The Most Encouraging Early-Season Stories for the Twins Have, Sadly, Faded Fast

[karcherd]

1 hour ago, DJL44 said:

To really give Sabato a shot, they would need to bench Royce Lewis. Likewise, Fedko would steal playing time from Austin Martin. That seems short sighted.

Sabato could replace Bell if they are going to insist on a DH spot on the roster.  Clemens moves around and starts 3 or 4 times which should be his role.  There are AB's for Fedko, have Larnach DH a couple of days a week and Sabato the other days.  Then Fedko plays in LF 2 days and can play RF two days for Martin.  Plenty of AB's to go around if the manager wants it to happen.

[karcherd]

35 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

In addition to the other poster's remark.....if ownership had understood anything they wouldn't have knee-capped the FO right after the most successful Twins season in a decade.

The Correa move was done with the expectation of a maintained payroll....not a slashed one.  Everything since that moment has felt like a spiral down the drain.  Only ownership owns that catastrophic choice.

Or Falvey took a swing and missed.  All this was post Covid, he had to know the team was accumulating debt and to think in that situation payroll was going to grow was naive.  He didn't win enough to justify further debt.  He could have passed on Correa the second time and built the roster with the known resources that he would have.  He wanted to played with the big boys but didn't have the pocketbook behind him to back it up.

[RpR]

6 minutes ago, karcherd said:

Sabato could replace Bell if they are going to insist on a DH spot on the roster.  Clemens moves around and starts 3 or 4 times which should be his role.  There are AB's for Fedko, have Larnach DH a couple of days a week and Sabato the other days.  Then Fedko plays in LF 2 days and can play RF two days for Martin.  Plenty of AB's to go around if the manager wants it to happen.

Sabato would not be a bad idea at First Base.

[Mike Sixel]

5 hours ago, TheLeviathan said:

Yeah, to carry on from my response to the post about their resilience....this team isn't good at anything.  They are pretty much middling to bad in every category but hope two stars can carry them to 2 wins a week.  That's a great model for hitting the under on 72.5.

Anyone expecting Shelton to have made a major difference overrates the impact of a manager in baseball.  Especially modern baseball.

Ultimately, tlent wins and this team is (and has been for awhile) low on talent.

Quoting because of the manager comment......it hurts my brain how much people on this site give credit (or demerit) to the manager over the players.....

This team is bad at everything, though I think SP will improve when Abel returns.....

I think D will improve soon, when they promote Culpepper. I'd really try Lewis at 2nd and demote Keaschell for a bit.....

[Twinsrtheworst]

Out of curiosity, were did that fellow go that was lighting up the boards about referring Tom P to as tough talking Tom? Just curious. Were did that maniac go? Just disappeared. He was always around then season starts…poof disappeared. I’m guessing he was a character created by a writer under a different username?

[TheLeviathan]

34 minutes ago, karcherd said:

Or Falvey took a swing and missed.  All this was post Covid, he had to know the team was accumulating debt and to think in that situation payroll was going to grow was naive.  He didn't win enough to justify further debt.  He could have passed on Correa the second time and built the roster with the known resources that he would have.  He wanted to played with the big boys but didn't have the pocketbook behind him to back it up.

All due respect....what?  They had a great season with a  great postseason....how is the GM responsible for their owners crappy asset portfolio when planning a payroll?

[karcherd]

5 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

All due respect....what?  They had a great season with a  great postseason....how is the GM responsible for their owners crappy asset portfolio when planning a payroll?

They won 87 games and won a wild card series where the games were at home.  Just because it was the first playoff win in 20 years doesn't make it a great year.  And the debt accumulated was for the team, the President of Operations should know the financial situation and make decisions accordingly.   Did he really think payroll would go to $160, 180 or even 200m.  When they have never waded in those waters before.  Was there going to be enough dollars to fill in the roster around Correa.  Falvey was a failure as the President of Baseball Operations not GM as you stated.

[TheLeviathan]

4 minutes ago, karcherd said:

They won 87 games and won a wild card series where the games were at home.  Just because it was the first playoff win in 20 years doesn't make it a great year.  And the debt accumulated was for the team, the President of Operations should know the financial situation and make decisions accordingly.   Did he really think payroll would go to $160, 180 or even 200m.  When they have never waded in those waters before.  Was there going to be enough dollars to fill in the roster around Correa.  Falvey was a failure as the President of Baseball Operations not GM as you stated.

We don't really know what debt that was or when it was accounted for.  Payroll didn't have to increase for his plan to carry forward, but he had zero rational reason to expect it to decrease like it did.  

Falvey is not responsible for setting the budget.  He wasn't good at either of his jobs with the Twins....we don't need to invent frivolous reasons to criticize him for things squarely on the shoulders of ownership.

[karcherd]

Just now, TheLeviathan said:

We don't really know what debt that was or when it was accounted for.  Payroll didn't have to increase for his plan to carry forward, but he had zero rational reason to expect it to decrease like it did.  

Falvey is not responsible for setting the budget.  He wasn't good at either of his jobs with the Twins....we don't need to invent frivolous reasons to criticize him for things squarely on the shoulders of ownership.

It is not a frivolous reason to criticize him.  Everyone in his position in baseball or any other needs to anticipate based on what is happening inside their organization and within the industry.  It was a risk he advocated for and they had minimal success and the team was accumulating debt.  He chose to make a big swing and ask for record payrolls from ownership, you better produce more than he did.  He could have taken a more conservative approach like other teams that we should be patterning ourselves after but he didn't.  I will grant that ownership meaning Joe P. could have taken a less drastic approach to cutting payroll but they didn't and Falvey needed to understand the environment he was operating in when he chose to swim in the deep end.

[BillyBallLives]

1 hour ago, RpR said:

None of the Twins current rookies have come close to showing that; actually the opposite, look good first year and then fade away.

A rebuilds takes:  time + someone who knows how to build a roster + some luck = 1987

[TheLeviathan]

1 minute ago, karcherd said:

It is not a frivolous reason to criticize him.  Everyone in his position in baseball or any other needs to anticipate based on what is happening inside their organization and within the industry.  It was a risk he advocated for and they had minimal success and the team was accumulating debt.  He chose to make a big swing and ask for record payrolls from ownership, you better produce more than he did.  He could have taken a more conservative approach like other teams that we should be patterning ourselves after but he didn't.  I will grant that ownership meaning Joe P. could have taken a less drastic approach to cutting payroll but they didn't and Falvey needed to understand the environment he was operating in when he chose to swim in the deep end.

Honestly, this is just nonsense IMO.  You keep implying the budget was cut for baseball reasons but it was 100% outside of on-field play or success.  Even the current Pohlad of the month owns this mistake.  

I want a PBO/GM who is willing to take risks and push the boundaries.  And I will blame them 0% of them time when ownership kneecaps them for no rational reasons.  Even a payroll freeze would've been semi-rational.  A drastic cut?  That's on the PBO?  WTF?

[Mike Sixel]

2 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

Honestly, this is just nonsense IMO.  You keep implying the budget was cut for baseball reasons but it was 100% outside of on-field play or success.  Even the current Pohlad of the month owns this mistake.  

I want a PBO/GM who is willing to take risks and push the boundaries.  And I will blame them 0% of them time when ownership kneecaps them for no rational reasons.  Even a payroll freeze would've been semi-rational.  A drastic cut?  That's on the PBO?  WTF?

And then more cuts, then more....so, ya, this is 100% on ownership changing direction. No GM increases payroll that much w/o ownership approval.....

[karcherd]

2 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

Honestly, this is just nonsense IMO.  You keep implying the budget was cut for baseball reasons but it was 100% outside of on-field play or success.  Even the current Pohlad of the month owns this mistake.  

I want a PBO/GM who is willing to take risks and push the boundaries.  And I will blame them 0% of them time when ownership kneecaps them for no rational reasons.  Even a payroll freeze would've been semi-rational.  A drastic cut?  That's on the PBO?  WTF?

I didn't say it was for baseball reasons, but the PBO can't be blind to how the team is doing financially.  He needed to understand that the bottom line was not improving and was probably suffering from an ownership standpoint.  We can debate all day about if that is true or not but will never know because the books won't be shared.  Based on that he needs to be prepared to make the necessary adjustments, you don't wait until dad tells you can't spend money.  A business doesn't give 50% raises to employees if there is not sufficient revenue support it.  And likewise if revenues drop or expenses rise without a corresponding revenue increase, you have to be prepared to adjust your budget.  If Falvey doesn't understand this part of the business then he had no business being in a leadership position.

He has always tried to have that one big contract, first it was Donaldson, then Correa.  Another option was to build the team around known resources based on history.

[bean5302]

2 hours ago, Woof Bronzer said:

How does one get bolder and more aggressive roster-building by giving a new GM $0 to work with 3 weeks ahead of spring training? 

I just paid almost $5 for gas, thanks, Pohlads!!!!

Tom Pohlad favored a bolder approach last fall. He's on record lamenting the fact he wasn't in charge earlier where he could have presumably fired Falvey sooner and hired a GM with a different philosophy. 

Here's what I did for Feb 4th.

 

 

 

[karcherd]

7 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

And then more cuts, then more....so, ya, this is 100% on ownership changing direction. No GM increases payroll that much w/o ownership approval.....

Never said it was done without ownership approval.  But he was the one advocating and put the plan together for the larger payroll.  There were other options or be prepared because history would say the payroll has never been that high for this team, what made him think it was sustainable.

[bean5302]

4 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

It all starts at the top, and Tom P so far is showing he's even more incompetent than Joe P on the baseball side of things. Pressing the pause button on a rebuild already in motion, slashing the budget even further than last year, and simply stating we're going to be competitive... Yeah, anyone that's followed baseball for a little bit of time could have told Tom this was a terrible plan.

There was no rebuild. Trading away rentals and a couple relievers while keeping the best players with the largest contracts is not a rebuild in progress.

Pohlad wasn't in charge until mid December. Falvey had plenty of time to "rebuild" if that was going to happen.

[Vanimal46]

4 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

There was no rebuild. Trading away rentals and a couple relievers while keeping the best players with the largest contracts is not a rebuild in progress.

Pohlad wasn't in charge until mid December. Falvey had plenty of time to "rebuild" if that was going to happen.

Those “couple of relievers” are 2 of the top 5 relievers in all of baseball by fWAR with multiple years of control left. 

[HeresWaldo]

Two things on this:

1) This is a well written piece, but I feel like the headline says it all. These were just stories. A bunch of these guys might end up having decent years but the Twins fielded zero breakout candidates on their ML roster, and outside of Minnesota none of this regression is a surprise. So yeah, it sucks, but also it's not unexpected. 

2) The lack of more convincing positives to focus on seems to be a conscious choice made by this front office. Fair to say a majority of blame rests on cheap ownership, but this front office has seemingly gone out of its way to limit this team's upside. There were players they could financially afford on the trade market and they didn't trade for them. Fine, they like their prospects and they didn't want to give them up. But then they didn't call up the prospects, and that's entirely on them. Even as I type this we're watching crap shortstop play while a prospect just sits around waiting for a shot. 

To me this dates back to at least the 2024 trade deadline when they didn't acquire pitching because Luke Keashall *had* to be treated as off-limits. And I like Keashall fine, but if you refuse to ever push your chips in what's the point? It really feels like what's left of this front office ran out of bold ideas 3 years ago and is just waiting to be fired.

[HeresWaldo]

20 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

There was no rebuild. Trading away rentals and a couple relievers while keeping the best players with the largest contracts is not a rebuild in progress.

Pohlad wasn't in charge until mid December. Falvey had plenty of time to "rebuild" if that was going to happen.

They traded away the largest contract in team history.

[jkcarew]

It’s a long season, and developing young/inexperienced players at the major league level is always painful…with the ups and especially the downs applified. But the situation is what it is, and we should see more, not less, of that this year and next. It’s one thing to see guys like Keaschall regress…you need to find out what you have in him…it’s completely different when it’s happening with the veterans (of which there are many) who have proven that they’re incapable of being needle movers. Moving on usually means the ride will be even bumpier. But you HAVE to do it. PLEASE.

[Nick Nelson]

3 hours ago, bean5302 said:

Ownership did understand this. Tom Pohlad told Derek Falvey he was going to be let go just a couple weeks after Tom was made a controlling owner. There are many articles talking about how nearly unprecedented Falvey's pink slip was.

Tom favored a bolder, more aggressive approach to re-constructing the roster to win in 2026 and Falvey wasn't up to the task. Falvey's approach has been consistent (and highly unsuccessful). 

Reconstructing the roster to win in 2026 was essentially an impossible request after what happened at the deadline last year. Especially when the "bold, aggressive approach" doesn't involve spending any money.

[Nick Nelson]

42 minutes ago, HeresWaldo said:

They traded away the largest contract in team history.

For nothing, to save money. That's not rebuilding it's just being cheap. 

[TheLeviathan]

1 hour ago, bean5302 said:

I just paid almost $5 for gas, thanks, Pohlads!!!!

Tom Pohlad favored a bolder approach last fall. He's on record lamenting the fact he wasn't in charge earlier where he could have presumably fired Falvey sooner and hired a GM with a different philosophy. 

Here's what I did for Feb 4th.

 

 

 

You want us to take a blueprint like that seriously when you start it with a video game trade that the Nationals would've laughed you off the phone for offering?  

I mean, if I can just throw out logic for everyone else but the Twins I can come up with some sweet retooling ideas too.

[Sjoski]

2 hours ago, RpR said:

None of the Twins current rookies have come close to showing that; actually the opposite, look good first year and then fade away.

I think the point is that the Twins are not bringing in the younger talent  to see what the have. Instead, they are hanging on to the likes of Bell,  Arcia and the Kreidler.

It took Torri Hunter a few years to figure it out. Just give Lee, Martin,  Keaschall, and the likes some time! 

[TheLeviathan]

1 hour ago, karcherd said:

I didn't say it was for baseball reasons, but the PBO can't be blind to how the team is doing financially.  He needed to understand that the bottom line was not improving and was probably suffering from an ownership standpoint.  We can debate all day about if that is true or not but will never know because the books won't be shared.  Based on that he needs to be prepared to make the necessary adjustments, you don't wait until dad tells you can't spend money.  A business doesn't give 50% raises to employees if there is not sufficient revenue support it.  And likewise if revenues drop or expenses rise without a corresponding revenue increase, you have to be prepared to adjust your budget.  If Falvey doesn't understand this part of the business then he had no business being in a leadership position.

He has always tried to have that one big contract, first it was Donaldson, then Correa.  Another option was to build the team around known resources based on history.

I just don't know how you're arguing this seriously.  He had ownership approval for the Correa deal.  His budgets are dictated by ownership.

Ownership, abruptly for what appears to be non-baseball reasons, pulled this rug out from under baseball operations and the fault is with the employee who had no reason to expect a reversal like that?

Even the Pohalds don't agree with this Pro-Pohlad spin job.

[LastOnePicked]

4 hours ago, bean5302 said:

Tom favored a bolder, more aggressive approach to re-constructing the roster to win in 2026 and Falvey wasn't up to the task. Falvey's approach has been consistent (and highly unsuccessful). 

But that's my point. Anyone who knows anything about the game would have looked at this roster - and the players remaining available in free agency - and determined that keeping your most valuable veterans was foolish at best ... catastrophic to your future at worst.

This is the result. Some might say, well who could have guessed that Lopez, Jeffers, Ryan and Buxton would have all faced injuries this season? Anyone. Anyone who follows this club would have guessed that.