Derek Falvey is Likely to Stay, But Twins' Code of Silence Leaves Future of Front Office Unclear

[Doctor Gast]

1 hour ago, dxpavelka said:

Worth noting that spending a boatload more money than the Twins for the last 30 years has netted the Dodgers ONE title.  Go back 40 years and the two teams are even at two.  Just sayin

There seems to be a phenomenon that I love. Teams that think they can win a World Series by spending boatloads of money, seem to backfire. NYY spends more money than anybody & for many years they haven't come close to the World Series. NYM decided to do that with Cohan in '23. They had a great team & a great manager (Buck Showalter) but didn't make the playoffs. LAD FO seems to do everything right & spends a lot of money which supports that phenomenon. Hope that holds true this year also.

[AKTwinsFan]

The Pohlands inability to reinvest in the team has got them where they're at today. 3rd place in the division and getting worse every day. Its time to either pay for decent arms and management or sell to someone who will. 

[Mike Sixel]

I don't understand why anyone cares what they say in interviews?

I have no idea what will happen, but if I was them, I'd want to move on . 

[LA Vikes Fan]

15 hours ago, JD-TWINS said:

I agree with most everything …..the one angle that is assumed to not exist or isn’t considered at all, is the difficulty there is in getting to a top 5 minor league system. There is good fortune involved as well on some level. If the two guys are comfortable financially, they might opt for pride and commitment to what they have put in place……continuing to build upon what they have started. Maybe naive to think that? Maybe not.

I think this is a good take. They've built a great system; I can see sticking around to see it bear fruit. The frustration has to be the team's unwillingness/inability to build a solid group of veterans around the young guys coming up. The Lewis, Wallner, Miranda, Castro, Larnach types should be hitting 5-8 as they develop this year, not 1-4. Injuries have played a role in knocking Correa out (maybe those teams that decided against giving him a 10 year $350m deal after seeing the medicals were right) but Buxton isn't really a middle of the order hitter and Santana, Kepler, Jeffers/Vasquez, and Margot are all back of the order guys. I hope the younger guys can be that middle of the order core next year but that would require a step up and it would have to be all of them, not just one or two. Tough way to get better. 

[LA Vikes Fan]

3 hours ago, Doctor Gast said:

I'm not a Baldelli hater but if the Dodgers would like to trade their GM & manager for ours, I'd be all in.

I didn't say you get the GM, only the manager. Trust me on this as someone who lives in LA and follows the Dodgers. If you think Baldelli makes head scratching moves and manages by the book instead of a gut attuned to his players, you ain't seen nothing yet. Watch Dave Roberts. His ineptitude is papered over by a 25 year $8 billion (that's billion with a B) TV deal. $320M a year to spend can paper over a lot of ineptitude. And buy you Shohei Ohtani. 

[bean5302]

Last year, Joe Pohlad communicated clearly the new goal for the franchise was advancing in the playoffs. Since that time, ownership has pivoted greatly on their investment in the team which makes it hard to speculate whether or not the performance goal remains the same.

Lame duck GMs don't happen unless somebody is being seriously evaluated in terms of whether or not to part ways. Since nobody seems to understand the roles of Falvey and Levine it's also hard to tell who would be held accountable for any failures. Levine probably isn't well regarded as a potential GM since Boston didn't even grant him a second interview. Whatever he does, it doesn't seem to be running the show.

It'd be awfully surprising to me if Falvey were already extended unless the ownership has recognized they're no longer going to target that "advance in the playoffs" goal so the Twins wouldn't be nearly as attractive to other potential GMs. Not sure what value running the franchise all "secret squirrel" provides. It's not like knowing who is in charge of what is a "secret" worth keeping, but the Twins do seem to like pretending their strategies are particularly special and valuable.

Under Falvey's regime, the Twins have won more than 87 games just once, in 2019. They've won a single playoff series. I'm not impressed.

[Fire Dan Gladden]

For the haters out there, I am not sure how you can be negative about what Falvey/Levine have done for the organization.  Almost from bottom to top, the Twins are in better shape than they were 6 years ago.

You can always nitpick and find things you don't like, whether it is interviews, too much reliance on washed up veteran pitchers, signing/not signing <insert player here>...  You can find faults with anyone.  Grass is always greener and all that.

As for either/both of them leaving, for all we know they are very happy in their jobs and are not actively looking.  I know there have been external interviews, but those need to be taken with a grain of salt.  I for one hope ownership pays them to keep them here.

[CCHOF5yearstoolate]

15 hours ago, tony&amp;rodney said:

These articles on the front office and the comments commending Falvey always surprise me. I don't have any complaints because I don't specifically have any knowledge about who does what in the Twins organization. I just follow the play on the field and the minor leagues. The comments on the games include a ton of complaints. One would think that the type of play on the field is a reflection of the FO.

Because it's really easy to just voice complaints. If this team is seriously pushing for 90 wins while missing Correa and Ryan for ~2 months and Buxton for 3-4 weeks (3 of their 5 best players IMO) *someone* in the organization has to be doing a good job.

The team simply can't be performing this well if Falvey and Levine and Rocco and the rest of the coaches stink and the owners are slashing payroll. 

[Doctor Gast]

1 hour ago, LA VIkes Fan said:

I didn't say you get the GM, only the manager. Trust me on this as someone who lives in LA and follows the Dodgers. If you think Baldelli makes head scratching moves and manages by the book instead of a gut attuned to his players, you ain't seen nothing yet. Watch Dave Roberts. His ineptitude is papered over by a 25 year $8 billion (that's billion with a B) TV deal. $320M a year to spend can paper over a lot of ineptitude. And buy you Shohei Ohtani. 

Thank you for your 1st hand report on Dave Roberts, I have no idea what he's like. Like I said I'm not a Baldelli hater but this article is about the GM. After what you said about Roberts, I'd prefer Baldelli but my main focus is I'd prefer their GM to ours. I like their philosophy & the way they develop their players. That's all.

[DJL44]

2 hours ago, Doctor Gast said:

There seems to be a phenomenon that I love. Teams that think they can win a World Series by spending boatloads of money, seem to backfire. 

Texas spent a lot of money and won last year. Only one team wins the World Series which means making conclusions about process based on that as the sole metric is going to be sketchy.

[Fatbat]

Note to Joe Pohlad, please pay Falvine enough for them to stay around awhile. While you’re at it, give them a bigger budget for more top notch players.  Thad be great 👍🏻 

[chpettit19]

2 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

Texas spent a lot of money and won last year. Only one team wins the World Series which means making conclusions about process based on that as the sole metric is going to be sketchy.

I was going to mention Texas as well. And Houston. And Atlanta. And the Dodgers did win one. And the Nats won when they spent. And Boston. And Houston again. And Chicago. KC went above their normal spending to win, but certainly don't qualify as a big spending team that year. But then we're back to San Fran, Boston, San Fran, and so on and so forth with the list of top 5-10 payrolls that spend big and win. 

[rv78]

5 hours ago, jmlease1 said:

Santana is a replacement level signing? he's sitting at 2.1 bWAR right now with a 109 OPS+, despite the horrifically slow start. Instead of getting hit by the aging stick, he's been basically the same player as last season and getting paid $1M less. That's neither replacement level nor horrendous, and without him we'd be flailing at 1B this year.

Need to be accurate about this stuff when evaluating the FO.

Margot, Jackson, Gallo? Sure. But they were right about Santana. (I was wrong)

Yes, Santana is replacement level. A sub .240 Hitter that hits an occasional HR is nothing special, especially for a 1st baseman. I'd much rather see Miranda getting the at bats there and reps in the field to make him better defensively at 1st base. His bat is significantly better than Santana's and he is 10 times more important to the team going forward than Santana. Miranda has almost as many RBIs as Santana in almost 100 less at bats. He's much more productive and is only being held back by Rocco, Falvey and Levine who want the veterans they sign to play only to make it look like the signings were "the right thing to do" when in reality it shows they weren't worth it.. Even Gallo was favored over the young players (Wallner) who out-performed him when given the chance. 

[jmlease1]

6 minutes ago, rv78 said:

Yes, Santana is replacement level. A sub .240 Hitter that hits an occasional HR is nothing special, especially for a 1st baseman. I'd much rather see Miranda getting the at bats there and reps in the field to make him better defensively at 1st base. His bat is significantly better than Santana's and he is 10 times more important to the team going forward than Santana. Miranda has almost as many RBIs as Santana in almost 100 less at bats. He's much more productive and is only being held back by Rocco, Falvey and Levine who want the veterans they sign to play only to make it look like the signings were "the right thing to do" when in reality it shows they weren't worth it.. Even Gallo was favored over the young players (Wallner) who out-performed him when given the chance. 

See, you're using your own term for "replacement level". I use that term in the context of bWAR, which defines it like this: WAR Explained (v2.2): 8+ MVP, 5+ A-S, 2+ Starter, 0-2 Sub, < 0 Replacement

"Replacement" level is a guy you can sign off the street and do the job just as well. Santana is sitting at 2.1 bWAR for the season already.

[Mike Sixel]

7 minutes ago, jmlease1 said:

See, you're using your own term for "replacement level". I use that term in the context of bWAR, which defines it like this: WAR Explained (v2.2): 8+ MVP, 5+ A-S, 2+ Starter, 0-2 Sub, < 0 Replacement

"Replacement" level is a guy you can sign off the street and do the job just as well. Santana is sitting at 2.1 bWAR for the season already.

He's 5th in fWAR among first baseman. He's clearly not close to replacement level. 

[Doctor Gast]

3 hours ago, DJL44 said:

Texas spent a lot of money and won last year. Only one team wins the World Series which means making conclusions about process based on that as the sole metric is going to be sketchy.

Texas isn't close to being the top spender. IMO Texas got lucky. They spent the money, was bad, snuck into the the playoffs, peaked, & got lucky. And now they are bad & still paying the money. If you have a ton of money to throw away, you might get lucky & get some players that won't get injured, gel & peak at the right time with all the right conditions. But the odds are pretty much against you. Success is much cheaper, more sustainable if you have good player evaluation to draft & trade for players & develop them.

[Doctor Gast]

2 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

He's 5th in fWAR among first baseman. He's clearly not close to replacement level. 

Many of the "all or nothing" players were 1Bmen. When the league had the book out on them they didn't do very well, a far cry from the success they once enjoyed. Meaning, that players like Santana had better fWAR ranking than they normally would for 1Bmen. And that he put in so much time at 1B.

[bean5302]

6 hours ago, Fire Dan Gladden said:

For the haters out there, I am not sure how you can be negative about what Falvey/Levine have done for the organization.  Almost from bottom to top, the Twins are in better shape than they were 6 years ago.

You can always nitpick and find things you don't like, whether it is interviews, too much reliance on washed up veteran pitchers, signing/not signing <insert player here>...  You can find faults with anyone.  Grass is always greener and all that.

As for either/both of them leaving, for all we know they are very happy in their jobs and are not actively looking.  I know there have been external interviews, but those need to be taken with a grain of salt.  I for one hope ownership pays them to keep them here.

It's unbelievably easy to be unimpressed. Since the Twins were arguably the worst team in all of baseball from 2011-2016 results wise so being "better" by that metric is a virtually non-existent bar. In other ways, I'm not sure how you'd quantify an advancement. Both Smith and Ryan were better in drafting and developing valuable players for the Twins.

Buxton, Sano, Polanco, Dozier, Berrios, Rogers all of them All Stars as Twins. Falvey inherited all that talent, plus other valuable roster pieces that had been drafted and developed like Kepler, Garver, and Gibson.

On Falvey's side.... nothing. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Not a single All Star Player ever drafted or signed out of the international market by Falvey. Ever. Unless you're talking about guys he traded away like Rooker. Falvey lived off the cushion he was given.

Then there's payroll which expanded greatly under Falvey's regime. If Terry Ryan had been given an extra $50MM to spend, do you think he might have been able to field a better team in 2016?

How about the farm system rank? To start 2016, the Twins had an absolutely elite farm system. For 2015-2016, ranked in the top 5 or 10. Where do we sit today? Middle of the pack after trudging along in the bottom 10 recently.

Dramatically expanded payroll. Lower ranked farm. Not one single All Star drafted and developed in 8 years. One playoff series win. One season with more than 87 wins. Again, color me unimpressed.

 

[DJL44]

1 hour ago, Doctor Gast said:

But the odds are pretty much against you.

Yes, the odds are always 30-1 against you. chpettit had many examples where "spend a bunch of money and get lucky" worked and only one team (Kansas City) who followed your advice.

[Western SD Fan]

I know many of you are Vikings fans so you will understand this question. The Kirk Cousins conundrum: nobody liked Cousins as their QB, but who were you going to get that is better. I believe a similar question applies here with the FO. Who are you going to get that is better?

Remember, your choices need to include the following:

1. Be prepared to work under the financial constraints that ownership may give.

2. An uncertain TV contract which may (likely) affect point #1

3. Be willing to move/live in MN. I know MN is a very nice place, but when your candidate likely has other choices and you factor home living, climate, taxes, etc, MN may not be at the top of potential replacement’s lists.

4. May need to work with Correa on potential personnel decisions. Seems like I remember an article about how Correa had a list of players he wanted FO to pursue.

Also, where do you think they would/could go? NYY - Cashman will be there until he retires, or Dick Bremer retires. Detroit - only if they believe that ownership will spend money when it comes time, Seattle if DiPito is eventually fired this off-season, LAA - Moreno will spend money, but is too hands on for their comfort, NYM - I think they have their situation sorted out now. Maybe the Cubs would be a better situation, but that is the only one I see, but I could be wrong.

My only change would be in manager. I think either Ron Washington or Kevin Cash would be improvements. Washington does have ties to MN.

[Jocko87]

6 hours ago, bean5302 said:

It's unbelievably easy to be unimpressed. Since the Twins were arguably the worst team in all of baseball from 2011-2016 results wise so being "better" by that metric is a virtually non-existent bar. In other ways, I'm not sure how you'd quantify an advancement. Both Smith and Ryan were better in drafting and developing valuable players for the Twins.

Buxton, Sano, Polanco, Dozier, Berrios, Rogers all of them All Stars as Twins. Falvey inherited all that talent, plus other valuable roster pieces that had been drafted and developed like Kepler, Garver, and Gibson.

On Falvey's side.... nothing. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Not a single All Star Player ever drafted or signed out of the international market by Falvey. Ever. Unless you're talking about guys he traded away like Rooker. Falvey lived off the cushion he was given.

Then there's payroll which expanded greatly under Falvey's regime. If Terry Ryan had been given an extra $50MM to spend, do you think he might have been able to field a better team in 2016?

How about the farm system rank? To start 2016, the Twins had an absolutely elite farm system. For 2015-2016, ranked in the top 5 or 10. Where do we sit today? Middle of the pack after trudging along in the bottom 10 recently.

Dramatically expanded payroll. Lower ranked farm. Not one single All Star drafted and developed in 8 years. One playoff series win. One season with more than 87 wins. Again, color me unimpressed.

 

I'm beginning to think this is a prime-parody account.  Our current "middle of the pack" farm system would like a word.  (#2 MLB, #4 ESPN, #4 Bleacher Report, #7 Fangraphs, #3 Baseball America, #16 USA Today lol,)

I would say you have a point about the farm in 2015-2016 but being the worst team in all of baseball for years will tend to get you that.  I'd say that any idiot could get a great farm with high first round picks but then I looked to see the likes of Levi Micheal, Alex Wimmers, Kohl Stewart, Nick Gordon and Tyler Jay etc.  Kind of a "paper tiger" farm system if you will.   Being ranked due to draft equity is not great.  They earned their firing on the basis of first round picks alone. 

Farm system rankings being the crapshoot they are, it all comes down to long term results.  All-Star games are just about the last possible metric I would use, personally.  The mandatory All-Star selection was how many of your list?  There are two players in the entire organization that this FO doesn't own completely, they literally threw almost everything in the trash and kept a few choice pieces.

Having taken out the trash, we now have an almost entirely homegrown roster that can absolutely compete for championships and 6 top 100 prospects to boot.  You never had that in all of Twins history, certainly not under Smith and Ryan.  The turnover and turnaround is exceptionally impressive.

As for payroll, comparing 2015 money to 2024 money is pretty silly.  They have roughly the same payroll levels by all actual metrics.

It's easy to be unimpressed if you don't know what to look at.  This is a top 5 front office in baseball.

Gleemans 2016 prospect list is in a tidy format for a trip down memory lane.  Yikes.

[TopGunn#22]

I would like to echo LA Vikes Fan on his assessment of Dodgers manager Dave Roberts.  I'm not really a fan of Rocco, but I have stated on TD posts in the past and will do so again..."Nobody does LESS with MORE, than Dave Roberts.

Every season, Dodgers ownership and FO gives him whatever he needs... Mookie Betts?  No Problem!!  Trea Turner and Max Scherzer?  Here you go!  Freddie Freeman??  Piece of Cake!  Shohei and Yammamoto??  Are you kidding?  Consider them on the team Dave!!  (there are many other players I could mention).

And except for the Covid shortened season, the Dodgers haven't won a full season World series since Orel Hershiser pitched them to it in 1988.  That's not all on Dave Roberts, but it's hard to argue that the Dodgers organization hasn't done EVERYTHING to win a World Series for Dave Roberts and year after year after year he falls short.  So yeah, if you backed me up against a wall and told me I had to choose between Rocco and Roberts...I'd take Rocco.  

[jmlease1]

15 hours ago, bean5302 said:

It's unbelievably easy to be unimpressed. Since the Twins were arguably the worst team in all of baseball from 2011-2016 results wise so being "better" by that metric is a virtually non-existent bar. In other ways, I'm not sure how you'd quantify an advancement. Both Smith and Ryan were better in drafting and developing valuable players for the Twins.

Buxton, Sano, Polanco, Dozier, Berrios, Rogers all of them All Stars as Twins. Falvey inherited all that talent, plus other valuable roster pieces that had been drafted and developed like Kepler, Garver, and Gibson.

On Falvey's side.... nothing. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Not a single All Star Player ever drafted or signed out of the international market by Falvey. Ever. Unless you're talking about guys he traded away like Rooker. Falvey lived off the cushion he was given.

Then there's payroll which expanded greatly under Falvey's regime. If Terry Ryan had been given an extra $50MM to spend, do you think he might have been able to field a better team in 2016?

How about the farm system rank? To start 2016, the Twins had an absolutely elite farm system. For 2015-2016, ranked in the top 5 or 10. Where do we sit today? Middle of the pack after trudging along in the bottom 10 recently.

Dramatically expanded payroll. Lower ranked farm. Not one single All Star drafted and developed in 8 years. One playoff series win. One season with more than 87 wins. Again, color me unimpressed.

 

there's a lot of cherry-picking going on here. Take the all-star conversation: Twins had 2 this season, both signed by this front office. They had 2 last season, both signed by this front office. Luis Arraez may not have been drafted/signed by this FO but they certainly developed him and he was an all-star for the Twins in 2022 (along with Buxton). 2021 we stunk, but Nelson Cruz was an all-star, signed by the current FO. under the current format it's going to be challenging for the Twins to get more than 2 all-stars, so maybe evaluating success purely on all-star appearances doesn't make much sense.

Reading your evaluation, someone unfamiliar with the twins might think they have no quality home-grown talent...but that's simply wrong. SWR might not have been drafted by the twins, but they certainly developed him and he's been a quality starter. Griffin Jax wasn't drafted by this regime, but they turned him into an elite reliever. they traded for Duran and developed him into an elite reliever too. Traded for and developed Alcala. Drafted Sands. So our top 4 relievers this season were all developed by this front office. and these are quality players with tons of value.

the idea that our farm system at the end of the 2nd Ryan era was better than it is now is a bold statement; would love to see where the facts are to back it up. Twins current farm system is a consensus top 10, and that's after graduating players like Royce Lewis, SWR, Ed Julien, Trevor Larnach, and Matt Wallner in the last couple of seasons. 

the "87 wins" line is nicely arbitrary and designed to make this front office look worse than it is. because it nicely avoids the fact that the team made the playoffs 4 out of 7 seasons and pretends that there wasn't a pandemic year where literally no team could possibly win 87 games, because they only played 60. They've won the division 3 times in 7 seasons. How did we do in the previous 7? won the division once (in the first of those 7 seasons), then finished last 4 times. Didn't win a playoff series. Didn't win a playoff GAME.

 

[Jocko87]

2 hours ago, TopGunn#22 said:

I would like to echo LA Vikes Fan on his assessment of Dodgers manager Dave Roberts.  I'm not really a fan of Rocco, but I have stated on TD posts in the past and will do so again..."Nobody does LESS with MORE, than Dave Roberts.

Every season, Dodgers ownership and FO gives him whatever he needs... Mookie Betts?  No Problem!!  Trea Turner and Max Scherzer?  Here you go!  Freddie Freeman??  Piece of Cake!  Shohei and Yammamoto??  Are you kidding?  Consider them on the team Dave!!  (there are many other players I could mention).

And except for the Covid shortened season, the Dodgers haven't won a full season World series since Orel Hershiser pitched them to it in 1988.  That's not all on Dave Roberts, but it's hard to argue that the Dodgers organization hasn't done EVERYTHING to win a World Series for Dave Roberts and year after year after year he falls short.  So yeah, if you backed me up against a wall and told me I had to choose between Rocco and Roberts...I'd take Rocco.  

It also illustrates how slim the margins are. The Dodgers have chosen their path and it's a heavy commitment.  The manager is good for a couple wins or losses a year at best.  I'm not really into spending a billion dollars for 8-10 additional wins and having to take huge swings every year.

The long term approach is almost always better but having the patience to execute is rare.  We have it good and should recognize it.

[nicksaviking]

23 hours ago, rv78 said:

Yes, Santana is replacement level. A sub .240 Hitter that hits an occasional HR is nothing special, especially for a 1st baseman. I'd much rather see Miranda getting the at bats there and reps in the field to make him better defensively at 1st base. His bat is significantly better than Santana's and he is 10 times more important to the team going forward than Santana. Miranda has almost as many RBIs as Santana in almost 100 less at bats. He's much more productive and is only being held back by Rocco, Falvey and Levine who want the veterans they sign to play only to make it look like the signings were "the right thing to do" when in reality it shows they weren't worth it.. Even Gallo was favored over the young players (Wallner) who out-performed him when given the chance. 

I didn't like the Santana signing as it stunk of cheap desperation, but regardless of whether they were smart or got lucky, he was a fine signing.

But if I give them Santana, then they also have to eat crow on Margot, Desclafani, Topa, Okert, Jackson, Staumont and Richards. One out of seven in player acquisitions this year isn't very good. 

Not looking to fire anyone, but again, that's why I say Falvey, the architect, shouldn't have his career tied to Levine the GM.

[rv78]

On 8/29/2024 at 2:26 PM, jmlease1 said:

See, you're using your own term for "replacement level". I use that term in the context of bWAR, which defines it like this: WAR Explained (v2.2): 8+ MVP, 5+ A-S, 2+ Starter, 0-2 Sub, < 0 Replacement

"Replacement" level is a guy you can sign off the street and do the job just as well. Santana is sitting at 2.1 bWAR for the season already.

bWAR means nothing to me. I look at stats. MIranda is far and away a much better hitter. Why did Miranda start the season in AAA? Pure Plain and Simple answer..... Santana. Even with Kirilloff expected to play some 1B Santana was the reason Miranda started in AAA. Had Lewis not got hurt and they needed another 3B guy Miranda stays there until Kirilloff goes down. Take away Miranda's production and the team has at least 5 more L's in the loss column. Give Miranda an extra 100 At bats that Santana has been given and add 5 more W's to the win column. Even if you cut that 10 game difference in half to 5 and it could be the difference between playoffs or not, or at the very least, a better seed in the playoffs. But those on the Falvine and Rocco band wagon don't see what could be, they only see what they have. That's what the rest of us call.... drinking the kool-aid.

[Jocko87]

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/40953681/sources-angels-gm-perry-minasian-reach-new-deal

This seems a better comparison than random discussions of fbWar and all-stars.

We are not talking about baseball, we are talking about the business of baseball.  Who or what is a replacement level player has nothing to do with this discussion.

The Angels are a fascinating comp as without knowing what Arte Moreno wanted with Shohei and Trout we can't know how well he worked towards his directives.  An extension would suggest that he is at least on the owners side for now, although a two year deal is kinda short.

[Doctor Gast]

I didn't want to jump the gun but since Drew Macphail came to the Twins, I have secretly hoped he would follow in his father's footsteps. IMO Andy MacPhail has been our greatest GM by far. With such a rich family baseball heritage with his grandfather & great grandfather in the HOF, he has a deep well to draw from. Drew is the current head director of player development, IMO he has every right to be proud of where the farm system is at. 

He studied wealth management, and although players & wealth are different (he discovered that he enjoys working in baseball rather than wealth) many of the principles are the same, which he could use in baseball transactions. There was an article in The Athletic about Drew that inspired hope in me that the Twins might be considering him as a possible GM candidate. Even though that wasn't even mentioned in the article. IMO Drew with his background in wealth management, a rich understanding of baseball, analytics, & player evaluation & development, could become even a better GM than his dad.

[jmlease1]

12 hours ago, rv78 said:

bWAR means nothing to me. I look at stats. MIranda is far and away a much better hitter. Why did Miranda start the season in AAA? Pure Plain and Simple answer..... Santana. Even with Kirilloff expected to play some 1B Santana was the reason Miranda started in AAA. Had Lewis not got hurt and they needed another 3B guy Miranda stays there until Kirilloff goes down. Take away Miranda's production and the team has at least 5 more L's in the loss column. Give Miranda an extra 100 At bats that Santana has been given and add 5 more W's to the win column. Even if you cut that 10 game difference in half to 5 and it could be the difference between playoffs or not, or at the very least, a better seed in the playoffs. But those on the Falvine and Rocco band wagon don't see what could be, they only see what they have. That's what the rest of us call.... drinking the kool-aid.

See, this is the problem: you're doing this all on feel and guesswork. bWAR is a stat, it's just not a stat you like, so your dismiss it. How are you coming up with Miranda preventing 5 losses, and giving us 5 more wins if he had 100 more ABs? You don't have anything to back it up other than "he's a better hitter". He is a better hitter, but is he so much better a hitter and good enough defensively at 1B to be that much of a difference-maker at 1B? Since you don't have any real criteria, you can never be proven right or wrong about anything.

Miranda spent 9 games in AAA this season. If we hadn't signed Santana and started Miranda at 1B this season, how would we have done when Royce went down?

I'm not drinking the kool-aid, I'm being clear-eyed about this front office, and not pretending they suck because of style. They're not perfect: the Mahle trade was a real risk and a total bust. If GG doesn't pan out, the Polanco trade isn't going to look good (even with Polanco being diminished, something the league clearly recognized regarding his market). They haven't done well as buyers at the deadline, either missing opportunities or busting out. But we're seeing a real flow of young players up to the majors with a competitive club and a strong farm system, and the cupboard was looking a little bare when they arrived.

[wabene]

Were people actually paying attention during the decade before the Twin's makeover? Maybe some are just never happy. Maybe it's just nostalgia. Grasping at straws to understand here but from where I sit this organization is vastly improved from top to bottom (well except the very top, ownership). I wouldn't be surprised if Falvey and his family like it here and want to stay. Also that part of what Falvey likes about this job is the challenge of succeeding with a mid-market team. He actually has an advantage over one of his chief rivals in payroll, Cleveland where he came from, and I don't see management there jumping ship even though they are in a tougher position. Falvey isn't going anywhere, I'd guess in his eyes the job here is not yet done.