Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Was the last regime really worse than the current Front Office?


mikelink45
 Share

I posted this comment on Aaron Gleeman's last Athletic Q&A - I keep looking at the Falvey and Levine era and the fact is - they inherited a good team that was basically in place before they got here. Sano, Kepler, Rosario, Buxton, Polanco, Berrios were signed by the previous regime and J.A. Happ, Homer Bailey, Matt Shoemaker, Rich Hill, Martín Pérez and Bundy were added by the new FO is it time to reassess?

This has really started to get my thoughts rolling since I posted it.  We gladly attack the Ryan Regime and hold the Falvey and Levine in high regard, but why?  Is it because one group is analytic and the other can't spell it? 

In addition to the players I listed above they also had Pressly, Duffey, Perkins, Kintzler, Belisle, and Rogers in the BP and Mauer, Dozier, and Castro in the starting lineup.  

The new FO then added Ehire Adrianza and Marwin Gonzales, Cron and Schoop for 2019 and of course there best signing was Cruz.  Was the Cruz signing something the former regime would not have done?  We won't know, but the previous leadership did bring in Jim Thome - to me a comparable player. 

The previous regime was responsible for Trevor May who came up to be an important BP addition in 2019 and Kyle Gibson, out second best starter.  

The pitching additions by the current leadership was Perez, Pineda, and Odorizzi (the last two were positives).  New BP additions were Ryne Harper, Romo, Magill, and Sam Dyson.  

Since 2019 everyone know that most of the pitchers I have in the first paragraph were added along with players like Colome, Clippard, Wisler,   Garver was now the catcher, coming from the minors as a signing of the previous regime. and the current FO gave us Jake Cave, Ildemaro Vargas, and Alex Avila.  Maeda was the big positive addition who looked like a great pitcher in a short season.  Now we have to wait for him to recover and see if he really was that good or if it was a SSS.  

My thoughts are that if we stack the players inherited versus the players signed, the current FO has to wait a while to earn an accolades. 

 

Sometimes critical thinking does not happen in a nice sequence so I have to add this note that I replied to one of the posts because I think we have dwelled too much on Ryan's failures without reflecting on the successes too.  I am not a big Terry Ryan guy, but there was a time he was considered the model for MLB.   Remember he made the trade to acquire Ortiz who only hit 58 HRs in six seasons, and then we all regret his loss after he discovered himself in Boston.  Ryan acquired Shannon Stewart to be the catalyst for the 2003 team, he moved Knoblauch when he had to and got Eric Milton (pitcher) and Juan Guzman (SS) in return for a disgruntled employee.  Santana was not our rule V draftee, but Twins sent minor leaguer Jared Camp and cash to the Florida Marlins in exchange for Santana.  Some big issues, but some big successes too. 

The successes in drafting are really outlined in Cody's essay today 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

The old regime was worse, as they wasted three consecutive high first round picks as the team floundered through half a decade of 90+ loss seasons.

While this regime may ultimately do the same, they have yet to do it. We know the old regime was bad while the jury is very much out on the current regime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, mikelink45 said:

Garver was now the catcher, coming from the minors as a signing of the previous regime.

While there's a lot of validity to your other points, this one doesn't accurately reflect reality. Without this front office applying modern defensive coaching (and were actually ahead of the curve in a few ways), Garver wouldn't even be a catcher right now. He'd be a bat-only no-position guy, if he was in baseball at all. This front office inherited Garver, who was literally the worst framer in baseball and cost his team and enormous number of runs, and turned him into an acceptable defensive catcher. There's a good chance we would have already forgotten about the existence of Mitch Garver had this front office not altered his career trajectory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

While there's a lot of validity to your other points, this one doesn't accurately reflect reality. Without this front office applying modern defensive coaching (and were actually ahead of the curve in a few ways), Garver wouldn't even be a catcher right now. He'd be a bat-only no-position guy, if he was in baseball at all. This front office inherited Garver, who was literally the worst framer in baseball and cost his team and enormous number of runs, and turned him into an acceptable defensive catcher. There's a good chance we would have already forgotten about the existence of Mitch Garver had this front office not altered his career trajectory.

I like your take, but I cannot buy it completely.  There would have been coaches for the old regime too and I cannot say that they would not have been smart enough to coach Garver who most important was an eager student. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, mikelink45 said:

I like your take, but I cannot buy it completely.  There would have been coaches for the old regime too and I cannot say that they would not have been smart enough to coach Garver who most important was an eager student. 

Except they had Garver for 3+ seasons and the end result was literally the worst framing catcher in baseball. The old front office showed no interest or acceptance of framing so it's a stretch to believe they would have fixed Garver's framing problem if given more time (of which they already had plenty). The current front office didn't even fix Garver right away, it took them a couple of seasons to implement a new strategy and hire Tanner Swanson, after which Garver took a large step forward (but they also acquired Castro right away explicitly for his framing skills, which probably helped the younger catchers in 2017-2018).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good posting and questions. I will take the weasel way out and say it is still a bit early to form hard judgments on current leadership.

This is because it seems to me, and I might be wrong, that on average, it takes 5-7 years of player development before knowing if any given player will contribute to building a contending MLB roster. There are always exceptions, and I wish we would see some of those players once in awhile in Mn, but it is for this reason that I think the jury remains sequestered on the Falvine era.

That said, there is one constant that does not change, and that is ownership philosophy. I think it is hard to completely separate any FO activities from the ownership. It's not that the Pohlad ownership group is any more or less profit driven than any other. But their operating values certainly have an impact on roster construction that carries from one FO administration to another. And that part of the equation is, to me, discouraging. Do those values dictate that FO always strive to thread the needle looking to maximize value for minimal investment, and avoid long term salary risk at all cost? I am speculating here, but the history and results suggest that for any FO trying to win here, the eye of that needle grows narrower, and the likelihood of success lessens, by the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last part of the Ryan era was awful, they brought in some pieces and acquired much of the current core, but they had no plan to actually acquire and develop pitching.

The current FO has adopted new principles, improved in analytics. They're advanced over the last FO in many ways, but the results have largely been the same. If the results don't change can you really say this FO is good?

 These aren't mutually exclusive events. "Both And" is perfectly reasonable. I don't think we've given the Falvine era enough time, but tick, tick, tick...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to be a whataboutist, but is this even a question?

Don’t forget about how awful Terry Ryan was. Wasting first round picks is a huge thing you left out, I don’t recall Falvey doing that (at least not yet).

While Ryan did stock the farm with players like Berrios, Buxton, Polanco, Rosario, Garver, Kepler, Sano, etc he also left the pitching cupboards bare. The current FO has stocked the farm with players like Martin, Lewis, and Larnach, etc but also has managed to acquire pitchers like Ryan, Duran, Woods Richardson, & Petty.

If you want to argue that they shouldn’t have Ryan, Woods Richardson, and Martin and that the only reason they do is because they weren’t competitive, then in that scenario we wouldn’t even be having this discussion. So that argument is a total dead goose of an argument.

Pretty much any negatives you can attribute to the current FO can also be attributed to the Ryan administration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, cHawk said:

Not to be a whataboutist, but is this even a question?

Don’t forget about how awful Terry Ryan was. Wasting first round picks is a huge thing you left out, I don’t recall Falvey doing that (at least not yet).

While Ryan did stock the farm with players like Berrios, Buxton, Polanco, Rosario, Garver, Kepler, Sano, etc he also left the pitching cupboards bare. The current FO has stocked the farm with players like Martin, Lewis, Kirilloff, Larnach, etc but also has managed to acquire pitchers like Ryan, Duran, Woods Richardson, & Petty.

If you want to argue that they shouldn’t have Ryan, Woods Richardson, and Martin and that the only reason they do is because they weren’t competitive, then in that scenario we wouldn’t even be having this discussion. So that argument is a total dead goose of an argument.

Pretty much any negatives you can attribute to the current FO can also be attributed to the Ryan administration.

Actually Ryan drafted Kiriloff.  SWR and Martin are here because of Berrios. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cHawk said:

While Ryan did stock the farm with players like Berrios, Buxton, Polanco, Rosario, Garver, Kepler, Sano, etc he also left the pitching cupboards bare.
 

I was not a fan of the last FO, but to say the cupboard bare isn't entirely true.

Here are just a few major league players they had. Trevor May, Sean Poppen, Kyle Gibson, Joses Berrios, John Curtiss, Tyler Wells, Brusdar Graterol, Huascar Ynoa, Luis Gil, Chargois, Nick Anderson, Lewis Thorpe

Plus were given some other prospects in Stephen Gonsalves, Fernando Romero, Felix Jorge, Tyler Jay, Stewart, while all failed they had a good trade value they first couple of years.

The current FO traded a few that might turn out, kept a few too long, and others not long enough.

Hopefully they don't do the same with the pitching prospects they have drafted and traded for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting. We basically added two general managers, so to speak, by breaking the business-minded St. Peter into that end of the front office.

 

The current team inherited the current team and some of the prospects still in the system

 

It took a full season to jettison the current field staff. And also, a couple of seasons to start putting the "new look" minor league system in base, which was looking pretty good going into 2020 until that season was cancelled.

 

We have to give the current front office (and the team and baseball as a whole) a pass with that lost season of development (and you'd think they would be looking more closely as how any more lost time for future players will affect their future teams).

 

They seemed on the verge of success, albeit with many players leftover from the old regime. They managed to resign Polanco, Kepler and Sano to decent longterm contracts that would make any tradable in the future. They failed to resign Berrios and almost Buxton. I think they would have been happy to move on from ALL of the aforementioned five players, if necessary....but, again, being on the cusp makes you take a hard turn on your plans for the future. Sadly, they are treading water...but still showing the "good face forward" of any front office rather than sharing hard realities to the fan base.

 

Better to say we are young and enthusiastic going forward and hope to hit the top with our fantastic farm system than say "being competitive" and "going for it all" when, on paper, you look like fools. Undersell rather than oversell. In these pandemic times, just selling outdoor baseball as entertainment that can be enjoyed can work to put fans in the seats...and you should be able to survive while the new guys make ... adjustments.

 

I' m glad the Twins went outside the organization. Maybe they didn't go far enough as there are still many from the former regime in place in the front office, keeping that loving family look alive and well.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This FO was hired to replicate the system that Ryan created that kept the Twins competitive from 01-10.  They haven't shown the ability to do that yet. Doesn't mean that they can't. I wasn't a fan of Ryan in the late 90s but he got better. 

Brock's attack on Ryan are, in my opinion, unjustified. Yeah, the 13-15 drafts weren't great but the new FO has yet to come close to a draft as good as 2016 or 2012. And the 2017 and 2019 drafts look particularly ugly with four first round picks, including a number 1 overall, as well as the FO saving money to get additional first round talent such as Enlow.  (Comparing how Berrios and Buxton moved through the minors with Lewis and Enlow is not kind. Lewis already has more minor league at-bats than Buxton and is far away). And while the FO didn't do great on the draft front in 13-15 (besides Garver and Wade), in those years they did add Ryan Pressly, Trevor May, Eduardo Nunez, and international signings such as Graterol, Arreaz, Ynoa, and Gil. And, as I've mentioned a number of times, the talent this new FO has let walk or get taken in one sided trades is getting pretty high. And, that they were dealt a nice hand with promise of additional payroll that the old regime never had, I think it's fair to say they've blown whatever good will they should have received. 

I've been low on the FO for a while now. I assume this will be their last year. I assume we're looking at another 75-80 or so win season, low attendance, a

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What often gets lost in these kinds of discussions is the things we don't see. The Twins had had basically no analytics department when Falvey took over. That's awful. You can't rip Ryan enough for it. They were still using out dated development strategies in the minors and getting awful results.

People want to credit the previous regime for the good players the Twins have now as if they'd automatically be these players had the other regime still been in control. Garver and his defense has already been mentioned, but I'll add Duffey, Rogers, and Berrios to that list. This regime used technology and data to change what pitches those guys threw and when they threw them.

The assumption that Rogers would have started throwing a slider (his best pitch) under the previous regime is quite a stretch. He didn't start throwing a slider until 2018. And following that his K/9 jumped from 8 in 2017 to 10 in 2018 and 12 in 2019 before topping out at 13 in 2021. Why do we assume Ryan's regime and staff would've taught him that pitch?

Duffey was bad before 2019 when this regime used technology and data to turn him into basically a 2 pitch pitcher and he's been elite since. Why do we assume Ryan and his people would've done that? 

Berrios also changed his pitch usage based on data and technology (I know, I know, analytics are the worst) and saw success. They lowered his sinker usage, raised his curve, 4 seam, and change usage. 

I don't have time to dive into the entire pitching staff, but the idea that the team was automatically going to be this successful no matter who was in charge is ignoring a lot. Does that mean this regime is perfect, or great, or even good? No. But they're head and shoulders ahead of Ryan and his regime. This front office has modernized the organization, and that alone gives them the win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Game7-91 said:

Good posting and questions. I will take the weasel way out and say it is still a bit early to form hard judgments on current leadership.

This is because it seems to me, and I might be wrong, that on average, it takes 5-7 years of player development before knowing if any given player will contribute to building a contending MLB roster. There are always exceptions, and I wish we would see some of those players once in awhile in Mn, but it is for this reason that I think the jury remains sequestered on the Falvine era.

That said, there is one constant that does not change, and that is ownership philosophy. I think it is hard to completely separate any FO activities from the ownership. It's not that the Pohlad ownership group is any more or less profit driven than any other. But their operating values certainly have an impact on roster construction that carries from one FO administration to another. And that part of the equation is, to me, discouraging. Do those values dictate that FO always strive to thread the needle looking to maximize value for minimal investment, and avoid long term salary risk at all cost? I am speculating here, but the history and results suggest that for any FO trying to win here, the eye of that needle grows narrower, and the likelihood of success lessens, by the year.

The one caution I have is that Falvine comes from Cleveland and how does that team operate?  That was their training ground.  I am trying to keep all the factors in front of us because I do not have a concrete position yet.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, gunnarthor said:

Brock's attack on Ryan are, in my opinion, unjustified. Yeah, the 13-15 drafts weren't great but the new FO has yet to come close to a draft as good as 2016 or 2012. And the 2017 and 2019 drafts look particularly ugly with four first round picks, including a number 1 overall, as well as the FO saving money to get additional first round talent such as Enlow.  (Comparing how Berrios and Buxton moved through the minors with Lewis and Enlow is not kind. Lewis already has more minor league at-bats than Buxton and is far away). And while the FO didn't do great on the draft front in 13-15 (besides Garver and Wade), in those years they did add Ryan Pressly, Trevor May, Eduardo Nunez, and international signings such as Graterol, Arreaz, Ynoa, and Gil. And, as I've mentioned a number of times, the talent this new FO has let walk or get taken in one sided trades is getting pretty high. And, that they were dealt a nice hand with promise of additional payroll that the old regime never had, I think it's fair to say they've blown whatever good will they should have received. 

My ridicule of those drafts is entirely justified. The Twins had picks 4, 5, and 6 in consecutive years and produced nothing from it as the team lost 90 games over and over and over again. A bad product on the field in Minnesota and blowing draft picks left and right. It's a bad combination and absolutely deserves ridicule. Frankly, I'm perpetually confused why you're not critical of those late Ryan drafts. They sucked. Unless I'm missing someone, I don't believe even one of the 2013-2015 picks accumulated 1+ WAR in a Twins uniform. ONE WAR. That's just about the lowest bar I can set for a draft.

And in my post, I didn't imply any drafting acumen by this front office. I've liked some of their drafts and disliked others... but to have individual picks derailed by injury is a lot different than just making bad picks, as the Twins did in 2013-2015. None of Stewart, Gordon, or Jay were hit particularly hard by the injury bug, they just didn't perform. Stewart and Jay were particularly bad picks. The likes of Lewis, Cavaco, Enlow, et al are still works in progress and only time will tell where they land when the dust settles.

The books are nearly closed on those 2013-2015 drafts while the books are very much open on the 2017+ drafts. If those Falvey drafts turn out to be as atrocious as those late Ryan drafts (a nod to the 2012 draft, which was legit awesome), I'll be just as critical of them but I'm not going to declare the game over in the fourth inning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, cHawk said:

Not to be a whataboutist, but is this even a question?

Don’t forget about how awful Terry Ryan was. Wasting first round picks is a huge thing you left out, I don’t recall Falvey doing that (at least not yet).

While Ryan did stock the farm with players like Berrios, Buxton, Polanco, Rosario, Garver, Kepler, Sano, etc he also left the pitching cupboards bare. The current FO has stocked the farm with players like Martin, Lewis, and Larnach, etc but also has managed to acquire pitchers like Ryan, Duran, Woods Richardson, & Petty.

If you want to argue that they shouldn’t have Ryan, Woods Richardson, and Martin and that the only reason they do is because they weren’t competitive, then in that scenario we wouldn’t even be having this discussion. So that argument is a total dead goose of an argument.

Pretty much any negatives you can attribute to the current FO can also be attributed to the Ryan administration.

I liked your statement until the last line which I think is too harsh.  I am not a big Terry Ryan guy, but there was a time he was considered the model for MLB.   Remember he made the trade to acquire Ortiz who only hit 58 HRs in six seasons, and then we all regret his loss after he discovered himself in Boston.  Ryan acquired Shannon Stewart to be the catalyst for the 2003 team, he moved Knoblauch when he had to and got Eric Milton (pitcher) and Juan Guzman (SS) in return for a disgruntled employee.  Santana was not our rule V draftee, but Twins sent minor leaguer Jared Camp and cash to the Florida Marlins in exchange for Santana.  Some big issues, but some big successes too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rosterman said:

Interesting. We basically added two general managers, so to speak, by breaking the business-minded St. Peter into that end of the front office.

 

The current team inherited the current team and some of the prospects still in the system

 

It took a full season to jettison the current field staff. And also, a couple of seasons to start putting the "new look" minor league system in base, which was looking pretty good going into 2020 until that season was cancelled.

 

We have to give the current front office (and the team and baseball as a whole) a pass with that lost season of development (and you'd think they would be looking more closely as how any more lost time for future players will affect their future teams).

 

They seemed on the verge of success, albeit with many players leftover from the old regime. They managed to resign Polanco, Kepler and Sano to decent longterm contracts that would make any tradable in the future. They failed to resign Berrios and almost Buxton. I think they would have been happy to move on from ALL of the aforementioned five players, if necessary....but, again, being on the cusp makes you take a hard turn on your plans for the future. Sadly, they are treading water...but still showing the "good face forward" of any front office rather than sharing hard realities to the fan base.

 

Better to say we are young and enthusiastic going forward and hope to hit the top with our fantastic farm system than say "being competitive" and "going for it all" when, on paper, you look like fools. Undersell rather than oversell. In these pandemic times, just selling outdoor baseball as entertainment that can be enjoyed can work to put fans in the seats...and you should be able to survive while the new guys make ... adjustments.

 

I' m glad the Twins went outside the organization. Maybe they didn't go far enough as there are still many from the former regime in place in the front office, keeping that loving family look alive and well.

 

Despite the pitcher pedigree is Cleveland really the model that we want to replace the jettisoned field and office staff?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

What often gets lost in these kinds of discussions is the things we don't see. The Twins had had basically no analytics department when Falvey took over. That's awful. You can't rip Ryan enough for it. They were still using out dated development strategies in the minors and getting awful results.

People want to credit the previous regime for the good players the Twins have now as if they'd automatically be these players had the other regime still been in control. Garver and his defense has already been mentioned, but I'll add Duffey, Rogers, and Berrios to that list. This regime used technology and data to change what pitches those guys threw and when they threw them.

The assumption that Rogers would have started throwing a slider (his best pitch) under the previous regime is quite a stretch. He didn't start throwing a slider until 2018. And following that his K/9 jumped from 8 in 2017 to 10 in 2018 and 12 in 2019 before topping out at 13 in 2021. Why do we assume Ryan's regime and staff would've taught him that pitch?

Duffey was bad before 2019 when this regime used technology and data to turn him into basically a 2 pitch pitcher and he's been elite since. Why do we assume Ryan and his people would've done that? 

Berrios also changed his pitch usage based on data and technology (I know, I know, analytics are the worst) and saw success. They lowered his sinker usage, raised his curve, 4 seam, and change usage. 

I don't have time to dive into the entire pitching staff, but the idea that the team was automatically going to be this successful no matter who was in charge is ignoring a lot. Does that mean this regime is perfect, or great, or even good? No. But they're head and shoulders ahead of Ryan and his regime. This front office has modernized the organization, and that alone gives them the win.

You literally cannot know this. We have no idea how their development was affected by the new FO. To assume they would be worse if Ryan had stayed is baseless conjecture. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, mikelink45 said:

I liked your statement until the last line which I think is too harsh.  I am not a big Terry Ryan guy, but there was a time he was considered the model for MLB.   Remember he made the trade to acquire Ortiz who only hit 58 HRs in six seasons, and then we all regret his loss after he discovered himself in Boston.  Ryan acquired Shannon Stewart to be the catalyst for the 2003 team, he moved Knoblauch when he had to and got Eric Milton (pitcher) and Juan Guzman (SS) in return for a disgruntled employee.  Santana was not our rule V draftee, but Twins sent minor leaguer Jared Camp and cash to the Florida Marlins in exchange for Santana.  Some big issues, but some big successes too. 

That may have come across not how I intended it to. Ryan was good for a lot of his tenure. I was referring to 2011-2016. Ryan was clearly past his expiration date.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Linus said:

You literally cannot know this. We have no idea how their development was affected by the new FO. To assume they would be worse if Ryan had stayed is baseless conjecture. 

This argument goes back the other way as well. You literally cannot know that it would’ve been automatic.

So which is it? IDK. However, I think it’s foolish to think that a team at the professional level can succeed on talent alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, cHawk said:

This argument goes back the other way as well. You literally cannot know that it would’ve been automatic.

So which is it? IDK. However, I think it’s foolish to think that a team at the professional level can succeed on talent alone.

For sure and I would never make that argument. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

The old regime was worse, as they wasted three consecutive high first round picks as the team floundered through half a decade of 90+ loss seasons.

While this regime may ultimately do the same, they have yet to do it. We know the old regime was bad while the jury is very much out on the current regime.

I cannot Read this without getting upset about comments like this.  Who are you to say that Mr. Ryan and his team were bad?  And what do you mean by bad?  I thought this was the type of site where these type of comments were supposed to be kept off this site.

Mr. Ryan and his team included many first rate people.  And yes, I am speaking from first hand knowledge,  I expect they know a hell of a lot more about baseball than anyone here, including all of your TD staff combined.  No one ever sits back and tries to understand how difficult it is to project what type of player an 18 year old kid is going to be when he is 23 or 25.  Did they have failures, you betcha.  Show me any organization who didn’t make mistakes?

I expect you will respond and rip me a new one.  So be it, I can’t stand by while you disparage these fine people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, roger said:

I cannot Read this without getting upset about comments like this.  Who are you to say that Mr. Ryan and his team were bad?  And what do you mean by bad?  I thought this was the type of site where these type of comments were supposed to be kept off this site.

Mr. Ryan and his team included many first rate people.  And yes, I am speaking from first hand knowledge,  I expect they know a hell of a lot more about baseball than anyone here, including all of your TD staff combined.  No one ever sits back and tries to understand how difficult it is to project what type of player an 18 year old kid is going to be when he is 23 or 25.  Did they have failures, you betcha.  Show me any organization who didn’t make mistakes?

I expect you will respond and rip me a new one.  So be it, I can’t stand by while you disparage these fine people.

Episode 5 Reaction GIF by The Office

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think either is worse than the others. Ryan was a great GM in the mid-90s through 2010ish... The reliance was on scouting and trusting the scouts and loyalty and a lot of those things. 

Then the game changed. Ryan didn't want to change. Doesn't mean his style or baseball mind is any worse or less than the new guys, just a different mindset. 

The current front office uses much more technology and analytics while still using the scouting voices and other metrics on every decision. That is the game today. 

The new regime uses lots of a variety of data points to make any decision. It's more formal. Terry Ryan's run was based on fewer data points, but relied on the eyes and some stats, etc., and it was some just gut feel. That's how they got David Ortiz for Dave Hollins, or Joe Mays for Roberto Kelly, etc. 

And, I think what we've learned, is that regardless of method and data points and all that, a lot of many free agent signings are the same, or the type of player is the same, or some of the philosophies ultimately are the same. Every front office is going to have good moves and bad moves if given enough time. 

And now the front offices are all the same, so it's kind of back to an even playing field in that sense. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mikelink45 said:

I liked your statement until the last line which I think is too harsh.  I am not a big Terry Ryan guy, but there was a time he was considered the model for MLB.   Remember he made the trade to acquire Ortiz who only hit 58 HRs in six seasons, and then we all regret his loss after he discovered himself in Boston.  Ryan acquired Shannon Stewart to be the catalyst for the 2003 team, he moved Knoblauch when he had to and got Eric Milton (pitcher) and Juan Guzman (SS) in return for a disgruntled employee.  Santana was not our rule V draftee, but Twins sent minor leaguer Jared Camp and cash to the Florida Marlins in exchange for Santana.  Some big issues, but some big successes too. 

Terry Ryan was one of the best GMs in baseball in the late 90s that oversaw the rebuild post World Series into the early aughts rejuvenation that was a component to saving the team from contraction. He was a great GM the first go.

He was a major part of Andy MacPhail’s modernization of the scouting and analysis in the early 80s. There’s stories of the Griffith years back when the entire 6 teams of roster files were housed in a couple recipe boxes on index cards, and MacPhail and Ryan expanding that to modern (at the time) file folders with extensive type-written written reports. Scouts complaining “do you want me to scout? Or do you want a secretary?”


Saying the Ryan regime was bad the second go around isn’t a knock on Ryan as a person, or saying that he was bad the whole time. When he came back in 2011, his organization never adapted their approach, they were just starting to computerize files in word in 2015, the analytics department was one guy with Excel who got an intern in the summer. The game changed, the Twins did not and desperately needed to.

Falvey modernized the front office, which was a massive feat! Let’s see if he and Levine can bring in the players to win as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, cHawk said:

That may have come across not how I intended it to. Ryan was good for a lot of his tenure. I was referring to 2011-2016. Ryan was clearly past his expiration date.

And trying to dig out from the Bill Smith debacle.  Older, recovering from Cancer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Seth Stohs said:

I don't think either is worse than the others. Ryan was a great GM in the mid-90s through 2010ish... The reliance was on scouting and trusting the scouts and loyalty and a lot of those things. 

Then the game changed. Ryan didn't want to change. Doesn't mean his style or baseball mind is any worse or less than the new guys, just a different mindset. 

The current front office uses much more technology and analytics while still using the scouting voices and other metrics on every decision. That is the game today. 

The new regime uses lots of a variety of data points to make any decision. It's more formal. Terry Ryan's run was based on fewer data points, but relied on the eyes and some stats, etc., and it was some just gut feel. That's how they got David Ortiz for Dave Hollins, or Joe Mays for Roberto Kelly, etc. 

And, I think what we've learned, is that regardless of method and data points and all that, a lot of many free agent signings are the same, or the type of player is the same, or some of the philosophies ultimately are the same. Every front office is going to have good moves and bad moves if given enough time. 

And now the front offices are all the same, so it's kind of back to an even playing field in that sense. 

 

Great response - kind of like Seth Stohs versus the Geek!  That is why I like your observations about the minor leaguers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, RpR said:

OH, the miracle analytics , I used to see thee type of people selling miracle cures at carnivals.

R. Strange McNamara used analytics to run the Vietnam War.

Even if a GM were to (irrationally) dislike analytics, he should still be obliged to understand them if only to better understand his opponents next moves and motivations. 
 

Ryan put about as much effort into this particular area as my 9-year-old does into cleaning her bedroom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

The Twins Daily Caretaker Fund
The Twins Daily Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premiere Twins community on the internet.

×
×
  • Create New...