Are “Bad Clubhouse Guys” a Market Inefficiency the Twins Can Exploit In Their Hour of Need?

[Greggory Masterson]

These two guys have reputations that precede them, and they may have earned them. However, does it mean what everyone thinks it means, and can smart teams take advantage of the ways in which it doesn't?

Image courtesy of © Peter Aiken-Imagn Images

The Twins are notorious among their own fans for bargain hunting over the offseason, and this offseason has turned that dial to 11. As we bandy about names, some inevitably get dismissed with a firm “I don’t want him in the clubhouse.” But Bad Clubhouse Guy™️ is a label that borders on being a heuristic. Let’s take a look at two potential discount-bin signings the Twins might be interested in (after the all-but-inevitable trades of Chris Paddack and Christian Vázquez, of course).

Yasmani Grandal
If the Twins do indeed trade Vázquez for salary relief, they’re probably going to need to reallocate some of his money toward a new, veteran backup catcher. They have shown little confidence in rookie Jair Camargo to this point and seem to prefer that he remain in the next-man-up role. Grandal is one high-profile candidate for a one-year, low-cost deal.

Grandal has a reputation as a defensive wizard, most prominently in his otherworldly framing ability. That checks one box for a backup catcher. Honestly, that’s probably the biggest box. But Grandal can also swing it a bit—not as well as he did a few years ago when he was the platonic ideal of a three-true-outcome hitter, but he’s never had a worse year at the plate than Vazquez did the past two seasons. He’s also a switch-hitter and performed better against righties last season, which can be beneficial for pairing him with righty Ryan Jeffers.

However, Grandal has earned himself a bit of a reputation. He’s generally been perceived as a prickly guy, which isn’t the greatest trait for a catcher. He also allegedly hit Tim Anderson in the face when they were both members of the 2023 White Sox, perhaps the most dysfunctional clubhouse in modern times. That’s enough to scare some people off. I mean, if it’s true, he punched a teammate and potentially brings a stink.

Tommy Pham
Pham’s story is one of the funniest in recent memory, but let’s talk about why he fits the Twins. He’s a right-handed corner outfielder. Yep, that’s the whole deal. The Twins love to platoon, and Pham, a 36-year-old 11-year veteran, can do that—ur at least he did until 2024, a year in which we saw a dropoff that might scare some teams off.

However, teams are probably more scared off by the other things. In no particular order, Tommy Pham has been stabbed outside a gentlemen’s club; slapped Joc Pederson over a fantasy football dispute; gotten into arguments with fans on the field; said some out-of-pocket things to the media and on his social media; and publicly disrespected his former teammates for not working hard enough.

That’s a bit of baggage. That’s enough baggage that might lead a fan or executive alike to say “How about not; what’s Adam Duvall up to?”

Yet, Pham has remained employed since 2014. Grandal is likewise in the twilight of a 13-year career, and he keeps getting jobs.

What is a Bad Clubhouse Guy, Anyway?
I mean, that’s the million-dollar question (literally). We tend to throw this singular label around (or some variant, such as clubhouse cancer) pretty liberally, to describe a wide range of behaviors and personalities. But bad clubhouse guys aren’t all created equal.

Just look at Grandal and Pham. Their cardinal sins are hitting someone in the face, but there’s a huge difference between the two stories. Grandal allegedly smacked a teammate in the face, whereas Pham smacked an opponent. But the context for both matters, as well, as Grandal was a member of one of the worst clubhouses in recent memory, and it doesn’t take a lot of imagination to figure out why someone might want to hit Anderson. (Ask José Ramírez for confirmation.) Pham slapped a man over fantasy football waiver-wire shenanigans.

Obviously, if given the choice between two players with the exact same skills and contract, you’re going to go with the one without the questionable behavior. But how much do those factors actually matter in the grand scheme of things?

For instance, despite his foibles, Pham has been lauded as an excellent teammate. He’s a hard worker, blunt in his honest feedback for his teammates and coaches, and a sparkplug. He's unselfish, to the point that he eschewed a chance to collect five hits in a World Series game by asking to be pinch-hit for late in Game 2 of the 2023 Fall Classic. The plate appearance he conferred upon Jace Peterson was the only one Peterson would get in the Series.

There are players like this across sports. One of my favorite examples is Stephen Jackson of the NBA—the second guy to run into the stands to fight fans during 2004’s Malice at the Palace incident. The man was a nuisance on the court and has a lengthy rap sheet that includes a felony. Yet, his teammates loved him. He was a ride-or-die teammate who played 14 years and won a championship. He was the second guy into the stands that night because he had an outnumbered teammate (in Ron Artest) to defend. Obviously, you do not want those things to happen with someone on your team, but you’d probably prefer a player like that over a player who released a video of his teammate admitting to cheating on his wife (Wolves fans: if you know you know).

There are any number of behaviors that can saddle a player with a label like that. Social scientists have attempted to quantify these locker-room or clubhouse dynamics. For example, Cope and colleagues did a study in 2011 that attempted to identify informal roles on athletic teams and three negative roles emerged—cancer, distracter, and malingerer.

Cancers pollute the locker room with negative emotion. Distracters somehow take focus away from the team and toward themselves, often away from the field of play. Malingerers keep themselves off the field due to injury longer than they need to. Each of these three roles has a different effect on the team.

If even the stuffy social scientists can identify that there are levels and flavors to negative behavior on a sports team, there must be something there. Is the player going to ruin his teammates’ days? Is he a candidate to miss games due to off-field choices? All of these questions are worth asking. Ask any scout what he sees as a bad makeup guy, and you’ll end up with as many questions as answers. That lack of a cohesive answer only adds to the tendency to group every player with one negative trait or incident into one single bucket.

Instead of slapping the same label on every guy, a team should ask themselves what the possible range of consequences to this guy might be. It’s enough to drive guys’ prices down just to have the label, and a team that can recognize which red flags are true dangers can benefit. Nor is it fair to assume that any of us—ball player, ne'er-do-well blogger, insurance company CEO, anyone—are the same person in all situations and settings. They call it clubhouse chemistry because there are real interactions that change the people involved, personally and professionally. Not every person who runs into or creates trouble in one place will do the same in another. At the very least, the primary rationale for being against a signing of a Grandal or Pham should be their talent level—so long as we don’t have true, consequential negative traits beyond “he’s kinda a hothead.”

Of course, it’s also worth factoring in the team’s context. One of the prevailing storylines for the 2018 Twins was that there were too many strong personalities and disgruntled players in the clubhouse. We ourselves will never know what’s going on behind closed doors, but it can be a legitimate concern.

However, if a team like the Twins believes that they have the infrastructure to deal with a player who isn’t a walk in the park, let’s have at it. There were some rumored problems in the clubhouse at the end of last year that could lead to trepidation about adding another big personality whose performance isn’t a needle-mover, but we should all at least be open to the possibility without pulling out the same Bad Guy stamp every time.

View full article

[FilthyMogwai]

"If you know, you know" is one of the most obnoxious comments. Stop it.

[Greggory Masterson]

5 minutes ago, FilthyMogwai said:

"If you know, you know" is one of the most obnoxious comments. Stop it.

I don’t want to do that

[jjswol]

If the Twins put up with Donaldson they can put up with Pham.

[jmlease1]

I always think about the "Bad Clubhouse Guy" issue through the lens Bill Simmons set up long ago: you can have ONE. When you have 2+ then they might start hanging out together and enabling each others worst traits. or drown out the quieter but possibly smarter guys. And there's a difference between a guy with some questionable issues and a total disaster.

The biggest issue I have with Pham is he's been bad in too many recent years (3 of the last 5) and at 37 how many more bounce back years does he actually have?

Same question with Grandal: hasn't hit since 2021 and might just be cooked. 2024 when he had an OPS+ of 95 might have been his bounce back and now he's cooked...

[Fire Dan Gladden]

Don't confuse bad clubhouse guys with agitators.   Pierzynski was anything but a bad clubhouse guy, yet other teams hated him.  Think more Josh Donaldson, hated by all.

Clubhouse contentment can go a very long way.  While you may not see immediate results on the field, strong clubhouse culture can help younger players improve and play a huge role FA recruitment.

Only teams that have an extremely established culture from top to bottom can truly integrate bad clubhouse guys. Josh Donaldson with the Twins was a key cog and he knew it.  He could get away with anything.  Josh Donaldson with the Yankees was an extremely small part.  He had to conform.

Correa brings gravitas, but the Twins are young.  There needs to be a lot of caution with bringing in guys with a bad clubhouse history.

[bean5302]

If you're talking about clubhouse guys with bad reps and value... Trevor Bauer. That's who the Twins should sign. MiLB contract, invite to Spring Training. What does ownership care about fan reaction? Fans are already apathetic and the Twins are selling the team.

[mikelink45]

50 minutes ago, jjswol said:

If the Twins put up with Donaldson they can put up with Pham.

We actually did not put up with him, we were stuck with him until the Yankees stepped up.  Both teams were worse for having him.  I am completely against having bad attitudes on the team.

[jud6312]

29 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

 the Twins are selling the team.

This is part of the reason they won't. Potential owners don't want PR nightmares. Bauer is going to provide that and beyond the allegations there haven't been many glowing things said about him by his former teams.

[Doctor Gast]

I'm sorry Greg, IMO clubhouse chemistry is super important, The change in clubhouse chemistry last season was the difference in correcting the plane in a nosedive & crashing. The loss of Polanco, now Kepler, later Vazquez maybe Correa or Lopez maybe more core players. And you think adding Grandal & Pham will help us? 1st their bad chemistry, 2nd they cost more than I'd want to pay for them & 3rd they aren't that good & IMO we can do much better elsewhere or in-house.

Twins had great chemistry when they got Donaldson. But even so they couldn't take Donaldson & we took a big hit in trading him. But thanks for the interesting article.

[sweetmusicviola16]

We jettisoned Tom Brunansky for Tommy Herr back in '88. How did that one work out?

[Greggory Masterson]

12 minutes ago, Doctor Gast said:

I'm sorry Greg, IMO clubhouse chemistry is super important,

…

1st their bad chemistry,

Trust me, Doc, I am one of the biggest proponents of clubhouse chemistry being a real thing that you’re going to find. I believe it’s 100% real and is a real factor in clubs not reaching their peak performance level, both at the individual- and team-level (I’ve written about things like leadership, cohesion, and conflict on this site before). My contention here is that we’re too quick to oversimplify our discussions about guys with the “bad clubhouse guy” label without asking what specifically this guy in particular might do to detract from performance on the field.

 

I appreciate your thoughts here, and we’re not that far off (I would first just change the order of your reasons not to sign them to 3, 2, 1)

[TFRazor]

To be fair to Grandal, there was probably many players on that '23 White Sox team that wanted to smack Tim Anderson in the face

[Greggory Masterson]

13 minutes ago, sweetmusicviola16 said:

We jettisoned Tom Brunansky for Tommy Herr back in '88. How did that one work out?

That’s actually a really interesting topic this vein—was Tommy Herr regarded as a “bad clubhouse guy”? Or was it a more situational issue where this guy in particular served as an obstacle for this team in particular?

[Doctor Gast]

3 minutes ago, Greggory Masterson said:

Trust me, Doc, I am one of the biggest proponents of clubhouse chemistry being a real thing that you’re going to find. I believe it’s 100% real and is a real factor in clubs not reaching their peak performance level, both at the individual- and team-level (I’ve written about things like leadership, cohesion, and conflict on this site before). My contention here is that we’re too quick to oversimplify our discussions about guys with the “bad clubhouse guy” label without asking what specifically this guy in particular might do to detract from performance on the field.

 

I appreciate your thoughts here, and we’re not that far off (I would first just change the order of your reasons not to sign them to 3, 2, 1)

Yes we aren't that far off. I was open to take on Bauer because I thought our clubhouse was solid enough, we really needed him, he was cheap, he had changed & he was a competitor. Right now IMO he isn't an option.

[Mike Sixel]

2 minutes ago, Doctor Gast said:

Yes we aren't that far off. I was open to take on Bauer because I thought our clubhouse was solid enough, we really needed him, he was cheap, he had changed & he was a competitor. Right now IMO he isn't an option.

He will never change. Ever. 

[sweetmusicviola16]

8 minutes ago, Greggory Masterson said:

That’s actually a really interesting topic this vein—was Tommy Herr regarded as a “bad clubhouse guy”? Or was it a more situational issue where this guy in particular served as an obstacle for this team in particular?

Back in the day it was well reported that Herr didn't want to be here and there was no sadness when he departed. Another guy I recall being a bad clubhouse guy was Delmon Young. I could be wrong on that one though.

[DJL44]

Whether a clubhouse can survive some jerks is mostly up to the manager. Many people with elite athletic skills are lacking in social skills. People coddle elite athletes and rarely hold them accountable for their behavior.

[Greggory Masterson]

3 minutes ago, sweetmusicviola16 said:

Back in the day it was well reported that Herr didn't want to be here and there was no sadness when he departed. Another guy I recall being a bad clubhouse guy was Delmon Young. I could be wrong on that one though.

So Herr didn’t have the Bad Clubhouse Guy label, and yet he didn’t match with the team, and by accounts actively made it worse. That seems like an argument to consider each guy individually.

Young didn’t have many positive reports from the clubhouse, that’s for sure—but do we know anything about what that caused on the field?

[sweetmusicviola16]

4 minutes ago, Greggory Masterson said:

So Herr didn’t have the Bad Clubhouse Guy label, and yet he didn’t match with the team, and by accounts actively made it worse. That seems like an argument to consider each guy individually.

Young didn’t have many positive reports from the clubhouse, that’s for sure—but do we know anything about what that caused on the field?

During Young's time here the team had two first place finishes and a second. So on the field the team as a whole did quite OK. As for Young, great pedigree with middling results overall. He had a pretty decent 2010.

[sweetmusicviola16]

Oh yeah, Young threw his bat at an Umpire in a minor league in 2006. 

[Jocko87]

I think the sensational headline is burying the real question. No we obviously don't want a clubhouse cancer.  Do I want a little "red ass" in the mix? Absolutely.  I've mentioned before that it is probably in short supply from what I can see out here.

A Pham, as described, might be a very helpful person to mix in. Any combination of loafer, quitter, selfish and whatnot is out.

The Pierzynski mention by @Fire Dan Gladden is a great example.  I don't mind a guy that opponents hate as long as he is full bore on our side.

[bean5302]

1 hour ago, jud6312 said:

This is part of the reason they won't. Potential owners don't want PR nightmares. Bauer is going to provide that and beyond the allegations there haven't been many glowing things said about him by his former teams.

Actually, for generating interest in terms of buyers, it's a good move. The new owner can then cut him and be the hero, if the public actually has the reaction most people expect. That said, it'd probably be a bad idea in terms of getting the desired asking price. New prospective owners are going to be looking for a return on their investment. They do not care about who is on the roster. The bigger the return (more they can increase value), the better, and signing Bauer would potentially decrease the sale price. So if the Pohlad's want to drop the sale price for the team to increase interest without looking like they're not generating interest already, it'd be an interesting strategic choice.

I don't see the Twins signing free agent splash players, especially including Bauer. But if we're just advocating for on field value vs. cost while considering the bad reputation of the player, there is no player the Twins could sign with a likely better return in that capacity.

[Karbo]

1 hour ago, Greggory Masterson said:

That’s actually a really interesting topic this vein—was Tommy Herr regarded as a “bad clubhouse guy”? Or was it a more situational issue where this guy in particular served as an obstacle for this team in particular?

Herr never wanted to play here. For quite a while it seemed like he was more interested in pouting and feeling sorry for himself than playing ball, at least for the twins!

[Greggory Masterson]

13 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

I don't see the Twins signing free agent splash players, especially including Bauer. But if we're just advocating for on field value vs. cost while considering the bad reputation of the player, there is no player the Twins could sign with a likely better return in that capacity.

I don’t wade into the Bauer topic but I think this is the time I’m going to break the rule because it’s relevant to the conversation. I’m going to paste a Twitter thread I wrote a year and a half ago about Aroldis Chapman because the ideas carry over here and it shows how there are levels, grades, and flavors to this topic. See below:

““If there are character or personality flaws that detract from that, understandable.” Let’s talk about that. There are a lot of dirtbags on your favorite team already, it’s just how it works. [Chapman’s transgressions] is something ******* else.

Having highly competitive millionaires who have been famous for a long time breeds dirtbaggery. You deal with a certain level no matter what. Everyone knows it, and it can cause insignificant to severe interpersonal strife, depending on who each party is.

However, when you’re talking about a guy who did that to his girlfriend, he’s always going to be “that guy who [Chapman’s transgressions]” in some teammates’ eyes. You might even be able to debate whether that’s right or wrong, but it’s the truth.

It probably doesn’t lead to direct conflict. If he shows up in the clubhouse, your favorite player (who is of course the paragon of kindness and virtue) isn’t waiting there with a sign that says “No Aroldises Allowed.” But it’s immovably buried in at least some teammates’ minds.

It sits dormant until something goes wrong. Bad loss, bad performance, card game, whatever. There are many people who will not come to that guy’s defense. They’re primed not to. In their minds, he’s irredeemable. It doesn’t matter if it’s related to baseball, they won’t like him.

And liking someone, always having every teammates’ back, etc. isn’t something that’s necessary, but you never know what those feelings could lead to, especially in the heat of the moment. These are unnecessary impediments to team success, even if they are overcome.”

[bean5302]

It's hard to dig up history on Herr and why some Twins fans who've been around for so long hate him, haha.
https://www.twincities.com/2009/07/25/tom-powers-twins-have-employed-some-strange-characters-during-dome-era/

Quote

Tommy Herr — A second baseman, Herr is the oddest man I’ve ever met in baseball and the key ingredient in general manager Andy MacPhail’s worst trade ever: Herr for Tom Brunansky. Tommy would sit in front of his locker stark naked, drinking a beer, smoking a cigarette, and stuffing religious tracts into his fan mail.

https://coffeyvillewhirlwind.wordpress.com/2009/04/24/1988-brunansky-for-herr/

Quote

 

The story the numbers don’t tell is that Tom Herr did not want to play for the Twins. The first wind of it showed up in the papers three weeks after the trade, when Herr was quoted saying that he felt like an “intruder” in Minnesota. By the end of May, Herr had already announced that he would not return to the team in 1989. He took a trip on the DL in the middle of the season, though many on the team and in the media privately believed that the injury may have been in Herr’s head.

The Twin Cities media had passed judgment on Herr, and the writing was on the wall.

 

 

I found plenty about how Herr loved playing for the Cardinals and liked his team. He's in the Cardinals' HoF. He only played 1/2 a season with the Twins, and his performance wasn't bad (1.5 WAR in 86 games), but fans seem to be angry at Herr personally. Brunansky produced the same value as Herr did in 143 games for the Cardinals, btw. Bruno was playable as a starter for a couple years after the trade, but he didn't have a single 2.0+WAR campaign again.

[Doubles]

“Grandal has a reputation as a defensive wizard, most prominently in his otherworldly framing ability.”

Be nice if the Twins were interested in traits & abilities that actually exist. 

[ashbury]

1 hour ago, Jocko87 said:

The Pierzynski mention by @Fire Dan Gladden is a great example.  I don't mind a guy that opponents hate as long as he is full bore on our side.

"If you play against him, you hate him. If you play with him, you hate him a little less."   😀

[DJL44]

2 hours ago, Greggory Masterson said:

So Herr didn’t have the Bad Clubhouse Guy label, and yet he didn’t match with the team, and by accounts actively made it worse. That seems like an argument to consider each guy individually.

The 1988 Twins won 91 games, so he couldn't have made it that much worse. Herr got replaced by Lombardozzi who famously got into a fight with Dan Gladden.

[Rod Carews Birthday]

21 minutes ago, ashbury said:

"If you play against him, you hate him. If you play with him, you hate him a little less."   😀

Pierzynski was more of an example of someone you hated because he was an extreme competitor moreso than because he was a bad guy.  I think he probably begrudged the Twins for trading him, even if it was to open up the job for future hall of famer Joe Mauer, and played with a chip on his shoulder against us.  He was just that intense.  The Sox certainly got their money's worth from him.