The Chorus of "Sell The Team" Chants at Target Field Are a Dose of Reality for Despised Ownership

[TopGunn#22]

Nick, you may have a point about the impact of ownership in pro sports being exaggerated.  However...

Are the Vikings better off with the Wilf brothers as opposed to Red McCombs??

Are the T-Wolves better off with their new ownership as opposed to Glen Taylor??

Are the Wild better off with their current ownership than Norm Green ??  

Maybe as a generalized statement, you are correct.

However, as Minnesota sports fans, I think a lot of us would disagree with you.  

But I think 95% of us posting here agree with your article.  

[Doc Lenz]

4 hours ago, D.C Twins said:

This....people need to vote with their feet. The Pohlads will not care about booing but they will care eventually about the deafening silence of an empty stadium. 

I'm not in Minnesota... but to the Twins fans that are.... if you are tempted to go to the Twins game next summer... go to the lake instead.... you will be happy with your choice. 

No fans equals less revenue equals less opportunity to sign free agents and extend players.

great idea 

[TheLeviathan]

2 minutes ago, Doc Lenz said:

No fans equals less revenue equals less opportunity to sign free agents and extend players.

great idea 

My issue with Mike earlier is the same I have here: we shouldn't be lecturing each other about how to be fans.

Everyone is going to respond in their own way.  If you tune it out and try to focus on the game....good for you.  If you want to rage at the stupidity of the Pohlads....rage away.

 

[Andy Brodie]

9 hours ago, LewFordLives said:

Just speaking for myself, I would respect them more if they just came out and said the team is losing money, and this can't continue.

MLB teams, even the mediocre ones with mid-to-lower tier payrolls, still make bank (Pirates are one of the most profitable: https://www.si.com/mlb/pirates/news/pittsburgh-pirates-rank-one-mlb-most-profitable-teams). Don't believe any ownership "math" that tries to convince you otherwise. Plus the team's valuation is literally more than $1B+ what Pohlad family paid for it -- a valuation propped up in no small part by Minnesota taxpayers.

The Pohlads are losing / lost money on *other* business ventures and over-leveraged borrowing against the team, which MLB shouldn't even allow. 

I won't tell other fans how to spend their time or money, but the Pohalds don't *deserve* any respect or financial support.

SELL. THE. TEAM.

[Doc Lenz]

2 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

My issue with Mike earlier is the same I have here: we shouldn't be lecturing each other about how to be fans.

Everyone is going to respond in their own way.  If you tune it out and try to focus on the game....good for you.  If you want to rage at the stupidity of the Pohlads....rage away.

 

Not lecturing anyone just pointing out the business side. 
 

[Mike Sixel]

21 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

My issue with Mike earlier is the same I have here: we shouldn't be lecturing each other about how to be fans.

Everyone is going to respond in their own way.  If you tune it out and try to focus on the game....good for you.  If you want to rage at the stupidity of the Pohlads....rage away.

 

I'll try to be more clear. 

If you are doing something that makes you unhappy, it's healthy to stop. People here say it makes them angry to listen to the FO and manager. I'm suggesting not listening to the inane babbling. It's healthier. Nothing about that states not to care about what they do.... Or to know what they do.... Or not to care about the team.... It's merely about listening to corporate speak, when that make you unhappy, maybe don't do that. 

I don't know how to be more clear. 

If you want to listen, great! Go for it. I'm merely suggesting if listening to their lies makes you unhappy, stop listening to the pressers. 

[TheLeviathan]

34 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

I'll try to be more clear. 

If you are doing something that makes you unhappy, it's healthy to stop. People here say it makes them angry to listen to the FO and manager. I'm suggesting not listening to the inane babbling. It's healthier. Nothing about that states not to care about what they do.... Or to know what they do.... Or not to care about the team.... It's merely about listening to corporate speak, when that make you unhappy, maybe don't do that. 

I don't know how to be more clear. 

If you want to listen, great! Go for it. I'm merely suggesting if listening to their lies makes you unhappy, stop listening to the pressers. 

Ok, all of that sounds great from a practical standpoint, but this reaction isn't practical.  It's, by definition, emotional.  It's something you care about.  

I think you are attempting well meaning advice here but you happen to be mistaken.  Let me try to explain by analogy what I think is wrong about this advice: A young, naive Lev married a wonderful woman.  But like all relationships, arguments would happen.  Mostly because young Lev was a dude and dudes do stupid things.  When said things happened, and Mrs. Lev was justifiably angry our young Lev used to think a wise strategy was to say "relax". (Married men out there are cringing now.  I feel you brothers)

I can tell you as an older, wiser (and still married!) Lev.....such advice is not a good tactic. It ignores the justifiable feelings someone else has, offers no real advancement of the issues at hand, and can be interpreted as condescending even though it isn't meant to.

Your argument is the "relax" of sports ownership/fandom.  People are reacting and responding in a justifiable way.  They engage with the content because it is a big part of the thing they enjoy.  Those press releases and comments are pretty important.  Just ignoring them isn't really an option in a practical sense.  Fans just found out something they thought was happening wasn't going to happen and those press releases are the closest thing to an answer for "why?".  And fans have every right to ask "why?" and be pissed off when the answers they get aren't very good.  They don't want to hear "relax" in that moment.  They want to be pissed.

In this case...I say let the people who are pissed off be pissed off.  Maybe there is some small chance they'll be heard by the clowns who need to hear it.  

[MGX]

9 hours ago, Jasper said:

Pay off debt with others money, Trade Pablo, Ryan and Jeffers then put team back on the market, Pohlads get their 1.7 billion and run.

As much as I'd hate to see those trades, if it meant the Pohlads were gone I'd be ok with it.

 

[LewFordLives]

If the Pohlad's want to regain a modicum of respect from the fan base and show they're serious about winning, they could dump Falvey and Rocco. The fans are just tired of watching the lousy at bats, poor defense, sloppy base running, and general lollygagging. We can complain about the payroll, but at the end of the day Falvey and Rocco put them in the position they're in. Forget the payroll, the Pohlad's biggest fault is sticking with the same people for too long with no accountability. 

[insagt1]

I'll toss this in here. tonite in Rochester they inducted long time GM Dan Mason into the Wings Hall of Fame. Mason is probably one of the most highly respected GM's in baseball..a total class act. One of the guests who was interviewed was former Twins GM Bill Smith who was on hand to honor Mase. During the discussion he said recently that in talking with Terry Ryan, Ryan said with no reservations that the affiliation with Rochester was the best he ever had in all his years of being involved with the Twins or anyone else...and Dan Mason had a lot to do with that. High praise. Special night for the Red Wings organization. And some fond memories of our affiliation with the Twins. Wanted to share that.

[NYCTK]

7 hours ago, TheLeviathan said:

I don't need speculation - we know ownership DID impact the trade deadline.  We know they forced the Correa move.

Do we actually know that? I've not read Dan Hayes athletic article, but that wasn't my impression of it at all. Ownership giving an OK is not the same as forcing something. 

I just don't agree the deadline sell off was financially motivated by finances because bullpen arms aren't prohibitively expensive, least of all Varland.

This front office recognized their team sucked, and that their highly touted bullpen wasn't actually all that valuable, collectively. They have all the confidenc and that they can rebuild it in a couple years and I think that's a great bet. 

As for Correa, I know there was communication between owners, but it was instigated by Houston by my understanding, not some requirement set by ownership. 

I hate the Pohlads but I do think they're getting too much blame for Falvey's failures, and his eventual recognition of them. 

[D.C Twins]

5 hours ago, Doc Lenz said:

No fans equals less revenue equals less opportunity to sign free agents and extend players.

great idea 

(narrator's voice) They are not going to use the revenue to sign free agents and extend players....thanks for playing!

[mluebker]

1 hour ago, NYCTK said:

This front office recognized their team sucked, and that their highly touted bullpen wasn't actually all that valuable, collectively. They have all the confidenc and that they can rebuild it in a couple years and I think that's a great bet. 

And that, in a nutshell, is one of the biggest things wrong with the way Falvey thinks you build a team: It’s just a bunch of interchangeable guys you can swap around based on their statistics, with little or no regard for things like team chemistry, individual satisfaction, ability to inspire, or leadership qualities. It’s like paint-by-numbers, just matching up what you can see on the surface, but with no heart.

[mluebker]

1 hour ago, NYCTK said:

I hate the Pohlads but I do think they're getting too much blame for Falvey's failures, and his eventual recognition of them.

They hired him and keep renewing his contract.

[dxpavelka]

Ya'll had your chance. Any one or any group of you had your chance to pony up and by the team.  You didn't.  

[dxpavelka]

1 hour ago, mluebker said:

And that, in a nutshell, is one of the biggest things wrong with the way Falvey thinks you build a team: It’s just a bunch of interchangeable guys you can swap around based on their statistics, with little or no regard for things like team chemistry, individual satisfaction, ability to inspire, or leadership qualities. It’s like paint-by-numbers, just matching up what you can see on the surface, but with no heart.

Falvey built this team exactly the way fans clamored for this team to be built before Falvey was hired.  No more of the Gardy & Terry Ryan's gut instinct stuff.  Build a strong analytics department and listen to them.  YOU wanted it and you got it.  Fans should be pissed ownership for ONE thing:  Listening to the fans.  Twins fans are the most fickle group of humans on the planet.  The only thing they hate more than the team not spending money is the team spending money.  Ownership needs to spend like drunken sailors.  Why did they pay that guy?  

[dxpavelka]

7 hours ago, Andy Brodie said:

MLB teams, even the mediocre ones with mid-to-lower tier payrolls, still make bank (Pirates are one of the most profitable: https://www.si.com/mlb/pirates/news/pittsburgh-pirates-rank-one-mlb-most-profitable-teams). Don't believe any ownership "math" that tries to convince you otherwise. Plus the team's valuation is literally more than $1B+ what Pohlad family paid for it -- a valuation propped up in no small part by Minnesota taxpayers.

The Pohlads are losing / lost money on *other* business ventures and over-leveraged borrowing against the team, which MLB shouldn't even allow. 

I won't tell other fans how to spend their time or money, but the Pohalds don't *deserve* any respect or financial support.

SELL. THE. TEAM.

BUY..THE..TEAM

[dxpavelka]

Everybody acts like the team was going to be sold.  NOBODY EVER said that they were going to sell.  They said they were going to explore selling the team.  I told anyone who would listen at that time that what was said meant nothing.  None of you believed me.  Here we are.  To sell something you need both a seller and a buyer who can agree on a price.  We don't have that. Get over it.

[TheLeviathan]

5 hours ago, NYCTK said:

Do we actually know that? I've not read Dan Hayes athletic article, but that wasn't my impression of it at all. Ownership giving an OK is not the same as forcing something. 

I just don't agree the deadline sell off was financially motivated by finances because bullpen arms aren't prohibitively expensive, least of all Varland.

This front office recognized their team sucked, and that their highly touted bullpen wasn't actually all that valuable, collectively. They have all the confidenc and that they can rebuild it in a couple years and I think that's a great bet. 

As for Correa, I know there was communication between owners, but it was instigated by Houston by my understanding, not some requirement set by ownership. 

I hate the Pohlads but I do think they're getting too much blame for Falvey's failures, and his eventual recognition of them. 

The Athletic article confirms it was an ownership move almost exclusively.  At comically incompetent levels.

[old nurse]

22 hours ago, LewFordLives said:

Just speaking for myself, I would respect them more if they just came out and said the team is losing money, and this can't continue.

That is what right sizin a payroll means 

[old nurse]

6 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

and if they did you'd bitch about which ones they signed.

They would also complain if the team traded the underperforming free agents away. 

[old nurse]

7 hours ago, mluebker said:

And that, in a nutshell, is one of the biggest things wrong with the way Falvey thinks you build a team: It’s just a bunch of interchangeable guys you can swap around based on their statistics, with little or no regard for things like team chemistry, individual satisfaction, ability to inspire, or leadership qualities. It’s like paint-by-numbers, just matching up what you can see on the surface, but with no heart.

Since the beginning of sports team, winning cures chemistry, individual satisfaction, ….and any other complaints. Losing can bring out the dark side, regardless of leadership

[old nurse]

4 hours ago, TheLeviathan said:

The Athletic article confirms it was an ownership move almost exclusively.  At comically incompetent levels.

 

10 hours ago, NYCTK said:

Do we actually know that? I've not read Dan Hayes athletic article, but that wasn't my impression of it at all. Ownership giving an OK is not the same as forcing something. 

I just don't agree the deadline sell off was financially motivated by finances because bullpen arms aren't prohibitively expensive, least of all Varland.

This front office recognized their team sucked, and that their highly touted bullpen wasn't actually all that valuable, collectively. They have all the confidenc and that they can rebuild it in a couple years and I think that's a great bet. 

As for Correa, I know there was communication between owners, but it was instigated by Houston by my understanding, not some requirement set by ownership. 

I hate the Pohlads but I do think they're getting too much blame for Falvey's failures, and his eventual recognition of them. 

Interesting how 2 people can read the same article and have different ideas what was meant. I read that Joe was surprised by the Correa moved when called in on it and joe stated he did’t think they were going to trade that many player. Maybe I read a different article that the same author. Maybe people just see what they want 

[old nurse]

Yup, corporate speak and platitudes. You want something different. Yup. You won’t get fooled again. Just remember Townsend’s last line of the song 

[NYCTK]

8 hours ago, mluebker said:

And that, in a nutshell, is one of the biggest things wrong with the way Falvey thinks you build a team: It’s just a bunch of interchangeable guys you can swap around based on their statistics, with little or no regard for things like team chemistry, individual satisfaction, ability to inspire, or leadership qualities. It’s like paint-by-numbers, just matching up what you can see on the surface, but with no heart.

I don't necessarily disagree, but his actions don't really show that at all. The opposite if anything. 

The team sucked, and he sent away good spreadsheet guys because they weren't better than the sum of their parts. 

[Major League Ready]

1 hour ago, old nurse said:

 

Interesting how 2 people can read the same article and have different ideas what was meant. I read that Joe was surprised by the Correa moved when called in on it and joe stated he did’t think they were going to trade that many player. Maybe I read a different article that the same author. Maybe people just see what they want 

I think the highlighted portion is pretty common in sports.   Fans and fanaticism go together.   Correa is a perfect example.  There was quite a bit of discussion here questioning if the best baseball move would be to trade Correa.  Yet, when it happens, for many, it was 100% about money.  It's pretty simple.  Correa is no longer a good SS and Lewis probably has more upside at 3B or it's at least a wash.  We also didn't have Pena waiting in the wings when we signed him but we do now in the form of Culpepper.  

[mluebker]

1 hour ago, old nurse said:

Since the beginning of sports team, winning cures chemistry, individual satisfaction, ….and any other complaints. Losing can bring out the dark side, regardless of leadership

Then the problem is even simpler: Falvey doesn’t know how to assemble a winning team or hire a competent manager. 
 

Winning can cure a lot, but if you don’t have a team that looks out for one another and wants to win, they’re never going to be champions. Teams like the 1987 and 1991 built their chemistry by playing together through difficult years, not just because they finally were winning regularly.

[TheLeviathan]

2 hours ago, old nurse said:

 

Interesting how 2 people can read the same article and have different ideas what was meant. I read that Joe was surprised by the Correa moved when called in on it and joe stated he did’t think they were going to trade that many player. Maybe I read a different article that the same author. Maybe people just see what they want 

Well, the other poster admitted to not reading the article.  I don't think there is much ambiguity here.

Also...according to Reusse it was Jim Pohlad, not Joe, who was in conversations with Crane. (Confirming the report)

So a few things: 1) The  Pohlads were absolutely directly involved and 2) Either they don't talk to each other (incompetence) or Joe is lying (Possible, his public facing communication doesn't have a sterling track record).

[NYCTK]

35 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

Well, the other poster admitted to not reading the article.  I don't think there is much ambiguity here.

Also...according to Reusse it was Jim Pohlad, not Joe, who was in conversations with Crane. (Confirming the report)

So a few things: 1) The  Pohlads were absolutely directly involved and 2) Either they don't talk to each other (incompetence) or Joe is lying (Possible, his public facing communication doesn't have a sterling track record).

I just skimmed the relevant section. So, sounds like it was a relentless Houston owner that sold the deal. Not the Pohlads being cheap penny pinchers. Pohlads seemingly were intrigued by Cranes pitch and asked Falvey to look into it.

"The Pohlad family got back to Derek Falvey, Twins president of baseball operations. They suddenly were curious." 

"We know they forced the Correa move" seems like an entirely inaccurate portrayal of the events as reported. Doesn't sound to me like they forced anything at all. 

The Correa trade was such a defensible baseball driven decision, I and others on this site said a successful trade deadline would rely on getting rid of the contract, despite likely having to pay up to a third of it to move him.

[old nurse]

1 hour ago, mluebker said:

Then the problem is even simpler: Falvey doesn’t know how to assemble a winning team or hire a competent manager. 
 

Winning can cure a lot, but if you don’t have a team that looks out for one another and wants to win, they’re never going to be champions. Teams like the 1987 and 1991 built their chemistry by playing together through difficult years, not just because they finally were winning regularly.

A couple of division championships, a couple of wild card appearances and a winning record would say you are not paying attention. Now if your complaint was that they haven’t drafted more than a couple of competent positions players and have to rely on continually rebuilding with a short term position players, you would be correct. That is not your argument