Jump to content
  • Create Account

How quickly we Forget


Mike Sixel
 Share

Message added by Brock Beauchamp,

Please refrain from meta-arguing in this thread. Discuss the topic at hand, address others' posts directly, or just move on from the thread entirely. This isn't a place for commentary on other posters' posting styles, it's a conversation about the front office.

1 hour ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

The players were terrible in 2016.  A new FO comes in, emphasizing analytics to help drive improvement.  The players improve enough to make the playoffs.  Seems silly to just assume the players were always going to improve, regardless of any other factor, like perhaps a FO with greater ability to develop players?

Is your argument that Park, Murphy, Suzuki, Nolasco, Hughes, and Perkins would have been good if they weren't injured?  Otherwise, you're essentially saying that the 2016 team would have been better if the bad players had been able to play more.

It's not just that Stewart, Gordon, and Jay didn't turn out--it's that they were all top 6 picks in 2013-2015, and before this year, had combined for only 62 IP of 4.80 ERA, all from Stewart.  Ignoring that as a factor is silly--the Twins should have 2-3 guys in their prime able to put up 1-2 WAR each right now, and they're getting nowhere near that.  Of the 7 players you listed the FO shouldn't have let go, Anderson has only pitched 2 innings in the minors this year, so he wouldn't have helped.  The other 6 have combined for 5.9 WAR--for what it's worth, Pineda, Thielbar, Jeffers, Kepler, Donaldson, and Garlick have combined for 5.8 WAR.  It's also too early for their first round picks to truly make a difference when you account for the fact that their first 1st rounder was barely 4 years ago, and has been out this entire year, and that every MiLBer lost all of 2020.  None of their first round picks had been able to get even 3 full seasons of pro ball going into 2021, and 2 of the 4 had less then one season (Cavaco and Sabato).  Are they really supposed to be able to transition that quickly?

This FO spent money in FA on Cruz x2, Pineda x2, Happ, Donaldson, Shoemaker, Colome, Simmons, Parker, Perez, Gonzalez, Schoop, committing $213.5M over just the past 3 off-seasons--my quick search at the source below shows that's more than the Twins spent on their ENTIRE roster in any TWO years of their history prior to the Falvine era (the only exception is if you combine 2011 with either 2015 or 2016--that would get you either $218M or $221M).  The only year of the Falvine era that didn't have higher payroll than any other year in Twins history was 2017, their first, and that's because teams that lose 100 games generally don't go out and spend like crazy.  The idea Falvine doesn't spend in FA is just not supported by fact or reality.

This FO has been good--the proof is in the record.  That doesn't mean they were good this year.  It doesn't mean they'll continue to be good next year or the year after.  But to jettison a front office that has produced playoff seasons in 3 of their 5 years at the helm is ridiculous.  I also have to wonder how much better the Twins' pitchers WAR might be if Maeda, Pineda, Dobnak, Thorpe, Smeltzer, Rogers, Duran, Balazovic, and Winder hadn't all spent significant portions of the season hurt.  You're perfectly fine with giving 2016 a pass based on injuries, despite the fact that the 2016 team was significantly worse, so why not 2021?

https://twinstrivia.com/salaries-2/

This is mostly straw man arguments. The group of chaff that Brock brought up weren't being relied upon in 16 and weren't reason for the optimism of 17. They weren't parts of the core of the support staff. They are a distraction.

I completely disagree that this FO should be considered good because of their record. My opinion, which I've held for years, is that the core they inherited was going to be good, no matter what. It wasn't a question of being good, it was a question of supplementing and extending. They failed on that. The only post on here that I think has some merit is chpettit19's point that the pitching had been ok and might be again. As bad as it is this year, I'm willing to bet they don't have those answers. In fact, it looks like the FO's strategy is quantity and bullpen games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, gunnarthor said:

This is mostly straw man arguments. The group of chaff that Brock brought up weren't being relied upon in 16 and weren't reason for the optimism of 17. They weren't parts of the core of the support staff. They are a distraction.

I completely disagree that this FO should be considered good because of their record. My opinion, which I've held for years, is that the core they inherited was going to be good, no matter what. It wasn't a question of being good, it was a question of supplementing and extending. They failed on that. The only post on here that I think has some merit is chpettit19's point that the pitching had been ok and might be again. As bad as it is this year, I'm willing to bet they don't have those answers. In fact, it looks like the FO's strategy is quantity and bullpen games.

Ah, the good old Strawman argument accusation.  What a handy catch-all to be able to throw out, instead of directly engaging with points you disagree with.  You did indeed say Brock's list didn't play much, but you also called out injuries on some as a reason for that, so the question remains--would the 2016 Twins have been better if Brock's list of players played more?  If no, then weren't injuries in 2016 keeping the Twins from being even worse?

You believe that a core of players which was not good enough to avoid 100 losses in 2016 become good enough, in one offseason to improve by 24 games in 2017, and that result was inevitable, even if they had hired you or me?  If so, isn't it plausible that the upcoming core of Miranda, Kiriloff, Lewis, Larnach, Duran, Ryan, Balazovic, Winder, Jeffers, Wallner, Martin, and Canterino (among others), will also be good, no matter what?  And if they will be, then what is the point of firing another FO, especially when that FO was directly responsible for the acquisition of 9 of the 12 on that list?

Any time you actually want to respond to my points, all of which were directly in response to your assertions (and therefore not strawmen), go right ahead.  If not, I'll take it that you aren't able to actually refute anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, gunnarthor said:

This is mostly straw man arguments. The group of chaff that Brock brought up weren't being relied upon in 16 and weren't reason for the optimism of 17. They weren't parts of the core of the support staff. They are a distraction.

I completely disagree that this FO should be considered good because of their record. My opinion, which I've held for years, is that the core they inherited was going to be good, no matter what. It wasn't a question of being good, it was a question of supplementing and extending. They failed on that. The only post on here that I think has some merit is chpettit19's point that the pitching had been ok and might be again. As bad as it is this year, I'm willing to bet they don't have those answers. In fact, it looks like the FO's strategy is quantity and bullpen games.

The biggest hangup that I have with this guaranteed to be good core is that only one of them was a pitcher.  And he wasn't even a legitimate ace.  Even in today's game, you don't win without pitching.  This FO is what put that pitching around the position player core and filled out pitching staffs and the remaining position players.  While I think it crazy to say that a group of players will win regardless, even accepting that notion still ignores the pitching that got them to where they did go.  If 2019 showed us anything, it's that teams still can't solely hit their way through the playoffs.  Pitching is still required.  It's perfectly reasonable to give credit to the previous regime for the position player group and acknowledge the current FO for their contribution.  The last two division titles don't happen without contributions from both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, wsnydes said:

The biggest hangup that I have with this guaranteed to be good core is that only one of them was a pitcher.  And he wasn't even a legitimate ace.  Even in today's game, you don't win without pitching.  This FO is what put that pitching around the position player core and filled out pitching staffs and the remaining position players.  While I think it crazy to say that a group of players will win regardless, even accepting that notion still ignores the pitching that got them to where they did go.  If 2019 showed us anything, it's that teams still can't solely hit their way through the playoffs.  Pitching is still required.  It's perfectly reasonable to give credit to the previous regime for the position player group and acknowledge the current FO for their contribution.  The last two division titles don't happen without contributions from both.

Good comment. I do agree with Guns in that the current FO inherited a decent squad of talent. It had the makings - and up until this off season, and this year, the new FO team was on a good trajectory. We'll see where they take us from here. Need to really hit on a couple youngsters. Ryan & Ober look for real. Hope for a couple more to rise up next spring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 2017 they:

signed Belisle and Castro to major league deals,

signed Bartolo Colon, Chris Gimenez, Craig Breslow, and Nick Tepesch to minor league deals,

selected Justin Haley in the Rule V draft

claimed Adrianza off waivers.

 I don't know how anybody looks at that group and thinks that '17 team wasn't making the postseason without a change at the top. The FO inherited talent, that shouldn't even be debatable. Gunnarthor made a great point which has been lost in the argument about whether '16 or '21 are mulligans; "The FOs job was to keep the window open & support the core." That's 100% spot on. I'd add developing arms to that as well. I believe that's what we were sold when this duo took over. The fact that we're already likely looking at a lost season in '22 and the pitching staff is in worse shape then when this FO took over says it all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The current regime gets hit by fans because it is seen as stat nerds running their computer game, while Terry Ryan was seen as a die hard baseball guy. Nothing is going to change that, I.e. Viola and old cranks complaining about everything. 
 

Like Brock said the ‘16 team was bad. Happ and Shoemaker both had ERA+ around 100 recently. Their completed collapse, every one in the bullpen sucking are not complete surprises, but collectively is some bad luck. That and the timing of their bullpen sucking didn’t help either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, In My La Z boy said:

Good comment. I do agree with Guns in that the current FO inherited a decent squad of talent. It had the makings - and up until this off season, and this year, the new FO team was on a good trajectory. We'll see where they take us from here. Need to really hit on a couple youngsters. Ryan & Ober look for real. Hope for a couple more to rise up next spring.

I've said this in other threads of similar nature, but this FO was tasked with rebuilding the organization from the ground up and ownership has never been of the impatient ilk.  So, they're going to get the opportunity to see this through.  And they've made no indication that they won't.  The game had passed the previous regime's pitching philosophy by, so it's going to take time to build that pipeline.  I'm not saying that I'm sold that it's happening, but this FO is going to get that opportunity.  They appear to be on the cusp of that coming to fruition, so jettisoning them now makes little sense.  If it doesn't work out, then the decision is easy.  If it does, the decision is easy.  They're at that tipping point right now.  At this particular point in time, the effort is incomplete so making a decision one way or another makes little sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

You're upset that Cavaco, Wallner, Canterino, Sabato, and Soularie, who all had less than 1 full year of experience in the minors going into the 2021 season, aren't successful MLB players right now?  I would also point out that I'm sure the Pohlads understand the baseball draft is a giant crapshoot--BJ Surhoff is one of the 15 best first overall picks for crying out loud.  If half of the guys you listed from their first 4 drafts play in the majors for 4-5 years, the Twins drafted pretty well.

I'm not remotely upset. I'm saying those are the guys who should be used to judge Falvey's drafts. I think the verdict will be in on many of them next year. It's not like players need to play at the MLB level for them to be considered busts. If Lewis plays at A+/AA next year with a .600 OPS, he'll be judged as a bust. If Cavaco has another year in 2022 like he's had this year, he'll be written off as a bust. If Larnach can't find his bat at AAA, he'll be written off as a bust. If Sabato can't figure out how to stop striking out at a 40% clip in the low minors next year, he'll be written off as a bust.

Baseball drafts are a crap shoot one player at a time, not multiple consecutive draft classes at a time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, wsnydes said:

The biggest hangup that I have with this guaranteed to be good core is that only one of them was a pitcher.  And he wasn't even a legitimate ace.  Even in today's game, you don't win without pitching.  This FO is what put that pitching around the position player core and filled out pitching staffs and the remaining position players.  While I think it crazy to say that a group of players will win regardless, even accepting that notion still ignores the pitching that got them to where they did go.  If 2019 showed us anything, it's that teams still can't solely hit their way through the playoffs.  Pitching is still required.  It's perfectly reasonable to give credit to the previous regime for the position player group and acknowledge the current FO for their contribution.  The last two division titles don't happen without contributions from both.

Also, the fact that the current FO had to do so much work to rebuild the pitching staff is a strike against the idea that they just inherited a sure-fire winner.  Yes, they had some nice offensive players, but they weren't going to be able to build an entire staff (which they mostly had to do) AND draft their way to sustainability in two and a half years.  Their first draft was 2017, which meant they had 2018, 2019, and the weird Covid year to have talent ready to contribute.  I'm not sure that timeline is fair to conclude they just can't develop players.  That test, IMO, is still to be decided.

I'm disappointed with their decisions this year, but I'm intrigued by what is sitting in AA and AAA right now.  I'd prefer to make next year a major test and 2023 is make or break.  They've earned some leash with the work they've done and the potential they have fostered, but it's much more tenuous now than it was at this time a year ago.

Even circling the idea that they rode Ryan's coattails to gimme postseason berths and a 100+ win team is really an unfair argument against them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

I'm continually confused by statements that the FO has "no idea what it is doing" "they never make good decisions" etc...............

They literally won the division the last two years. 

You can be disappointed in this year, I think everyone is. But .... I think saying they are clueless idiots and we are only ever sold hope for the future....seems to completely ignore the last two years.

PS. Before you point out "last year doesn't count".....every team played under the same conditions, and the Twins won. It isn't their fault Covid happened....

I feel like we have talked about this a few times.

1) Problems were being masked, particularly Baldelli's game management, because the both the pitching and hitting had ample talent.

2) High turnover of the relievers was something we saw each of the past three years.  This spooked a lot of us.  It worked out 2 out of 3 years, but they ran out of luck.  This was a bad strategy.

3) Depth issues develop over time.  We saw the problem for the first time this year, but the problem was years in the making.  When you burn through 30-40 pitchers every year, what happens to your depth on the pitching side?  This team treats pitchers in a very carefree/careless manner. 

This year is a wake-up call for Twins management.  I'm confident they will make some changes to their approach.  Time will tell if they make enough changes or the right changes, and sure they deserve the chance to put things back together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Y'all are awesome..... But my point was pretty specific.... Anyone saying they are idiots, and only sell the future.....? Has not witnessed the two years before this.

For the more details..... Look at the awful minor league pitching they inherited, even if you count Luis Gil, they literally inherited one possible starting pitcher. And a young Berrios. That's it. And people say the pitching should be fixed, after that mess, and last year's lost season. That's not very realistic.

I don't love many of their decisions, and really hate their drafts, but to claim they are clueless, to say they know nothing about pitching after what they did the two years before this? You aren't being realistic at all. 

Claim they are wrong too much. Claim other things. But the ignoring of real success and saying it isn't real? Just bias. Plain and simple. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Dodecahedron said:

I feel like we have talked about this a few times.

1) Problems were being masked, particularly Baldelli's game management, because the both the pitching and hitting had ample talent.

2) High turnover of the relievers was something we saw each of the past three years.  This spooked a lot of us.  It worked out 2 out of 3 years, but they ran out of luck.  This was a bad strategy.

3) Depth issues develop over time.  We saw the problem for the first time this year, but the problem was years in the making.  When you burn through 30-40 pitchers every year, what happens to your depth on the pitching side?  This team treats pitchers in a very carefree/careless manner. 

This year is a wake-up call for Twins management.  I'm confident they will make some changes to their approach.  Time will tell if they make enough changes or the right changes, and sure they deserve the chance to put things back together.

They had ample talent, but they aren't good at bringing in talent......ok.

You completely ignored the whole part about results.... Winning the division two straight years. Dropping the team ERA from awful to great. 

Are either of those indicative of them being idiots who only sell the future?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do forget in 2019 we had Cruz, Schoop , Cron and Gonzalez , who had a career year, which is a main reason the Twins were as good as they were; They are all gone now.

Schoop and Cron are doing very well for their current team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are about 5 posts I want to just scream "THIS"! So I am forced to merely LIKE those posts and add my own comments. (And YES to everyone debating in a wonderfully civil tone).

1] Absolutely agree, and have argued this point previously many times, that the FO got the short straw when initially hired. Despite being FO executives in MLB, there was no way for them to fully know, understand, or comprehend the entirety of the Twins system from existing infrastructure to the ML roster on down through the milb system, including coaches and instructors. They basically took control the first of Novemeber and hit the ground running making their evaluations and beginning to implement changes. The fact that they inherited some quality young players to build with was a HUGE positive. HOWEVER, those players had yet to congeal in to anything resembling a successful team. How many teams in all sports have we seen underachieve, or not yet approach their ceilings, and then a staff turns over, a new way of doing things is implemented, and progress and winning is achieved? Kudos to the Ryan administration for brining these players to the organization, but some "automatic" improvement/achievement is short-sighted.

2] If we want to give the FO a pass or sorts for their 1st year, I'm OK with that for all the reasons previously mentioned. But they still produced a winning 2017. What's most important is the changes they began in regard to infrastructure changes. Sawyer made HUGE changes in the development of catching within the system. The results were so dramatic and well received him we lost him to the DAMN Yankees. Shelton was valuable as a bench coach, instructor and good baseball man. Then we lost him to a manager gig. Rowson did a tremendous job and then was hired away for a promotion to the Marlins. Hefner was so well respected as out bullpen/assistant pitching coach he became the Mets pitching coach. So the FO sure seems to know how to identify good coaching talent.

Current and former players who are still around and plugged in to the system have commented on the changes within the system in regard to approach changes and having a more personalized approach to player development throughout the system. So they have been doing an awful lot of things very, very right thus far in regard to the infrastructure.

3] Prospect and especially pitcher pipeline? Just how fast have some people expected draft choices made the last 4yrs to reach the majors? Look, I don't like every selection made, but Lewis, for example, misses all of 2020 and then has an unfortunate injury that is going to cost him 2021. That's the fault of the FO? Enlow looked like he was going to turn a corner this season and got hurt. Again, the fault of the FO? Jeffers has already reached, so has Larnach, obviously with mixed results. But you can see the potential. And there are a number of good looking players only in their 1st-3rd seasons within the system showing potential. 

But let's just look at the pitching pipeline we've been promised. 

At the ML level, we got a pair of productive steals in Odorizzi and Maeda. They had a smart idea of brining in Pineda on a make good, rehab deal. And despite some hiccups, he's been solid to great since he recovered from his original surgery.

Prospect wise? This organization is about as deep as its EVER been in pitching prospects. Jordy Blaze was drafted by the previous FO in 2016. But it's been under THIS FO and their watch he has developed. Look at every, single SP prospect in the system, including Ober and Dobnak, (however you feel about Dobber and what he's done so far and might yet do), have been signed, drafted, or traded for in the last 2-3 yrs by THIS FO. This includes Winder, Duran, Sands, Canterino, Sands, Enlow, etc, etc. So where is the pipeline? It's coming! We have only seen the tip of the iceberg thus far with Ober, Dobber, maybe Jax to some degree. A lost 2020 season and injuries in 2021 stink! But het again, this is the fault of the FO?

I like this FO so much, so far, for their infrastructure changes. I don't like every draft choice they have made to be sure, but I also can't argue a lot at this point after just a few years and a lot of great choices they have seemingly made. Its just way too early. And I can't say I've agreed with every ML move they've made, especially a couple FA choices. But I also can't say I have a leg to stand on with some of their choices.

A few of the guys I would have wanted/ signed turned out to be a poor idea. (Me playing amateur GM). I wanted Odorizzi or Walker instead of Happ on a 1yr. But I was fine with Happ, and he looked really good early. And we all know that. I was OK with Shoemaker, healthy, on a 1yr $2M flier. But I would have given Dobnak the 5th spot to open the year. Is that Rocco or the FO making a mistake there? Most of my BP choices woukd have turned as bad or worse than my choices. So I guess I'd already be fired, LOL. 

But almost universally, "experts" thought what the FO did was smart and they were poised to challenge for the ALC yet again and reach the playoffs. And then the 2021 season actually played out.

So after several years of just lousy, losing baseball, the current FO implements changes from top to bottom and bottom to top. Their teams have 3 winning seasons, including 2 divisional championships, one season slightly under .500 and one just horrible and disappointing season. There remains a lot of player talent not exactly old, and have auditioned more than a few quality prospects who show real potential. They have a quality milb system with some of the best pitching prospects we have seen in about 30yrs. And make no mistake, there is work to be done for 2022.

But it is short-sighted, and assanine IMO, to look at what has been achieved thus far and think or demand that some change needs to be made. Just ridiculous! This FO needs and deserves 2 more years to see this through, make some moves, and let their prospects rise up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

Also, the fact that the current FO had to do so much work to rebuild the pitching staff is a strike against the idea that they just inherited a sure-fire winner.  Yes, they had some nice offensive players, but they weren't going to be able to build an entire staff (which they mostly had to do) AND draft their way to sustainability in two and a half years.  Their first draft was 2017, which meant they had 2018, 2019, and the weird Covid year to have talent ready to contribute.  I'm not sure that timeline is fair to conclude they just can't develop players.  That test, IMO, is still to be decided.

I'm disappointed with their decisions this year, but I'm intrigued by what is sitting in AA and AAA right now.  I'd prefer to make next year a major test and 2023 is make or break.  They've earned some leash with the work they've done and the potential they have fostered, but it's much more tenuous now than it was at this time a year ago.

Even circling the idea that they rode Ryan's coattails to gimme postseason berths and a 100+ win team is really an unfair argument against them.

OK, I finally am caught up enough to say I love a post and say THIS!

They absolutely had to re-build the pitching staff. I know Berrios is gone now, but the Odorizzi and Maeda trades were brilliant. In fact, despite the suspension interruption that was a major bummer and complication, the idea of singing Pineda on a rebound deal was very smart. Borderline brilliant when you look at what he's done when healthy.

I think the biggest problem in regard to "decisions" for 2021 is retrospective. And that's not really fair. Again, while we didn't all agree on every choice made, most of us, and the "experts" thought they made smart moves.

Proves back of the napkin smart ideas just don't always work out.

Agree with what is sitting at AA and AAA. There are a lot of kids getting ready and could be ready really soon.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Their big selling point was pitching, something they have yet to develop other than Ober... but after losing basically their entire farm system in 2020, they deserve one more year to show outcomes, good or bad.

And the result of those 2022 outcomes should determine their continued employment.

At the major league level or across the entire system?

Canterino is shelved again with an elbow aliment and has barely pitched at all this season. Same goes for Duran. Winder hasn't pitched since July, Idk if it's actually fatigue or an injury. If Woods Richardson starts throwing strikes maybe he could get a look, but even then it'd be nothing more than a glimpse. None of these guys are going to be able to throw anywhere near what would be considered a significant amount of innings at the major league level, even if they're healthy. I'm not sure how much you can take away from that. 

That leaves Balazovic and the guys they have up right now. I guess you can throw Alcala in there too, but I don't know if a guy settling into a relief role is much of a feather in the cap. If their continued employment is tied to the performances of Balazovic, Ryan, and Ober that seems kinda lame duck-ish to me. 

Maybe they go on a shopping spree, trade some corner OF/DH/1B prospect types, and actually solidify the rotation. Regardless of what happens this offseason though, I doubt their seat is all that warm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

At the major league level or across the entire system?

Canterino is shelved again with an elbow aliment and has barely pitched at all this season. Same goes for Duran. Winder hasn't pitched since July, Idk if it's actually fatigue or an injury. If Woods Richardson starts throwing strikes maybe he could get a look, but even then it'd be nothing more than a glimpse. None of these guys are going to be able to throw anywhere near what would be considered a significant amount of innings at the major league level, even if they're healthy. I'm not sure how much you can take away from that. 

That leaves Balazovic and the guys they have up right now. I guess you can throw Alcala in there too, but I don't know if a guy settling into a relief role is much of a feather in the cap. If their continued employment is tied to the performances of Balazovic, Ryan, and Ober that seems kinda lame duck-ish to me. 

Maybe they go on a shopping spree, trade some corner OF/DH/1B prospect types, and actually solidify the rotation. Regardless of what happens this offseason though, I doubt their seat is all that warm.

Pitching performances across the system, not only in Minnesota. For reasons you pointed out, that wouldn’t be a fair way to evaluate them next year.

But 2022 will be their sixth draft and they need to start impressing us with the pipeline. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

Y'all are awesome..... But my point was pretty specific.... Anyone saying they are idiots, and only sell the future.....? Has not witnessed the two years before this.

For the more details..... Look at the awful minor league pitching they inherited, even if you count Luis Gil, they literally inherited one possible starting pitcher. And a young Berrios. That's it. And people say the pitching should be fixed, after that mess, and last year's lost season. That's not very realistic.

I don't love many of their decisions, and really hate their drafts, but to claim they are clueless, to say they know nothing about pitching after what they did the two years before this? You aren't being realistic at all. 

Claim they are wrong too much. Claim other things. But the ignoring of real success and saying it isn't real? Just bias. Plain and simple. 

I'm not sure anyone is calling them idiots or clueless, maybe I missed that,  but they haven't had a clear philosophy or direction since they showed up. As I mentioned above, 2020 doesn't really matter much to me on grading this FO. Others, it may mean more. 

Pitching they inherited included Berrios for, what, five years of team control? Gibson had another three years of team control. Santana had two more years under contract. They had a few backend arms like Mejia (arm injury) in the majors already and a bunch of young arms in the farm system, some pretty highly ranked. Ynoa and Gil, Wells, Graterol, Stewart, Romero, Jay, Gonsalves, etc. Injuries knocked a few of them out, that's always a risk with pitching prospects, but this idea that the system didn't have quality arms is simply not correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, gunnarthor said:

I'm not sure anyone is calling them idiots or clueless, maybe I missed that,  but they haven't had a clear philosophy or direction since they showed up. As I mentioned above, 2020 doesn't really matter much to me on grading this FO. Others, it may mean more. 

Pitching they inherited included Berrios for, what, five years of team control? Gibson had another three years of team control. Santana had two more years under contract. They had a few backend arms like Mejia (arm injury) in the majors already and a bunch of young arms in the farm system, some pretty highly ranked. Ynoa and Gil, Wells, Graterol, Stewart, Romero, Jay, Gonsalves, etc. Injuries knocked a few of them out, that's always a risk with pitching prospects, but this idea that the system didn't have quality arms is simply not correct.

......you should maybe reread your own list.  I dont know how you draw that conclusion with a straight face.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm firmly on the fence with this FO.  They DID inherit a solid core, and YEARS of BAD Twins teams under Terry Ryan had helped stock the minor leagues with high draft picks.  This FO took a Twins team that Molitor miraculously guided to a playoff spot in 2016 (and earned him Manager of the Year) and then completely spit the bit in that off-season to gift Twins fans with the abomination that was 2017.  They DID win back to back division titles in 2019 & 2020 but continued the Twins inability to even win ONE playoff game since the early 2000's (I would add that the FO's inability to make any kind of big splash in either 2019 or 2020 at the trade deadline didn't help either).  And it's fair to point out that as a whole, the division was at a low point in those years.  The division title was ripe for the taking.  And now we see the fruits of a disastrous off season that saw our division rival White Sox completely checkmate us in every conceivable move, trade, acquisition.  This FO has an "incomplete" report card.  They COMPLETELY FAILED in 2017 and THIS year.  A bad move here or there can be excused, in fact, should be expected and accepted.  Nobody bats 1.000 in personnel decisions.  But I maintain this FO has had those two real clunkers and frankly with "analytics" guiding us, I expected better.  I didn't expect the two epic fails they've blessed Twins fans with in 2017 and this year.  I maintain that "relevance" in 2022 is crucial, to the team, the fanbase and this FO.  They better hit a HOMERUN this off season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd actually like to point out 2 things.

1) I've said multiple times the front office doesn't know what it's doing right now. I believe that to be accurate, but it refers to a specific plan of action. In July and August, I don't think they had a plan A/B/C going in to 2022. I don't know what their current plan is, either, but it's not like there are a lot of new bread crumbs at this time of the year so no biggie. I think having a plan is important, but that's just my philosophy. I don't think a determination can be made on Falvey's performance before the end of next year.

2) Yes. Injuries can be on the front office. The front office is paid for performance, not excuses. You draft injury prone pitchers or players, you get dinged for it. It's like the old school sick days at work. You're allowed up to "x" and after that, your boss starts noticing. Falvey clearly focuses heavily on velocity and finding every last mph the Twins can. The data and research supporting a correlation between arm injuries and higher velocity is becoming more concrete. That's on the front office. If their methodology is behind a larger than normal amount of arm injuries, then the arm injuries are on the front office, not random luck. I'm also not saying the Twins have an abormal amount of arm injuries in the past few years. I don't know enough about the rest of the league to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm on the fence with them as well. I was hyped when they were brought in and I still like them, but I want to start seeing results.

One thing really starting to annoy me is the players they've given away: Wade, Baddoo, Nick Anderson, Luis Gil, Huascar Ynoa, Tyler Wells. You can excuse one or two of those as bad luck or whatever, but this is a clear problem. That's an entire MLB core they gave away and have literally nothing to show for it. Learn to evaluate your own guys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bean5302 said:

I'd actually like to point out 2 things.

1) I've said multiple times the front office doesn't know what it's doing right now. I believe that to be accurate, but it refers to a specific plan of action.

This might be true ... but I really doubt it. Just because we don't know what the plan is or it doesn't follow what we expect it to or isn't being executed in how we think it should be ... doesn't mean they don't have one. A lot of posters complain about the FO because they haven't done what that particular poster thinks they should. And, don't get me wrong, those are valid discussion points. But I think the FO had some very specific plans to start the season which has had to change ... a LOT ... due to injuries and under performing and, well, prospects missing a year. That can lead to a rather stark or haphazard appearance when they've had to alter a path they were on. And in some cases i think they stuck to a plan for too long. (Colomé anyone?) And maybe the plan now is 'flying by the seat of their pants' because they've kind of had to this season. To me, implying they have no plan, implies they don't know what they are doing. It's how I read it. But you've clarified so I won't put words in your mouth you didn't say, but when that gets stated ... I don't think they have a plan ... I read it very differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, gunnarthor said:

I'm not sure anyone is calling them idiots or clueless, maybe I missed that,  but they haven't had a clear philosophy or direction since they showed up. As I mentioned above, 2020 doesn't really matter much to me on grading this FO. Others, it may mean more. 

Pitching they inherited included Berrios for, what, five years of team control? Gibson had another three years of team control. Santana had two more years under contract. They had a few backend arms like Mejia (arm injury) in the majors already and a bunch of young arms in the farm system, some pretty highly ranked. Ynoa and Gil, Wells, Graterol, Stewart, Romero, Jay, Gonsalves, etc. Injuries knocked a few of them out, that's always a risk with pitching prospects, but this idea that the system didn't have quality arms is simply not correct.

People call them stupid, clueless, idiots, people without a plan, etc. everyday on this board. Every day. 

None of those pitchers are good. Most were not highly regarded outside Minnesota, not after a year or so in the minors. But again, not the point. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bean5302 said:

2) Yes. Injuries can be on the front office. The front office is paid for performance, not excuses. You draft injury prone pitchers or players, you get dinged for it. It's like the old school sick days at work. You're allowed up to "x" and after that, your boss starts noticing. Falvey clearly focuses heavily on velocity and finding every last mph the Twins can. The data and research supporting a correlation between arm injuries and higher velocity is becoming more concrete. That's on the front office. If their methodology is behind a larger than normal amount of arm injuries, then the arm injuries are on the front office, not random luck. I'm also not saying the Twins have an abormal amount of arm injuries in the past few years. I don't know enough about the rest of the league to say.

That bolded sentence is an inaccurate description of the Twins pitching philosophy under this current regime. They hunt for elite pitches and get pitchers to throw them more. They also are invested heavily in biomechanics and use that to improve pitchers where they can. But the focus is most certainly not velocity. Joe Ryan and SWR were the big arms they added at the trade deadline and they both throw in the low 90s. The Twins helped Ober with his mechanics and added a couple MPH to him, but the movement and spin of his FB is what they targeted. Same with Ryan. They don't care about his velo, they care about his spin and movement. They brought in Wisler for his slider. Maeda for his split and slider. Pineda for his slider. They have almost nobody coming out of the pen throwing 100. Velocity isn't something they look for at all. They believe they can add some velo to certain pitchers with slight mechanical changes, but elite pitches is what they search for, not velocity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mike Sixel said:

None of those pitchers are good. Most were not highly regarded outside Minnesota, not after a year or so in the minors. But again, not the point. 

 

They aren't good? This is demonstratively not true. Ynoa and Gil, Wells, Graterol, Stewart, Romero, Jay, Gonsalves, were the minor league pitchers I mentioned. Ynoa and Gil and Wells look ok in the majors. Ynoa's legit. Gil could just be off to a hot start, ala Duffey, but he's only 23 and making starts for a playoff contender. Must be nice.

Graterol was a consistent top 100 prospect, debuted at 20, and was the centerpiece in the Maeda trade. Romero was a top 100 prospect under this FO. Gonsalves was as well, two years under this FO, and then hurt his arm, IIRC. Stewart and Jay were top 100 prospects but not under this FO. But the FO inherited a good system with some pitching depth. It doesn't make sense to keep denying this. They were dealt a nice starting hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

Featured Video

×
×
  • Create New...