans because ownership has instructed them to try to squeeze out as many wins as possible this season, what are they supposed to say?

 

"Yeah, we totally want to rebuild, but Jim invested a lot of money in this team and he wants attendance to be as high as possible through the rest of the year, so we're just hoping Cleveland keeps from taking off so there's some illusion we're still in contention." I don't think that'd go over real well.

 

As far as reporters getting their credentials pulled, it happens.

 

If a reporter writes something that doesn't shed a positive light, they could get get blackballed by the team, it happens.

 

I'd have to imagine if you are consistently a person who asks the type of questions people don't feel comfortable answering or develop a reputation as someone who's sniffing around for dirt, it's going to hurt your ability to be a good beat writer one way or another. So the incentive's not there to stick your neck out.

Wrong Tom.  On the most literal level I work for the parents because they pay the taxes that pay my salary. They vote on the budget and they are free to question me and my brethren at board meetings.  I wouldn't say you are being literal, but rather completely disconnected in this example.

 

Your problem is that you are looking at baseball on an antiseptic level.  Since when are we fans not part of the equation with regards to how teams operate?  They better care about what we think.  Baseball isn't a necessity.  They need us a whole hell of a lot more than we need them.

[yarnivek1972]

I don’t have a major problem taking a low risk flyer on Logan Morrison.

 

 

My question is why is he STILL getting at bats? I see zero value in him remaining on the roster. Give the at bats to either Vargas or Wade and decide if either is worth a spot in 2019.

[Tom Froemming]

 

Wrong Tom.  On the most literal level I work for the parents because they pay the taxes that pay my salary. They vote on the budget and they are free to question me and my brethren at board meetings.  I wouldn't say you are being literal, but rather completely disconnected in this example.

 

Your problem is that you are looking at baseball on an antiseptic level.  Since when are we fans not part of the equation with regards to how teams operate?  They better care about what we think.  Baseball isn't a necessity.  They need us a whole hell of a lot more than we need them.

Right, but in the grand scheme "us" isn't the hardcore fan on a message board trying to figure out what the hell the team is doing with their last few spots on the roster

 

"Us" is just somebody who is a potential consumer of the product. So when you look at things from that perspective, it starts to make a lot more sense why ownership would be hesitant to trade away players who even the most casual of fans recognize.

 

"Us" won't understand the logic behind a rebuild. "Us" doesn't give a **** about reporters pressing members of the front office about transactions.

 

The Jim Pohlads and the Dave St. Peters of the organization definitely need to be concerned about "us," but the front office works for "them."

[ewen21]

 

Right, but in the grand scheme "us" isn't the hardcore fan on a message board trying to figure out what the hell the team is doing with their last few spots on the roster

 

"Us" is just somebody who is a potential consumer of the product. So when you look at things from that perspective, it starts to make a lot more sense why ownership would be hesitant to trade away players who even the most casual of fans recognize.

 

"Us" won't understand the logic behind a rebuild. "Us" doesn't give a **** about reporters pressing members of the front office about transactions.

 

The Jim Pohlads and the Dave St. Peters of the organization definitely need to be concerned about "us," but the front office works for "them."

Whatever.  I am interested in their mindset because I think their mindset is ridiculous.  It is time for articulate fans to question that mindset, in my opinion

[Platoon]

When you screw up my tax return. I may make you squirm and your boss might make you squirm if I go over your head and everybody in the Twins organization will be held accountable in that sense, just like you are because they all report to someone. 

 

The Major Difference is this: You don't have a reporter taking the information of your screw up, asking you tough questions and passing along that information to millions. 

 

Imagine you got a reporter asking you: What happened on Riverbrian's Tax Return?

 

With the same transparency that you demand from the Twins brass you explain it for the reporter.

 

"In 2017,  "Riverbrian made $1,000,000. During the course of the year, he spent a little over $100,000 on nude photographs of Chief that were legitimate business purposes and should have been a standard deduction according to section Q5 Page 147 of the U.S. Tax code. I mistakenly changed the $100,000 to $100,000,000 and this triggered an IRS audit and during the audit, it was discovered that Riverbrian has been investing in chemical weapons that will target old people and dogs. 

 

The reporter than reports the information you have given and you can imagine what happens next. 

 

I don't think Chief or I are going to very happy with you for starters and all those potential future clients who have read this report are going to think twice before they pick up the phone with your kind of public transparency.  

 

Potential Client: Hey Darius, I'm looking for a CPA

 

Darius: Perfect... however, you should know that if anything goes wrong, your personal information will be  shared with everybody in the entire world. 

 

Potential Client: No Problem... Where do I sign? 

This really ain't a problem. Chief runs for President, yells FAKE NEWS, 37% ignore him for yelling GRAB EM BY THE ATM MACHINE, and you form a corporation in Deleware to funnel that $100,000 or $1,000,000 (the amount is irrelevant) to reimburse the Grand Forks paper for buying and burying the photos. Once elected Chief fires the Director of the IRS and has the audit vacated. The only problem I can see in the whole plan is if Chief is afraid of escalators?

[Riverbrian]

 

Exactly!!!
The origin of my post came after reading an article about Max Muncy. The Dodgers GM was looking for players to stash in the minors for depth purposes. Muncy had been in Seattle without any success,and was cut. But there was enough information available on Muncy that the Dodgers GM thought he’d be great insurance for any major injuries to the Dodgers starters. The rest, as they say, is history. And the reason for my post was this:
1.) There was obviously no plan or contingency for an injury to Castro. Having a catcher like Wilson- batting around .120 for a large portion of the year, is embarrassing.
2.) The Twins had spent an enormous amount of capital in drafting relievers, especially those who threw hard.
They have many who have achieved some success, but have been by-passed by choosing options like Matt Belisle, which would be fine if Mr. Belisle had been successful.
3.) The entire roster construction is baffling, from the 4th outfielder question to having relief pitchers being over-used or not used at all!
I agree that the FO probably doesn’t owe us an explanation, but I think it’s better to be concerned about these issues than to care nothing about your major league franchise!

 

I've been singing this song. I'm guessing it is something systemic but I have no idea but I've seen enough to be suspicious and concerned. 

 

We have been making waiver claims, Drafting Rule 5 guys, acquiring throw-ins on trades, signing AAAA guys for organizational filler for awhile now. We've selected players in the late rounds that were never supposed to make it like everyone else, it's not like we haven't been to each of those markets to do some shopping.  

 

Where are the Twins versions of:

JD Martinez 

Sandy Leon

Jesus Aguilar

Keon Broxton

Corey Knebel

Jeremy Jeffress

Hernan Perez

Jonathan Villar

Corey Kluber 

Andrew Miller

Brad Hand

Mike Clevinger 

Edwin Encarnacion 

Charlie Morton

Brad Peacock

Chris Devenski

Will Harris

Collin McHugh

Max Muncy

Justin Turner

Chris Taylor 

Enrique Hernandez

Rich Hill

Scooter Gennett

Eugenio Suarez

Justin Smoak

Yangervis Solarte

J.A. Happ

Jose Martinez

Bud Norris

Jose Bautista

Odubel Herrera

Justin Bour

David Peralta

Wade LeBlanc

Darren O' Day 

Kirby Yates

 

All of these players were cheap acquisitions at one time. 

 

Are we bad at identifying these cheap success stories, bad at fixing the flaws or bad at giving them opportunity. The Brewers, Dodgers, Indians and Astros seem to be pretty good at it.

 

We got Brandon Kintzler and ? 

 

I'd like to ask the front office something about this. 

 

[curt1965]

Well done, Brian. Excellent post!

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I've been singing this song. I'm guessing it is something systemic but I have no idea but I've seen enough to be suspicious and concerned. 

 

We have been making waiver claims, Drafting Rule 5 guys, acquiring throw-ins on trades, signing AAAA guys for organizational filler for awhile now. We've selected players in the late rounds that were never supposed to make it like everyone else, it's not like we haven't been to each of those markets to do some shopping.  

 

Where are the Twins versions of:

JD Martinez 

Sandy Leon

Jesus Aguilar

Keon Broxton

Corey Knebel

Jeremy Jeffress

Hernan Perez

Jonathan Villar

Corey Kluber 

Andrew Miller

Brad Hand

Mike Clevinger 

Edwin Encarnacion 

Charlie Morton

Brad Peacock

Chris Devenski

Will Harris

Collin McHugh

Max Muncy

Justin Turner

Chris Taylor 

Enrique Hernandez

Rich Hill

Scooter Gennett

Eugenio Suarez

Justin Smoak

Yangervis Solarte

J.A. Happ

Jose Martinez

Bud Norris

Jose Bautista

Odubel Herrera

Justin Bour

David Peralta

Wade LeBlanc

Darren O' Day 

Kirby Yates

 

All of these players were cheap acquisitions at one time. 

 

Are we bad at identifying these cheap success stories, bad at fixing the flaws or bad at giving them opportunity. The Brewers, Dodgers, Indians and Astros seem to be pretty good at it.

 

We got Brandon Kintzler and ? 

 

I'd like to ask the front office something about this. 

More than anything, I'm questioning this front office's "short game". Their backup acquisitions and waiver wire deals have been pretty bad and not the kind of risky bad you roll with when it doesn't work; it's the kind of bad that makes you roll your eyes when it happens and the results usually play out exactly as expected.

 

With that said, I have no idea how to evaluate their long game, which is what will really matter if/when the Twins enter legitimate contention status. We can second-guess and complain about their 23-25 man roster moves but ultimately when combined, they might add up to a couple of wins difference in the grand scheme of things.

 

What really matters is getting the big things right in the first place: drafting, signing, development. Getting it right there can be 4-6 wins from a single player.

 

Also, while I have issues with this front office's management of catcher and the outfield backups, they were basically wedged into a corner when their catcher, shortstop, veteran "ace" (ugh, hate that term), centerfielder, and third baseman basically took a pass on this season for various reasons. Few teams could or would recover from that kind of setback.

[nicksaviking]

I've been singing this song. I'm guessing it is something systemic but I have no idea but I've seen enough to be suspicious and concerned. 

 

We have been making waiver claims, Drafting Rule 5 guys, acquiring throw-ins on trades, signing AAAA guys for organizational filler for awhile now. We've selected players in the late rounds that were never supposed to make it like everyone else, it's not like we haven't been to each of those markets to do some shopping.  

 

Where are the Twins versions of:

JD Martinez 

Sandy Leon

Jesus Aguilar

Keon Broxton

Corey Knebel

Jeremy Jeffress

Hernan Perez

Jonathan Villar

Corey Kluber 

Andrew Miller

Brad Hand

Mike Clevinger 

Edwin Encarnacion 

Charlie Morton

Brad Peacock

Chris Devenski

Will Harris

Collin McHugh

Max Muncy

Justin Turner

Chris Taylor 

Enrique Hernandez

Rich Hill

Scooter Gennett

Eugenio Suarez

Justin Smoak

Yangervis Solarte

J.A. Happ

Jose Martinez

Bud Norris

Jose Bautista

Odubel Herrera

Justin Bour

David Peralta

Wade LeBlanc

Darren O' Day 

Kirby Yates

 

All of these players were cheap acquisitions at one time. 

 

Are we bad at identifying these cheap success stories, bad at fixing the flaws or bad at giving them opportunity. The Brewers, Dodgers, Indians and Astros seem to be pretty good at it.

 

We got Brandon Kintzler and ? 

 

I'd like to ask the front office something about this. 

Don't Dozier, Hildenberger, Escobar and Pressly fit those perimeters? Jake Cave's giving it a try. Eduardo Nunez was a good find. Grossman and Adrianza had a moment in the sun and the jury's still out on Rogers and Busenitz.

 

Obviously none of those guys are JD Martinez but I'd put Dozier's success above 2/3rds of those guys and Escobar's over a handful as well.

 

Not trying to defend this front office or the prior one, I just don't think this particular area is the amongst the main reasons this organization can't compete,

[curt1965]

Screwing up the catcher position has bigger ramifications for the whole team, as compared to an outfielder, for example. In the Twins case, you either play a guy that basically has zero contributions to the offense: it’s like playing with 8 hitters and an automatic out, or you play someone like Garver, who has good potential to contribute as a hitter, but apparently he is so terrible defensively Molitor and the pitching staff have no confidence in him.

The catcher is the quarterback for the defense: the calls pitches, throws out runners (or doesn’t!), blocks errant pitches, frames balls into strikes, endures all kinds of punishment from foul balls, etc., and his personality mimics the defensive mind set. He brings an attitude.

So when Castro went down for the year, the Twins options were a backup (Garver) with little experience, and ...............nobody. The nobody turned out to be Bobby Wilson (see above). I don’t think good organizations make this kind of mistake, and I guess I’d like to know why did this happen??

[The Wise One]

 

1. Hiring decisions and those made by popular vote are two very different things.

 

2. I made no reference of politicians.

 

3. The premise in the original posts suggests the primary qualification for a leadership position is the ability to deceive. Do you really support the notion that getting a great education, amassing skills, and an excellent track record are subordinate to the ability to deceive if you want to ascend to a position of leadership? I guess I am teaching my kids the wrong lessons if I want them to excel in business.

1. Baseball employment  is not immune to the whims of the popular vote.  See Luke Heimlich. The fear of backlash that lead to the Mauer and Morneau contracts would be another baseball decision effected by what is popular. 

 

2. meant to multi quote with the OP, He mentioned politicians, you responded

 

3. Deceit and the ability to deceive appear to be more valued than integrity these days. That is what it is.  Honesty and business seems to be a rare thing outside of the small business world.  The ability to see deceit and counteract it effectively is a skill worth teaching.

 

FWIW  There is an education based on deceit. It is sort of the current attitude that if you are defrauded by someone, you should have known better

[ewen21]

 

When you screw up my tax return. I may make you squirm and your boss might make you squirm if I go over your head and everybody in the Twins organization will be held accountable in that sense, just like you are because they all report to someone. 

 

The Major Difference is this: You don't have a reporter taking the information of your screw up, asking you tough questions and passing along that information to millions. 

 

Imagine you got a reporter asking you: What happened on Riverbrian's Tax Return?

 

This analogy is silly, I am sorry.  General managers cannot avoid interviews because it is part of their job to relate their plans and their intentions to the fan base.  As magnanimous as Darius may be, he doesn't get radio and television coverage and doesn't have a fan base.  He isn't in the sports entertainment industry so you are comparing apples to trout, actually more like apples to celestial bodies or something even more far out.

 

I am not understanding why people accept that baseball executives are "paid to lie" and that they need to be terse and evasive and are somehow above the fray when it comes to the customer (us).  As fans we can do things to hold them a bit more accountable.  If you want to shrug your shoulders and just assume that is how it is then that is your prerogative.  In other markets, the fan base does more to hold executives accountable.  The Terry Ryan debacle only went on as long as it did because there was virtually no blowback from the fans or the media (with their irrational fear of losing access).  

 

It is possible to critique and organization without ranting and raving and acting like a Neanderthal.  Well thought out critiques should be food for thought rather than viewed as" being negative" or "whining" and that to me is at the center of the issue we have here.  There can be open dialogue without arms waving and people acting like salivating beasts.  I get so tired of hearing criticism being equated to negative behaviors.  To me it is negative to brush problems aside and not discuss them.  Seems as if a lot of Twins fans give upper management way too much of a pass in that it is assumed they don't need to get into any of that on a sincere level.  GMs can have no integrity and basically lie if they want to because it is assumed that is how they function.  That is just messed up, sorry.

 

I don't understand is the paranoia of the press covering this team.  They hold the cards in this discussion more than the Twins do.  As if the Twins will swipe credentials away if the reporting is not slanted in their favor?  That is utterly absurd.  They don't have the power to do that unless they have no grounds to make that decision.  If they did have reporters 86'd for being "too probing" they need to deal with the court of public opinion and the national media.  I have not heard of a beat reporter covering a team getting credentials swiped for being critical.  Since when is being critical or probing being unprofessional?  When I say this please do not assume that I give media free rein.  They can operate within the parameters of reason and be a whole lot more valuable to us.

Sorry, but I just don't get the mindset that figures sports executives are in control and the fan doesn't make a difference.  I live in upstate NY and I can tell you Yankee fans and reporters of that team are obliged to speak up and it keeps the front office in check.  Terry Ryan would not last two months in that market.  An example.....Several years ago Mets manager Terry Collins blew up on a reporter and then apologized the next day because he caught hell for it from the fans and the radio guys.  Fans and media should have carte blanche to check these guys so long as they aren't being ridiculous.  

[markos]

 

Don't Dozier, Hildenberger, Escobar and Pressly fit those perimeters? Jake Cave's giving it a try. Eduardo Nunez was a good find. Grossman and Adrianza had a moment in the sun and the jury's still out on Rogers and Busenitz.

Obviously none of those guys are JD Martinez but I'd put Dozier's success above 2/3rds of those guys and Escobar's over a handful as well.

Not trying to defend this front office or the prior one, I just don't think this particular area is the amongst the main reasons this organization can't compete,

I can't speak for Riverbrian, but I think he was talking about a specific category of player; namely, those that were plucked from another organization for little or no cost, turned into above-average players, AND the with multiple years of team control remaining. Dozier, Hildenberger, Rogers were all Twins draft picks. Nunez didn't really have enough team control remaining to qualify. Escobar, Pressly, Grossman, Adrianza, Cave and Busenitz all fit the bill, but only Escobar really reaches the "above-average" part (at least right now). And Escobar, Pressly, Grossman and Busenitz were all acquired by the prior front office.

 

I do think that it is a critical area for team development. There are only only so many avenues for a team to acquire above-average talent outside of the free agent market. If the Twins don't have the scouting and player development in place to actually hit on a few of these guys, that will put them in a competitive disadvantage that they can ill afford. I don't know the exact rate here, but my SWAG would be that good teams hit on a player in the above category every other year (the best teams, like the Dodgers, seem to be doing it every year...). Assuming that they have the player under team control for at least 3 years, that works out to being two-ish above-average players that are missing from the roster each year. That is a big deal.

 

Anyway, I'm trying to be patient with this front office, but I see a lot of warning signs.

[Squirrel]

This analogy is silly, I am sorry. General managers cannot avoid interviews because it is part of their job to relate their plans and their intentions to the fan base. As magnanimous as Darius may be, he doesn't get radio and television coverage and doesn't have a fan base. He isn't in the sports entertainment industry so you are comparing apples to trout, actually more like apples to celestial bodies or something even more far out.

 

I am not understanding why people accept that baseball executives are "paid to lie" and that they need to be terse and evasive and are somehow above the fray when it comes to the customer (us). As fans we can do things to hold them a bit more accountable. If you want to shrug your shoulders and just assume that is how it is then that is your prerogative. In other markets, the fan base does more to hold executives accountable. The Terry Ryan debacle only went on as long as it did because there was virtually no blowback from the fans or the media (with their irrational fear of losing access).

 

It is possible to critique and organization without ranting and raving and acting like a Neanderthal. Well thought out critiques should be food for thought rather than viewed as" being negative" or "whining" and that to me is at the center of the issue we have here. There can be open dialogue without arms waving and people acting like salivating beasts. I get so tired of hearing criticism being equated to negative behaviors. To me it is negative to brush problems aside and not discuss them. Seems as if a lot of Twins fans give upper management way too much of a pass in that it is assumed they don't need to get into any of that on a sincere level. GMs can have no integrity and basically lie if they want to because it is assumed that is how they function. That is just messed up, sorry.

 

I don't understand is the paranoia of the press covering this team. They hold the cards in this discussion more than the Twins do. As if the Twins will swipe credentials away if the reporting is not slanted in their favor? That is utterly absurd. They don't have the power to do that unless they have no grounds to make that decision. If they did have reporters 86'd for being "too probing" they need to deal with the court of public opinion and the national media. I have not heard of a beat reporter covering a team getting credentials swiped for being critical. Since when is being critical or probing being unprofessional? When I say this please do not assume that I give media free rein. They can operate within the parameters of reason and be a whole lot more valuable to us.

Sorry, but I just don't get the mindset that figures sports executives are in control and the fan doesn't make a difference. I live in upstate NY and I can tell you Yankee fans and reporters of that team are obliged to speak up and it keeps the front office in check. Terry Ryan would not last two months in that market. An example.....Several years ago Mets manager Terry Collins blew up on a reporter and then apologized the next day because he caught hell for it from the fans and the radio guys. Fans and media should have carte blanche to check these guys so long as they aren't being ridiculous.

Okay, putting on my moderator hat for a minute. Take a breath here. No one in this thread is suggesting asking tough questions and making tough critiques is ranting and raving like a Neanderthal. Not one person. And no one, not one person, again, has suggested that anyone’s take here is whining or negative. People disagree with you here. That is not the same, no way near even, as accusing anyone as whining. No matter how right you think you are, or wrong you think the other person is, it’s neither. There is no right or wrong here at TD, just differing opinions. Strongly felt, no doubt. Passion is okay. It’d be pretty boring without it. I respect and accept your point of view. Sometimes I agree with it, sometimes I don’t, and sometimes we can find middle ground, and sometimes I just choose to walk away from a never ending cycle of disagreeing when no middle ground is found. You can state what you think as emphatically as you want as many times as you want, but expect and accept the same from the next guy. You don’t think any less of them for it and no one thinks any less of you for it. It’s discussion and debate and that’s what we’re here for. Not to come to agreement on every issue.

 

This goes for everyone. Disagreement or push back, on ANY issue, is neither whining nor sunshine and rainbows. So let’s stop characterizing people’s opinions in such regard.

[ThejacKmp]

no.

[Major League Ready]

 

1. Baseball employment  is not immune to the whims of the popular vote.  See Luke Heimlich. The fear of backlash that lead to the Mauer and Morneau contracts would be another baseball decision effected by what is popular. 

 

2. meant to multi quote with the OP, He mentioned politicians, you responded

 

3. Deceit and the ability to deceive appear to be more valued than integrity these days. That is what it is.  Honesty and business seems to be a rare thing outside of the small business world.  The ability to see deceit and counteract it effectively is a skill worth teaching.

 

FWIW  There is an education based on deceit. It is sort of the current attitude that if you are defrauded by someone, you should have known better

 

It requires fairly intimate knowledge of a large sample size of leaders which I will define as CxOs (ie Lavine). Unless you have considerable experience working directly with CxOs you are assuming to know something based on conjecture. I have worked with hundreds of CxOs. Their integrity, like any other subset of the population varies substantially. Good leadership requires people are willing to follow and people are much more apt to follow someone who acts with integrity. 

 

My experience suggests that leaders sometimes can't be 100 transparent because the audience won't accept any rational. This situation is a good example. The FO made moves that were pretty much mutually praised by the baseball community. The best case scenario this year was Clevelend would be down and we could sneak by. After a couple key injuries, a key suspension, and 3 of our key players (Samo / Buxton / dozier) under performing and the fans want to know how could this happen? Why are we not a 90+ win team. It's absolutely absurd. What should we expect with all that's gone wrong.

 

I have asked a couple of the complainers what the F/O should have done. No takers. Please someone tell me what the F/O should have done to win the Central this year that would have actually accomplished that goal.

 

Another poster claimed that the results spoke for themselves. In a follow-up accepted that if this was true, all of these multi-page debates about what's a good ,move and what's not are absolutely useless  because a move can't be good if it does not pan out. In other words, we can't evaluate the quality of the decision making at the time. If a player gets hurt, the F/O failed in their decision making. This would suggest that had the Twins F/O signed Darvish and Lynn, and traded a C prospect for Sonny Gray, when he was still considered a hot commodity, that the front office was responsible for the failure as a result of their poor decision making.

 

This bit$#@ng is ridiculous. Some fans simply can't accept what has been proven for 100 years in sports. The best laid plans can fail. Anyone wanting to respond needs to include a plan with a reasonable chance of winning the division. That plan needs to include at least one front of the rotation SP, a couple of back of the bullpen arms, a 2B, 3B, and shortstop to replace Sano, Polanco, and Dozier. One could argue 1B as well but Mauer is not part of the failure in my opinion. 

 

I would be happy to apologize for suggesting this is whining if someone can show me a plan that would have averted this disaster.

[Han Joelo]

The internet has allowed the (sometimes) articulate but (always) passionate minority to gain an outsized presence, if not actual influence, on many features of life these days.  Maybe this isn't a perfect analogy, but then again, maybe it is--

 

Rian Johnson has received (and some of the actors due to guilt by association?) all sorts of criticism for how he treated Star Wars VIII.  Passionate fans, who would have done things differently, criticize endlessly...because the way they would have done it would have been better.

 

Johnson is the same age as me.  So is Levine.  Falvey is younger.  Had I chosen to live my life differently, I could have, theoretically (I believe actually, really) been in any of their seats--if I'd been dedicated, persistent...and not screwed up too badly along the way.

 

I enjoy Star Wars because I was 4 when the first movie came out, and I was blown away by the story.  I was too young to know anything about how cool the special effects were--they just were.

 

I enjoy baseball, and the Twins specifically, because I was 13 and into sports when the Twins won the '87 WS--in a very Star Wars like, blowing up the Death Star fashion.

 

Episode VIII was a fun, enjoyable flick that took some creative gambles, some of which may not have worked for me, but were admirable nonetheless.  The same is true for this season of Twin's baseball.

 

When I'm an old man, I'll read Falvey's autobiography and find out exactly what was going on.  Maybe I'll finally get a true behind the scenes explanation of what really happened in the JFK assassination too.  Until then, I don't mind if the baseball teams keep their cards somewhat close to the vest.  And I'll keep coming here to read the complaints, make some complaints, and speculate on whether or not it is feasible to use the Force to pull yourself through space, or whether or not a spacecraft flying at light speed could smash into another ship, or whether or not Max Muncy is sitting at Rochester right now in the form of Jeremy Hazelbaker.

[USAFChief]

 

It requires fairly intimate knowledge of a large sample size of leaders which I will define as CxOs (ie Lavine). Unless you have considerable experience working directly with CxOs you are assuming to know something based on conjecture. I have worked with hundreds of CxOs. Their integrity, like any other subset of the population varies substantially. Good leadership requires people are willing to follow and people are much more apt to follow someone who acts with integrity. 

 

My experience suggests that leaders sometimes can't be 100 transparent because the audience won't accept any rational. This situation is a good example. The FO made moves that were pretty much mutually praised by the baseball community. The best case scenario this year was Clevelend would be down and we could sneak by. After a couple key injuries, a key suspension, and 3 of our key players (Samo / Buxton / dozier) under performing and the fans want to know how could this happen? Why are we not a 90+ win team. It's absolutely absurd. What should we expect with all that's gone wrong.

 

I have asked a couple of the complainers what the F/O should have done. No takers. Please someone tell me what the F/O should have done to win the Central this year that would have actually accomplished that goal.

 

Another poster claimed that the results spoke for themselves. In a follow-up accepted that if this was true, all of these multi-page debates about what's a good ,move and what's not are absolutely useless  because a move can't be good if it does not pan out. In other words, we can't evaluate the quality of the decision making at the time. If a player gets hurt, the F/O failed in their decision making. This would suggest that had the Twins F/O signed Darvish and Lynn, and traded a C prospect for Sonny Gray, when he was still considered a hot commodity, that the front office was responsible for the failure as a result of their poor decision making.

 

This bit$#@ng is ridiculous. Some fans simply can't accept what has been proven for 100 years in sports. The best laid plans can fail. Anyone wanting to respond needs to include a plan with a reasonable chance of winning the division. That plan needs to include at least one front of the rotation SP, a couple of back of the bullpen arms, a 2B, 3B, and shortstop to replace Sano, Polanco, and Dozier. One could argue 1B as well but Mauer is not part of the failure in my opinion. 

 

I would be happy to apologize for suggesting this is whining if someone can show me a plan that would have averted this disaster.

It no more takes "considerable experience working directly with CxOs" to form an opinion on this subject than it takes "considerable experience pitching in the big leagues" to form an opinion on the Twins starting pitching.

 

Mod hat on: You are welcome to post your opinion. However, telling me, or others, that my opinion is "bit$#@ng" and/or "ridiculous" is not within the posting guidelines here at TD. Please stop.

 

 

 

 

[Major League Ready]

 

Exactly!!!
The origin of my post came after reading an article about Max Muncy. The Dodgers GM was looking for players to stash in the minors for depth purposes. Muncy had been in Seattle without any success,and was cut. But there was enough information available on Muncy that the Dodgers GM thought he’d be great insurance for any major injuries to the Dodgers starters. The rest, as they say, is history. And the reason for my post was this:
1.) There was obviously no plan or contingency for an injury to Castro. Having a catcher like Wilson- batting around .120 for a large portion of the year, is embarrassing.
2.) The Twins had spent an enormous amount of capital in drafting relievers, especially those who threw hard.
They have many who have achieved some success, but have been by-passed by choosing options like Matt Belisle, which would be fine if Mr. Belisle had been successful.
3.) The entire roster construction is baffling, from the 4th outfielder question to having relief pitchers being over-used or not used at all!
I agree that the FO probably doesn’t owe us an explanation, but I think it’s better to be concerned about these issues than to care nothing about your major league franchise!

 

Riverbrian put together a nice list of valuable players acquired for minimal cost. Those acquisitions are huge and we have not had one since Johan. That would be a fair question to pose to the F/O. However, to be fair, this F/O has only been in place for a relatively short time. Hopefully, Cave will turn out to be such an acquisition although I doubt he becomes JD Martinez or Corey Kluber equivalent. If we are being fair, what is the response here when a player like Muncy is acquired? Very negative, right. We are dumpster diving again. His numbers were mediocre at best in the minors and miserable at the ML level.  https://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=13301&position=1B/3B

 

The acquisition of Muncy would have resulted in several very negative posts here and a few others who would have acknowledged it was a depth move. Nobody would have said they thought this guy could be a great replacement for Mauer.

 

[Vanimal46]

Riverbrian put together a nice list of valuable players acquired for minimal cost. Those acquisitions are huge and we have not had one since Johan. That would be a fair question to pose to the F/O. However, to be fair, this F/O has only been in place for a relatively short time. Hopefully, Cave will turn out to be such an acquisition although I doubt he becomes JD Martinez or Corey Kluber equivalent. If we are being fair, what is the response here when a player like Muncy is acquired? Very negative, right. We are dumpster diving again. His numbers were mediocre at best in the minors and miserable at the ML level. https://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=13301&position=1B/3B

 

The acquisition of Muncy would have resulted in several very negative posts here and a few others who would have acknowledged it was a depth move. Nobody would have said they thought this guy could be a great replacement for Mauer.

I agree the posts would have been negative for a Muncy signing. Hopefully the development team proves us wrong in the future and fixes some of these diamonds in the rough.

 

For the moment, I have significantly more confidence in other teams' development teams than Minnesota. I'll feel better about our team if they have a few more success stories like Gibson.

[Major League Ready]

 

I agree the posts would have been negative for a Muncy signing. Hopefully the development team proves us wrong in the future and fixes some of these diamonds in the rough.

For the moment, I have significantly more confidence in other teams' development teams than Minnesota. I'll feel better about our team if they have a few more success stories like Gibson.

 

I agree completely. Our results in terms of development are evident. However, that's on the previous regime IMO. This type of organizational transformation does not take place over night. Plus, we are talking about a development process of 3-6 years. The results won't show-up over night. Gibson took a while. It would give us good reason to be optimistic if they can fix Sano and Buxton.  

[Vanimal46]

I agree completely. Our results in terms of development are evident. However, that's on the previous regime IMO. This type of organizational transformation does not take place over night. Plus, we are talking about a development process of 3-6 years. The results won't show-up over night. Gibson took a while. It would give us good reason to be optimistic if they can fix Sano and Buxton.

For sure. It takes a while to build from the ground up. LA for example has a couple of success stories every year seemingly out of nowhere. They've also had their leadership in place for a while.

 

I will gain a ton of confidence in this regime if Buxton and Sano are fixed next year.

[slash129]

Here is a list of what the front office owes you ...

 

http://espressyourself.coffee/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/ThingsIOU-1.jpg

[howieramone2]

Buxton and Sano getting fixed before the end of the season is the key. During the off-season, I don't recall anyone suggesting we sign Trout and Harper, in case they crapped the bed. 

 

The teams under performing is unfortunate and unexpected, get over it. We were in the hunt in 2015 and 2017, and the core will remain in place. Last article I read, had our farm system rated #6, and we have as much money to spent this off- season as any team in baseball.

[Mike Sixel]

 

More than anything, I'm questioning this front office's "short game". Their backup acquisitions and waiver wire deals have been pretty bad and not the kind of risky bad you roll with when it doesn't work; it's the kind of bad that makes you roll your eyes when it happens and the results usually play out exactly as expected.

 

With that said, I have no idea how to evaluate their long game, which is what will really matter if/when the Twins enter legitimate contention status. We can second-guess and complain about their 23-25 man roster moves but ultimately when combined, they might add up to a couple of wins difference in the grand scheme of things.

 

What really matters is getting the big things right in the first place: drafting, signing, development. Getting it right there can be 4-6 wins from a single player.

 

Also, while I have issues with this front office's management of catcher and the outfield backups, they were basically wedged into a corner when their catcher, shortstop, veteran "ace" (ugh, hate that term), centerfielder, and third baseman basically took a pass on this season for various reasons. Few teams could or would recover from that kind of setback.

 

their short game also included rule 5 guy, on a supposed playoff roster......

[ewen21]

I am simply going to close with this....

We as fans have the right to question management and so does the media.  It is also the responsibility of Twins management to communicate effectively with the fanbase AND that we as fans can have some say in setting that bar.  It is a normal and healthy relationship between a franchise and its constituency (if I can call it that).  The fans foot the bill for the stadium, we buy tickets and consume the product.  They darn well better embrace the idea that they "work for us".  Without fans this team could have easily been contracted and how soon we forget that.  

 

I also don't like that people accept that general managers "lie for a living" and I reject the notion that any sports organization can "pull credentials" from reporters when the urge hits them.  There needs to be grounds for it and reporters being critical or thorough is not enough.  There would need to me some ethical or moral issue.

[Riverbrian]

 

More than anything, I'm questioning this front office's "short game". Their backup acquisitions and waiver wire deals have been pretty bad and not the kind of risky bad you roll with when it doesn't work; it's the kind of bad that makes you roll your eyes when it happens and the results usually play out exactly as expected.

 

With that said, I have no idea how to evaluate their long game, which is what will really matter if/when the Twins enter legitimate contention status. We can second-guess and complain about their 23-25 man roster moves but ultimately when combined, they might add up to a couple of wins difference in the grand scheme of things.

 

What really matters is getting the big things right in the first place: drafting, signing, development. Getting it right there can be 4-6 wins from a single player.

 

Also, while I have issues with this front office's management of catcher and the outfield backups, they were basically wedged into a corner when their catcher, shortstop, veteran "ace" (ugh, hate that term), centerfielder, and third baseman basically took a pass on this season for various reasons. Few teams could or would recover from that kind of setback.

 

I agree... I've also got concerns about the "Long Game". Draft and development is the heart and soul of every major league club and we simply haven't produced any superstars. If you want a superstar, they are really expensive to trade for and really expensive to sign as free agents so if you want them... you got to produce them. Where is our version of Jose Ramirez or Nolan Arenado?

 

I realize that you don't always hit with 1st rounders in the sport of baseball and I realize that the first round is not the end of the story because superstars can come from any round. I'm not asking for the impossible and asking for 100% success. But... when you look at who we did draft during the era of players playing today, it doesn't look good at all.

 

Garza, Sanchez, Parmelee, Revere, Hicks, Gutierrez, Hunt, Gibson, Bashore, Wimmers, Michael, Harrison, Boyd, Buxton, Berrios, Bard, Stewart, Gordon and Jay is what 2010 to 2015 has brought us. 

 

Berrios and Gibson are the only players we have gotten decent performance out of and Gibson took a long time to get the decent added to his performance. 

 

We didn't wait for Garza or Hicks because we traded them and got nothing in return unless we have Delmon Young Fans in the building. I'm going to pin this on the previous regime and not hang the current regime for this but yeah... our long game has been lacking for awhile. 

 

Now for the short game... I believe any time you label guys on the roster as "23-25", you are asking for what you get. 

 

I don't have the numbers but I bet if you add up the games lost to injury and the games of sub-par performance from players 1-20 and it will reveal that those "23-25" guys end up being extremely important every single year.  

 

I'm not saying we could have prevented everything that capsized on us this year because we had a lot of it but I am saying that we did not try to stop the massive capsizing...  beyond umm... hoping that we eventually stop capsizing. 

 

Couple the short game issues with the long game issues and we got deep rooted depth issues that will never be solved. 

 

I'm hoping Falvey and Lavine are working on the long game and learning from this year that the short game also needs to be fixed immediately and won't be unless they stop looking at them as "23-25" especially when 5-9 is playing like "27-31".  

 

[Riverbrian]

 

Don't Dozier, Hildenberger, Escobar and Pressly fit those perimeters? Jake Cave's giving it a try. Eduardo Nunez was a good find. Grossman and Adrianza had a moment in the sun and the jury's still out on Rogers and Busenitz.

Obviously none of those guys are JD Martinez but I'd put Dozier's success above 2/3rds of those guys and Escobar's over a handful as well.

Not trying to defend this front office or the prior one, I just don't think this particular area is the amongst the main reasons this organization can't compete,

 

I threw together the list in about an hour. I opened up each roster, scrolled it and said "there's one" and put it on list. I'm sure I've missed some.  

 

It's a list of cheap acquisitions, meaning they were waived, rule 5'd or were considered trade throw in's and ended up at least contributing fairly significantly during (at least) a season afterwards. 

 

About the only guy I spent time debating (with myself) if he belongs on the list was Kluber. Decided to keep him on the list because he was part of an Indians salary dump (3 team trade) and he wasn't a highly ranked Padres prospect so he came some what cheaply.  

 

If I included Dozier (8th round pick) the list would have grown considerably because now you start adding the Mookie Betts and Cody Bellinger types. I could have added Pressly but I don't think he's earned the right to join the above list yet. 

 

Escobar could certainly be considered for the list but he was what we got back for Francisco Liriano and considering what Liriano did after the trade in Pittsburgh for a few seasons... I'm not sure Escobar was a cheap acquisition no matter how much I enjoy his presence on my favorite team. 

 

Regardless... I am starting to believe that this is a major reason why we are struggling to compete. 

[Riverbrian]

 

Screwing up the catcher position has bigger ramifications for the whole team, as compared to an outfielder, for example. In the Twins case, you either play a guy that basically has zero contributions to the offense: it’s like playing with 8 hitters and an automatic out, or you play someone like Garver, who has good potential to contribute as a hitter, but apparently he is so terrible defensively Molitor and the pitching staff have no confidence in him.
The catcher is the quarterback for the defense: the calls pitches, throws out runners (or doesn’t!), blocks errant pitches, frames balls into strikes, endures all kinds of punishment from foul balls, etc., and his personality mimics the defensive mind set. He brings an attitude.
So when Castro went down for the year, the Twins options were a backup (Garver) with little experience, and ...............nobody. The nobody turned out to be Bobby Wilson (see above). I don’t think good organizations make this kind of mistake, and I guess I’d like to know why did this happen??

 

My question would be specifically. If Garver isn't good enough defensively to be the every day catcher in the event of a Castro injury. 

 

Didn't anybody in the room knows this before he was placed on the 25 man roster? 

[Riverbrian]

 

This analogy is silly, I am sorry.  General managers cannot avoid interviews because it is part of their job to relate their plans and their intentions to the fan base.  As magnanimous as Darius may be, he doesn't get radio and television coverage and doesn't have a fan base.  He isn't in the sports entertainment industry so you are comparing apples to trout, actually more like apples to celestial bodies or something even more far out.

 

I am not understanding why people accept that baseball executives are "paid to lie" and that they need to be terse and evasive and are somehow above the fray when it comes to the customer (us).  As fans we can do things to hold them a bit more accountable.  If you want to shrug your shoulders and just assume that is how it is then that is your prerogative.  In other markets, the fan base does more to hold executives accountable.  The Terry Ryan debacle only went on as long as it did because there was virtually no blowback from the fans or the media (with their irrational fear of losing access).  

 

It is possible to critique and organization without ranting and raving and acting like a Neanderthal.  Well thought out critiques should be food for thought rather than viewed as" being negative" or "whining" and that to me is at the center of the issue we have here.  There can be open dialogue without arms waving and people acting like salivating beasts.  I get so tired of hearing criticism being equated to negative behaviors.  To me it is negative to brush problems aside and not discuss them.  Seems as if a lot of Twins fans give upper management way too much of a pass in that it is assumed they don't need to get into any of that on a sincere level.  GMs can have no integrity and basically lie if they want to because it is assumed that is how they function.  That is just messed up, sorry.

 

I don't understand is the paranoia of the press covering this team.  They hold the cards in this discussion more than the Twins do.  As if the Twins will swipe credentials away if the reporting is not slanted in their favor?  That is utterly absurd.  They don't have the power to do that unless they have no grounds to make that decision.  If they did have reporters 86'd for being "too probing" they need to deal with the court of public opinion and the national media.  I have not heard of a beat reporter covering a team getting credentials swiped for being critical.  Since when is being critical or probing being unprofessional?  When I say this please do not assume that I give media free rein.  They can operate within the parameters of reason and be a whole lot more valuable to us.

Sorry, but I just don't get the mindset that figures sports executives are in control and the fan doesn't make a difference.  I live in upstate NY and I can tell you Yankee fans and reporters of that team are obliged to speak up and it keeps the front office in check.  Terry Ryan would not last two months in that market.  An example.....Several years ago Mets manager Terry Collins blew up on a reporter and then apologized the next day because he caught hell for it from the fans and the radio guys.  Fans and media should have carte blanche to check these guys so long as they aren't being ridiculous.  

 

Of course it's silly. I have 19,000 posts that should have prepared you for that possibility. 

 

When you say that Darius "doesn't get radio or television coverage or a fan base" and use that to argue my point... I stopped reading the rest. because... that was my point.  

 

You've managed to take my point and turn it around and use it against me like it wasn't my point. 

 

Media Coverage, Social Media Reaction and a fan base that needs to be retained are Game Changers that will always separate what they do from CPA's and Teachers.  It is Apples to Trout.