Does the Twins Front Office Have Difficulty Admitting When They Are Wrong?

[Craig Arko]

Most every management/executive team I’ve seen in many industries has had difficulty admitting they are wrong. I assume it’s a requirement in business management school.

[chpettit19]

1 hour ago, Schmoeman5 said:

I think we had this discussion a few months ago. I said then that the Twins would have a hard time cutting anyone that money was owed. Unlike the Yankees who cut loose a guy who they owe way more than the Twins owe Pagan. I'm not sure if it's a monetary thing either. More of an embarrassing thing because nobody likes to hear the phase "I told you so" I'm sure that behind the scenes the Twins are working with Pagan. His stuff isn't terrible.  You've seen it, as have I. I think it's a mental thing more than a physical thing. Low leverage, high leverage. Makes no difference. Cut him and wish him well. 

The Yankees kept Hicks for 2+ years when he was bad. Yes, they cut him now, and owe him a bunch, but he's been terrible, and hurt, for 2+ years now. I don't think Pagan is a money thing, I think it's an overreliance on the wrong data while not being willing to admit that the results have spoken much louder than the predictive stats. It's the one spot where I wouldn't argue with anyone that the FO thinks they're smarter than the results, and just won't admit they're wrong about someone.

1 hour ago, Schmoeman5 said:

Is there an article where the FO blamed the fans for last year's meltdown? I'd love to read that

Dave St Peter had some really questionable comments after last season. Falvey and Levine haven't said anything of the sort (that I'd seen/heard at least).

[Minderbinder]

Yes.  Humility is often a lost concept in business, but perhaps the most valuable one.

 

I will say that when Pagan stops thinking and just slings his most effective pitches, he's serviceable.  That's a Maki challenge.

[MABB1959]

35 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

They pitch fewer innings in AAA than they'd be expected to in the majors. My confusion comes in on what the difference is in them pitching in AAA or MLB. The level they're at doesn't matter when it comes to being injury prone or not.

As in any sport, the longer you are in it the more your body wears down.  

[chpettit19]

2 minutes ago, MABB1959 said:

As in any sport, the longer you are in it the more your body wears down.  

Sure, but they aren't keeping guys there til they're 30. Do you have some examples of guys who were performing well enough in AAA to deserve a promotion, there was an opening on the big league roster (there've been a ton the last couple years, that's for sure), the team didn't call them up, and then the player started getting injured for the first time in their career (whether we're talking TJS or any other injury)? I can't really think of any, but there certainly could be some.

[joefish]

If they released Pagan. Would another team scoop him up?

Most likely. 

Why?

[Daniel Blegen]

It is obvious from this article and the ensuing comments that the professionals in the Twins management and coaches who see Pagan every day and have access to immense piles of information of all kinds have no idea what they are doing with regards to Pagan. Thank goodness the fine people on this website none of whom see Pagan every day, have never seen a bullpen session,  attend few or no games in person have the knowledge that the professionals seem to be lacking.                                                                                                                                                                                                                       If Sheldon Cooper is reading this....Yes, Sheldon that is Sarcasm.

[chpettit19]

7 minutes ago, joefish said:

If they released Pagan. Would another team scoop him up?

Most likely. 

Why?

Same reason lots of guys bounce around and get numerous chances. The "underlying data," or scouting, suggests there's more in them, and every team thinks they have the key to unlocking someone. Just a matter of what the rest of their roster looks like on whether or not it's worth a shot to get them in your building and see them up close.

[chpettit19]

3 minutes ago, Daniel Blegen said:

It is obvious from this article and the ensuing comments that the professionals in the Twins management and coaches who see Pagan every day and have access to immense piles of information of all kinds have no idea what they are doing with regards to Pagan. Thank goodness the fine people on this website none of whom see Pagan every day, have never seen a bullpen session,  attend few or no games in person have the knowledge that the professionals seem to be lacking.                                                                                                                                                                                                                       If Sheldon Cooper is reading this....Yes, Sheldon that is Sarcasm.

Welcome to Twins Daily!

While I 100% agree with the idea that the guys in the building have WAY more info than those on the outside, there's some incredibly smart, and highly knowledgeable folks posting on these boards. Including an "insider" or 2 from time to time. And everyone has access to his performance stats. You don't need to be a front office staff member to see how he performs. I don't need to see Pagan throw a bullpen to see that he's been one of, if not the worst reliever in baseball for years. I also don't need to see him throw a pen to know he's got good stuff, and understand why the Twins wanted to take a chance on "fixing" him. At some point you have to just admit he's not who you wanted him to be, though.

[wabene]

2 hours ago, Schmoeman5 said:

I think we had this discussion a few months ago. I said then that the Twins would have a hard time cutting anyone that money was owed. Unlike the Yankees who cut loose a guy who they owe way more than the Twins owe Pagan. I'm not sure if it's a monetary thing either. More of an embarrassing thing because nobody likes to hear the phase "I told you so" I'm sure that behind the scenes the Twins are working with Pagan. His stuff isn't terrible.  You've seen it, as have I. I think it's a mental thing more than a physical thing. Low leverage, high leverage. Makes no difference. Cut him and wish him well. 

Look at Hick's OPS with the Yankees. Seems to me they waited and waited for him to live up to expectations after signing a huge, embarrassing contact.

[Mark G]

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

You wanted them to fire Rocco after 2021 because they had 1 down year? He'd had 2 seasons of 60+% winning percentage the 2 seasons before that. Firing him after 2021 would've been incredibly hasty. No idea why the tenured Pagan, that we definitely agree on. And the baseball ops (Falvey and Levine) didn't blame the fans. Don't lump them in with St Peter's nonsense comments.

No, I would not have fired him after the '21 season.  After the 22 season?  I would have to do a little thinking, and not just because of the won/loss record, but because of why the won/loss record was what it was.  This year?  Hmmmmm......seems to be a pattern.  You can only live on 307 home runs for so many years.  

Molitor was the Manager of the Year in '18, and when he finished 78-84 the following year he was gone; no 2nd chance, he lost and he was gone.  Somehow that same standard hasn't been applied.  And, for the record, it shouldn't be.  It just never should have been applied to begin with.  I respect your opinion as much, or more, than anyone on TD.  And I agree with much more than I disagree with.  But this FO has shown us that they believe in their stats much more than they believe in anyone else's knowledge, no matter where the knowledge comes from. And they believe they are correct in the overall direction they are taking the franchise in.  I, along with a lot of others (at least I think so), don't believe that direction is the one that will lead us to a competitive and winning organization year in and year out, because they are wrong just as often as they are right.  And I just wish they would admit it.  No offense.  

[Woof Bronzer]

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

You wanted them to fire Rocco after 2021 because they had 1 down year? 

Was extending him the only option?  

[chpettit19]

8 minutes ago, Mark G said:

No, I would not have fired him after the '21 season.  After the 22 season?  I would have to do a little thinking, and not just because of the won/loss record, but because of why the won/loss record was what it was.  This year?  Hmmmmm......seems to be a pattern.  You can only live on 307 home runs for so many years.  

Molitor was the Manager of the Year in '18, and when he finished 78-84 the following year he was gone; no 2nd chance, he lost and he was gone.  Somehow that same standard hasn't been applied.  And, for the record, it shouldn't be.  It just never should have been applied to begin with.  I respect your opinion as much, or more, than anyone on TD.  And I agree with much more than I disagree with.  But this FO has shown us that they believe in their stats much more than they believe in anyone else's knowledge, no matter where the knowledge comes from. And they believe they are correct in the overall direction they are taking the franchise in.  I, along with a lot of others (at least I think so), don't believe that direction is the one that will lead us to a competitive and winning organization year in and year out, because they are wrong just as often as they are right.  And I just wish they would admit it.  No offense.  

Oh, I don't think it's outrageous to be talking about his job security now, or after 2022. But the post I responded to suggested firing him after 2021, and I think that'd have been awfully quick.

Molitor got fired because there was a new FO brought in. They're not truly comparable situations. It's pretty standard that a new FO who's changing a whole lot about the organization would want to bring in their own guy. I actually think it was unfair to all involved that the Pohlads made them keep Molitor for the extra year when everyone knew he'd be canned at the first chance.

I'm quite torn on the FO. I think they've done a great job modernizing the organization, but I think they've really struggled to identify, and develop, top end talent. I also think they rely too heavily on data in some instances. Pagan being the obvious one with their refusal to accept his performance stats over his "underlying data." The lineup being another one. I hate the extreme platoon decisions. Platooning is great for the bottom of your lineup, but if you're going to be a great team you need a top of the lineup that you just plug and play everyday. I think some of it is bad luck in injuries, but they also make a lot of decisions I don't understand. I think they're probably an average FO, and Rocco is an average manager, but I don't know that I really think they can get the team over the top and truly become contenders.

[chpettit19]

4 minutes ago, Woof Bronzer said:

Was extending him the only option?  

They didn't technically extend him. He had options on his contract that they picked up. His original contract ran through last year, but they picked up his options through 2025. I'm not sure exactly how those were structured so I don't know if it was an option to just pick up year by year, or they had to pick them all up at once. I think a discussion about not picking up his options is certainly valid.

[Mark G]

2 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Oh, I don't think it's outrageous to be talking about his job security now, or after 2022. But the post I responded to suggested firing him after 2021, and I think that'd have been awfully quick.

Molitor got fired because there was a new FO brought in. They're not truly comparable situations. It's pretty standard that a new FO who's changing a whole lot about the organization would want to bring in their own guy. I actually think it was unfair to all involved that the Pohlads made them keep Molitor for the extra year when everyone knew he'd be canned at the first chance.

I'm quite torn on the FO. I think they've done a great job modernizing the organization, but I think they've really struggled to identify, and develop, top end talent. I also think they rely too heavily on data in some instances. Pagan being the obvious one with their refusal to accept his performance stats over his "underlying data." The lineup being another one. I hate the extreme platoon decisions. Platooning is great for the bottom of your lineup, but if you're going to be a great team you need a top of the lineup that you just plug and play everyday. I think some of it is bad luck in injuries, but they also make a lot of decisions I don't understand. I think they're probably an average FO, and Rocco is an average manager, but I don't know that I really think they can get the team over the top and truly become contenders.

Agreed.

[MABB1959]

34 minutes ago, wabene said:

Look at Hick's OPS with the Yankees. Seems to me they waited and waited for him to live up to expectations after signing a huge, embarrassing contact.

Kind of kidding but except for this year he would fit right in in BA for the Twins.

[Woof Bronzer]

1 hour ago, USAFChief said:

Nitpic, but I don't think most people consider Dave St Peter to be the "front office." 

I mean, in normal business terms he absolutely is. But in baseball, most would consider Falvine to be "the front office."

Fair enough I guess.  Though is the distinction all that meaningful?  St Peter is the CEO, which I'm guessing makes him Falvine's boss. 

[Jocko87]

1 hour ago, Craig Arko said:

Most every management/executive team I’ve seen in many industries has had difficulty admitting they are wrong. I assume it’s a requirement in business management school.

 

52 minutes ago, Minderbinder said:

Yes.  Humility is often a lost concept in business, but perhaps the most valuable one.

Its not that its a required course, but the undercurrents are everywhere.  Part of what is taught though, is how to address failure.  Key to this conversation is none of it has to do with us.  There are very few instances of any high performing organization just openly apologizing for anything.  Its usually a bad idea because it foments more distrust and suspicion of failures.  Its the beginning of the end.  I know this from having an MBA, getting the good inside/private fortune 500 training and personal experience. 

They owe us nothing in the way of an apology or admitting wrong.  Customers get apologies when the latte order is wrong, not highly complex multi million dollar and variable business moves.  The closest we will get is moving on from Donaldson quickly. 

The important part of the equation is what happens behind closed doors.  While I don't know what happens in the Twins offices, I've been behind several of these closed doors.  You better have thick skin and be able to admit errors while standing firm on where you were correct.  In well run organizations you can articulate what the boss did wrong as well with no repercussions if delivered correctly.  The most important thing, by far, is that it stays behind closed doors.  When I have these meetings I say out loud very clearly that we will be honest, say what we need to say including about me, and have it out.  When we open this door we are a united front on the plan forward, no exceptions.  The Twins are good at the united front, I hope they are having these open discussions behind the scenes.

What I do think they do to a failing is relying on too heavily on the data and miss more obvious signs where the numbers aren't matching up with actual results.  I think they are slow to act if the data still shows a good trend.  This is generally a good trait but makes it very hard to act away from the data at times.  Examples are if Jax stuff+ and whatnot looks great but his scouting report is one simple sentence.  Pagan has great location+ except that one pitch that he also is tipping.  Data can lie, other teams can do things that are effective for them inside your good data etc.  I feel like the coaching staff is missing the one old school guy that can point these things out.  The underlying data is worthless if the other guys know whats coming.

The best thing we can do with the data we have is see them adjust their approaches when things go wrong.  It is a stated organizational philosophy not to invest in the bullpen.  The haven't, but then spent lots of prospects at the deadline.  We will see if they change this going forward as it looks like they may need to.  We have seen them adjust their approach many times over their tenure and they do continue to improve in all facets.  They've also improved so many parts on the roster the bullpen will be a glaring area where they can upgrade as everything else needs minimal help compared to other years.  Times are tough right now but this is objectively the most talented 40 man roster most of us have seen in our fan lifetimes.  Now they need to learn to execute. 

[Woof Bronzer]

4 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

 I think a discussion about not picking up his options is certainly valid.

Yeah I should have clarified I wasn't suggesting he should have been fired.  Sorry about that.

[chpettit19]

7 minutes ago, Woof Bronzer said:

Fair enough I guess.  Though is the distinction all that meaningful?  St Peter is the CEO, which I'm guessing makes him Falvine's boss. 

I think it's pretty significant. St Peter doesn't do anything with baseball decisions. He helps set the budget, but he's not sitting in scouting meetings or discussing draft strategy. There's really not much for us to speak on with St Peter outside the budget he helps set, and his insane comments that I'm sure made a lot of people, including his boss, angry when he said them.

[ashbury]

3 hours ago, USAFChief said:

Nitpic, but I don't think most people consider Dave St Peter to be the "front office." 

I mean, in normal business terms he absolutely is. But in baseball, most would consider Falvine to be "the front office."

But yeah, St Peter surely said what he said, and without looking I'd guess they're off to an even worse start with attendance so far this year.

 

It is interesting to look up, and you're not wrong.  It's hard to measure apples-to-apples, using raw totals (Opening Day for instance can skew things), but across the majors, and looking at the team ranked 15th respectively each season, attendance is down about 500 per game from last year.  Our Twins? Down about 1900.

Numbers aside, Dave St Peter needs to take a vow of silence.  He makes the mistake many public figures do, of saying what he knows, instead of saying what helps.  Whether he's technically the FO, he speaks for the Twins and people take his words at face value.  Our new guy Joe Pohlad needs to do what DSP's underlings have apparently failed to get across, and politely tell him to STFU and just do his job, which as far as I've been able to figure out is making sure enough packets of mustard are ordered so the concession stands don't run out, or whatever.  The business-side of the franchise presumably is doing well; he should stay out of PR if he can't stay on-message.

[mikelink45]

2 hours ago, Bigfork Twins Guy said:

This is a very valid list and I do also believe that the FO hates admitting a mistake and many times hold on to that player too long.  That said, it is possible that the reason they do this is because they do not want to release or trade a player only to regret it later on.  A prime example is LaMonte Wade Jr.

LaMonte Wade 258/420/462

Tyler Wells 3 - 1 2.94

Akil Baddoo 250/353/340 

Brusdar Graterol 22 games, 3 sv 2.18 era

Martin Perez 6 - 1 4.01

No discussion about Pressly, Hendriks

Every team has regrets

[LastOnePicked]

1 hour ago, Daniel Blegen said:

It is obvious from this article and the ensuing comments that the professionals in the Twins management and coaches who see Pagan every day and have access to immense piles of information of all kinds have no idea what they are doing with regards to Pagan. Thank goodness the fine people on this website none of whom see Pagan every day, have never seen a bullpen session,  attend few or no games in person have the knowledge that the professionals seem to be lacking. 

Few things in life are as clear-headed, concise, unfiltered and honest as results. Folks are free to defend the organization's process for as long as they want, but there's no argument as compelling as the one the outcome offers.

With Pagan, the outcome is clear. So, too, is the work of the FO, from trades to bullpen stats to the shrinking lead in the standings.

[Rosterman]

Pitchers are going to give up runs. A relief pitcher is going to make a mistake and give up a home run. Heck, Duran has done that a couple of times this year.

You don't expect not jsut one, but two pitchers to walk in runs in the same inning.

And your team has to score, score, score, too. 

But you create a team with role players. The dynamite starter who will give you innings and keep you in the game. The fly ball pitcher. The groundball pitcher. The strikeout pitcher. The guy who can run the bases. Maybe someone who knows how to bunt.

Anyone can throw the ball across the plate. Anyone can watch pitches go by. Anyone can field a ball, but not all can catch it on the run or make the strong and straight throw to the correct place. Or do it all the time.

Okay, regarding Pagan, he was an option. But let's talk about Alcala coming off an injury. Let's look at the stock put in names like Coulombe, Megill and others as potential backend pitchers. Let's look at a roster stocked with unproven arms.

How do you approach making a team if you are thinking of the future as well as competing in the present.

The Twins are in a lucky division. Right now, if one American League, they would be 9th or 10th place - ahead of everyone else still in their own division. Explain that.

 

[Dennesey55347]

Funny how lousy a bullpen looks when you have zero high-leverage hitters. The pen can almost never afford to give up a couple of runs now and then and just be above average overall- which should suffice. Reliever K's per 9, BABIP, HR's per 9, ERA, FIP, and WAR are all top-12 but they've lost the 2nd most games. The lack of consistent contributions in key spots every year from the bats leads to fans turning on the pitchers every single time (not that much of an exaggeration). Never understood how one could miss assessing the majority of the blame in the right place.

[TwinsDr2021]

3 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

You wanted them to fire Rocco after 2021

I would have fired him after 2019, to me it was obvious he wasn't ever going to be a great manager IMO. I also said in 2016 the Vikings should fire Zimmer (only took the Vikings 5 years to see what I seen)

If the Twins don't make the playoffs and win at least one game I would fire this FO and Manager.

[chpettit19]

2 minutes ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

I would have fired him after 2019, to me it was obvious he wasn't ever going to be a great manager IMO. I also said in 2016 the Vikings should fire Zimmer (only took the Vikings 5 years to see what I seen)

If the Twins don't make the playoffs and win at least one game I would fire this FO and Manager.

Dang, top 10 offense and pitching staff, win 101 games in your first season, and get fired. That's a tough gig.

[TwinsDr2021]

1 minute ago, chpettit19 said:

Dang, top 10 offense and pitching staff, win 101 games in your first season, and get fired. That's a tough gig.

Well besides a flukely 2020 season (which they didn't win a playoff game in ) I have been way more right than wrong.

[chpettit19]

6 minutes ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

Well besides a flukely 2020 season (which they didn't win a playoff game in ) I have been way more right than wrong.

I'm not someone who puts much weight on managers in general so it's whatever to me. Just saying, if you're firing guys after that season it's pretty rough to set what an acceptable performance is for your manager. The argument would basically be that they were a 110+ win team without him. Not sure anyone would argue that team should've been pushing for the all-time wins record.

[TwinsDr2021]

10 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

I'm not someone who puts much weight on managers in general so it's whatever to me. Just saying, if you're firing guys after that season it's pretty rough to set what an acceptable performance is for your manager. The argument would basically be that they were a 110+ win team without him. Not sure anyone would argue that team should've been pushing for the all-time wins record.

Not saying any other manger would have gotten more wins out of that team, but, he showed IMO in 2019 he didn't have what it took to be a successful manager, wins aren't everything when it comes to a manager. I thought he made a ton of mistakes, got out managed, was bailed out by the Bomba squad and played one a super easy schedule. and IMO he wasn't the type of manager that was going to lead the Twins to the World Series. (Maybe that changes this year or next and I am wrong, I really, really hope I am wrong but as of today I am not)