Does the Front Office owe us an explanation?

[Riverbrian]

 

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.

 

You nailed it and  you can speak for me anytime. 

[Riverbrian]

 

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 off-season signing of Muncy would have been crickets.

 

His eventual call up would have greeted with tomatoes from the balcony. 

 

I don't know the dynamic of that room. It's been reported that it is a collective effort and I'm sure that you know that even in collective efforts that there people who guide the agenda more so than others. 

 

I'm trying to be fair with the front office on this issue for the moment but I am looking at Molitor since he is the one constant from the 2016 collapse to the 2018 struggles. 

 

We took the same go down with the ship approach in 2016 that we are doing in 2018.

 

Different front office, same manager. 

 

None of this is fair to anyone without knowing exactly what is happening in that room but from my chair... Different front office... same manager... same approach... same result. 

 

Unfair maybe... but I'm currently under the impression that if Molitor was manager of the Dodgers... He would play Utley over Muncy. 

[Riverbrian]

 

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.

 

My scariest point that I'm trying to make is the death cycle you end up in.  

 

It is really easy to minimize these diamonds in the rough because they've been written off and nobody expects anything out of them. 

 

I've posted this before but once again... Here is the death cycle.

 

 

If Logan Morrison doesn't lose playing time for playing poorly. The Team suffers the consequences of the poor play in full. 

 

If Logan Morrison doesn't lose playing time... not only does the team suffer the consequences in full but it loses the chance to find a diamond in the rough because Morrison not losing playing time won't allow it. 

 

Because you didn't find a diamond... you are forced to go back to the jeweler and try again by purchasing another Logan Morrison so you repeat it the following year. 

 

This is the perfect formula for never developing necessary depth to compete in a world of frequent injuries and bad years. 

 

 

[jorgenswest]

My scariest point that I'm trying to make is the death cycle you end up in.  

 

It is really easy to minimize these diamonds in the rough because they've been written off and nobody expects anything out of them. 

 

I've posted this before but once again... Here is the death cycle.

 

 

If Logan Morrison doesn't lose playing time for playing poorly. The Team suffers the consequences of the poor play in full. 

 

If Logan Morrison doesn't lose playing time... not only does the team suffer the consequences in full but it loses the chance to find a diamond in the rough because Morrison not losing playing time won't allow it. 

 

Because you didn't find a diamond... you are forced to go back to the jeweler and try again by purchasing another Logan Morrison so you repeat it the following year. 

 

This is the perfect formula for never developing necessary depth to compete in a world of frequent injuries and bad years.

 

How do you project future poor play? If you look at the statcast data he isn’t that far different from last year in the batted ball data.

 

Slash stats in a partial season are a very unreliable way to project future performance. What are the consequences of basing decisions on unreliable sample sizes?

[curt1965]

The Twins are never going to have the ability to spend like the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, etc.

So you have to do other things to help the franchise. The big emphasis should be drafting and developing players. You can supplement this by adding “select” players in free agency. Don’t think you can build a team in free agency. But like Brian has said so eloquently, finding an occasional diamond in the rough can be the final piece. Matt Muncy is my example for 2018. Justin Turner is another the Dodgers picked up for next to nothing. The Diamonds got John Ryan Murphy for next to nothing from........... oh, right.

Our guys had no plans for the loss of Castro.

[Riverbrian]

 

How do you project future poor play? If you look at the statcast data he isn’t that far different from last year in the batted ball data.

Slash stats in a partial season are a very unreliable way to project future performance. What are the consequences of basing decisions on unreliable sample sizes?

 

Projections are for the front office exclusively for determining the rosters. These guys have to make their guesses based upon the best information they can gather and this means projections.  There is value in that but projections are often not what actually happens. So... the front office has to prepare for that frequent possibility. Businesses need an exit strategy, high wire acts need a safety net and squirrels store nuts for winter. 

 

For the managers... The lineup card... How does he project future poor play?

 

He doesn't. 

 

He navigates by the actual conditions he is in the middle of... Not Projected Conditions. 

 

The consequences of staying with a missed projection hurts more than the consequences of playing a player who is playing better. 

 

If you are worried that Dozier gets benched in April and therefore we miss the torrid hot streak of August because we gave the job to a player who cooled off in June. That isn't what I'm saying. 

 

Compete for the playing time... in real time. If you don't have the competition to compete with a .198 hitter... The front office blew it. 

 

[jorgenswest]

Projections are for the front office exclusively for determining the rosters. These guys have to make their guesses based upon the best information they can gather and this means projections.  There is value in that but projections are often not what actually happens. So... the front office has to prepare for that frequent possibility. Businesses need an exit strategy, high wire acts need a safety net and squirrels store nuts for winter. 

 

For the managers... The lineup card... How does he project future poor play?

 

He doesn't. 

 

He navigates by the actual conditions he is in the middle of... Not Projected Conditions. 

 

The consequences of staying with a missed projection hurts more than the consequences of playing a player who is playing better. 

 

If you are worried that Dozier gets benched in April and therefore we miss the torrid hot streak of August because we gave the job to a player who cooled off in June. That isn't what I'm saying. 

 

Compete for the playing time... in real time. If you don't have the competition to compete with a .198 hitter... The front office blew it.

 

The manager must not base a determination of poor play on slash stat results. Poor slash stat results in an unreliable sample sample are not a good indicator of poor play.

[h2oface]

If they trade Gibson, there will really need to be some explanations. 

[Riverbrian]

 

The manager must not base a determination of poor play on slash stat results. Poor slash stat results in an unreliable sample sample are not a good indicator of poor play.

 

Yes I am quoting Slash Stats for demonstration purposes but I am aware that sometimes line drives are caught and bloopers fall in. 

 

A good manager should be able to tell the difference. 

 

However: 

Byron Buxton didn't look good in the slash stats... he looked hopelessly lost and he played every day.  

Miguel Sano didn't look good in the slash stats... he was visibly lost to all who were watching and he played everyday. 

Logan Morrison didn't look good in the slash stats... He was either striking out with runners in scoring position or pulling the ball into that over stated shift at bat after at bat and he played every day. 

Brian Dozier didn't look good in the slash stats... He was consistently pulling off outside pitches to weak grounders to short and weak pop ups and he played every day. 

 

 

 

 

[DocBauer]

It's our fault... this dynamic you describe is accurate but it has been forged over time from lessons learned by the consequences of open dialogue. They speak up honestly and they immediately pay the price. It isn't just social media but yeah... social media is bad enough on its own.

 

The front office is not going to say they are keeping Belisle because they don't trust someone else... that type of publicly honesty is going to suck for whoever the someone else is. They are not going to break down Belisle for public consumption either because Belisle isn't going to appreciate that and understandably so. You gotta work with these people and nobody is going to want to work with you if they are going to be laid open for everyone to see. LEN3 isn't going to ask those questions because he has been at his job long enough to know that he didn't get the answer all the other times he has asked those type of questions. If you want transparency in all thought processes... you have to ask yourself, how many people is it going to cause a problem for... once you do that... you'll see the tentacles. 

 

Your wife wants you to be honest with her and she stressed the importance of that honesty in a healthy relationship so you try it. You get plenty of time to assess want went wrong with that great sounding idea on paper while you are sleeping on the couch because you honestly communicated with her about how much money she spent on this, what you thought of that dress or how you felt about her wanting to travel to Omaha to spend the weekend with her crazy aunt and uncle, 

 

Great post.

 

But being a resident of Omaha, it made me LMAO!

[jorgenswest]

Dozier’s performance and batted ball/pitch level data have been equally mediocre. He should be playing but not batting in the top four spots

 

Buxton and Sano poor at bats match their poor results. Sending them down was the correct move.

 

My response was about Morrison not the others. I think his batted ball/pitch level data tell a different story than his results. I would be playing him against every right handed pitcher.

[Riverbrian]

 

Dozier’s performance and batted ball/pitch level data have been equally mediocre. He should be playing but not batting in the top four spots

Buxton and Sano poor at bats match their poor results. Sending them down was the correct move.

My response was about Morrison not the others. I think his batted ball/pitch level data tell a different story than his results. I would be playing him against every right handed pitcher.

 

Does the batted ball/pitch level data take into considerations the over stated shifts that Morrison was hitting into frequently? 

 

As for Buxton and Sano... I agree but I'm questioning why it took them so long?

 

As for Dozier... I agree but I'm adding that I would have sat him down for a couple of days and told him that I was going to give someone else a chance to out perform him. 

[DocBauer]

The main topic has transformed in to potential failures and questionable moves, along with short term and long term plans. So be it.

 

DOES THE FO OWE US AN EXPLANATION?

 

Sorry, but my answer is yes and no. It would be ridiculous for the FO of any team to say "We can't and won't keep player X so we are going to try to unload him for whatever we can get". Further, it would be equally ridiculous to state: "Player X just doesn't get it. I mean, he's got talent, but he's a head case/lazy/unable to do this so we just don't know how he's going to turn out". (Just examples, no innuendo implied)

 

However, to the paying customers/consumers...and we all are to some degree or another...it is on them, IMO, to share reasons for certain moves made, as well as best laid plans. I doubt any of us, in lives or careers, would just admit we "blew it" on something initially, though after trying to rectify the situation we might humbly admit our mistake. When the season is done, I would lay real money you'd hear the FO make comments similar to: "We thought we made the moves to put this team forward. Obviously it didn't work out the way we thought. We thought we made moves that made sense, now we need to to re-evaluate going forward." Standard speak? Maybe. But also an admission.

 

Personally, even as a fanatical fan, I have no problem with the FO just admitting they blew their handling of Buxton earlier in the season after his injury. Just admit you rushed him and were hoping for the best.for the most part, however, from speaking about building the team from the ground up the day they were hired, to the off season moves, to their handling of Buxton now, and Sano, I feel they've been pretty transparent and open.

 

I have largely supported them and the moves they have made. Are there some questions about this season that I would drill them on? YOU BET!

 

SHORT TERM PLANS:

 

Despite the frustration and disappointment of this season, ownership and the FO made some pretty serious moves that were lauded in the baseball world and by most of all of us. I'm really sick and tired of talk about suspension, injuries and regression. Why? Because it all happened! It's been almost comical when you look at all that has happened. (Dark comedy for sure). But I'm also sick and tired of arguments like: "well, this team lost so and so, and they've done OK". One teams ability to overcome, via depth or top prospect rising to the occasion, (A bit of a different arguement), is still different than another teams ability to do so.

 

It's easy to play fantasy and the "what if" game, and I get that. But still, considering the moves made, what if Polanco, Santana, Buxton, Castro and Sano don't all stumble down the stairs all at once? Are guys like Grossman and Adrianza on the bench and Wilson working with the staff in AAA really that bad of options?

 

That being said, despite my support for most everything the FO has done in their short time on the job...still only a year and a half...i was, and remain, extremely disappointed in their efforts to construct the Rochester roster. Your AAA roster will always have a few journeyman types, mixed in with some top prospects. But unless the FO just struck out in their efforts due to some bad luck, you can't tell me they didn't have the financial opportunity to place at least a couple really nice AAAA players at Rochester who could be called on as decent fill ins.

 

We applauded the Rochester shuttle last year to juggle the roster and keep fresh players, mostly bullpen arms, to keep the Twins roster viable. We have been riding that same train the past month or so, but with different results and objectives. Belisle is an easy target, despite what he did last season, and the fact he's actually been pretty good his last few appearances. But his success is not the point! Maybe ownership and the FO are real optimists who felt we were really a streak away from competing. But reality should tell them what we all know...its not our year. Play the shuttle game, but play it with a PURPOSE! They slow played a few guys when the season began, possibly with intelligence and intent, but have been rather aggressive as of late. Keep it going! And use that shuttle the next two months to audition and challenge the kids at AAA who have a chance. Make some trades, let Belisle go with a warm handshake and smile, and see what you have!

 

LONG TERM PLANS:

 

The FO has talked about the system from ground floor up. They have made some substantial changes already, perhaps more are coming and need to be made. They made some trades that seem pretty smart now. They had a first draft that seems outstanding, and a second one that looks pretty good so far. The off season moves they made did little to nothing to tie up payroll. This off season will be the start of their second full season on the job. And I, personally, will not judge them on trades that will or will not be made the next month or so, but what they do before 2019 hits. Will they promote aggressively to finish out 2018 for guys to at least get a taste of the next level? Will they make smart 40 man decisions? Will they do all they can to insure top players and prospects are ready mentally and physically for next season? And perhaps most importantly, will they make the smart trade or FA move or two that makes this team better?

 

Once again, they made aggressive moves that seemed smart. Things just didnt work. Sucks, but it happens. Unless you simply believe Buxton, Sano and others are just some loss cause, this roster absolutely does not need to be blown up! It just needs health, continued development, a promotion/audition or two, and just the right FA or trade to augment the roster.

 

Is two years too early to judge the new regime? Is that fair? Perhaps. Perhaps not. But I think we're going to learn a lot about this FO by ST next year.