Terry Ryan's Innovative formula for building a winner past and future

[Badsmerf]

Apparently I was one of the only ones to hate your post Brandon. I applaud you for your optimism (I'm actually a very optimistic person, kinda hard to see that with my ranting against the direction the Twins are going). Your arguments, and the evidence you provide are maddening. More than ever I feel like I've had to teach people the game lately and why I (and others) are so frustrated. Anyway, thanks for the talker, you put a lot of time into it.

 

 

Pitching Rule #2: You don't need an ace to win, you need 5 solid starters. [/Quote]

Define.... win. If winning is having a record above .500 than I agree with you.

 

What did I just say. We don't need an ace, but we had Santana all those years... One of the most successful seasons in franchise history was the 2010 Twins team. If you go back and look at the rotation, we had Pavano 220 innings 3.75 ERA, Liriano (almost an ace) with 191.2 innings and 3.62 ERA, Baker 170.1/ 4.49, Blackburn 161 / 5.42 and Slowey 155 / 4.45. Pelfry, Corriea, Dedunno, and 2012 Diamond fit that mold. In 2010 the team used primarily 6 starters as Deunsing did get 13 starts and had 130 innings / 2.62 for season including bullpen time. Now I am not saying we couldn't use an ace if there was an affordable one out there. Corriea costs just 4.5 million this year Pelfry will not be expensive to resign either should we go that route. [/Quote]

Your example is terrible. As has already been pointed out, Liriano very much pitched like an Ace and Pavano pitched like a #2. Plus, that team got swept in the playoffs.

 

The media and stat heads focus on K's and BB's and that's part of it but ultimately the question is can we have a pitcher with a 4.00 era that pitches between 180 and 200 innings. That type of pitcher keeps us in the ball games so the other aspects of winning can take over and those pitchers don't break the bank. Radke made 9 million per season, Pavano 8 million for 2 seasons, Santana was the ace that got paid 42 over 4 if I remember correctly, but outside there wasn't many expensive contracts....(there was the mistake of Mays and Blackburns extentions).

 

Outside of that they haven't had any good pitchers! I would not complain about Ryan signing a guy for 10 million a year and get what Pavano gave in 2010. Problem is, there is absolutely no evidence he will spend that much on a FA pitcher. Radke and Pavano were both with the Twins and got extended. He doesn't have that luxury now.

 

Rule #4 The bullpen is a great way to gain wins at a minimal cost.

 

It can be, when it works out. Sometimes it isn't that easy. It cost the Twins Ramos to try and get someone that had more than just a pulse.

 

Rule#5 Defense wins games:

Some, but not very many. Every year there are everything from great fielding teams to horrible fielding teams in the playoffs. If defense was so paramount, you would not see that much parity. I can agree that emphasis can be put on it, because it does help.

 

Like anything else there is a balance.

 

Rule#6 Smart baserunning is the hidden secret to the Twins scoring so much without hitting the expensive longball. The Twins were never the team to lead the league in stolen bases but they did execute more bunts, bunt singles to get on base, run from 1B to 3B on a single Sometimes the Twins over executed this one. how many times did we write about Ulger blowing a call? I think Hageman wrote an article about going 1b to 3b once and Twinsgeek wrote about the statistical analysis of the likeliness someone scores when on each base with 0,1,or 2 outs. wish I had the links for you on this one.

 

Wrong again. Sacrifice bunting has been proved to be a complete waste of an out unless we're talking about pitchers or Butera. And hidden secret? When the Twins had a lot of speed on the team obviously they could be effective at base-running. That is why they got the Piranah nickname from Ozzie. The appeal 10 years ago was the small ball little engine that could Twins. The game has changed. That approach proved very ineffective, unless you are considering division tittles and getting swept in the playoffs effective.

 

Plus, I have a hard time seeing any of those Twins teams outside of 2006 and maybe 2010 getting to the playoffs with this division now.

 

Rule #7 The lineup is better off with 20 HR /75-85RBI or .270/.330/.370 hitters 1-8 than 1 35HR hitter and several holes in the lineup. The Twins didn't really go for the HR hitters too much. They liked the guy who would hit 20 HR and 75-85 RBI. Those hitters are more than half the cost at 3/4 the production. The Twins had several of these hitters: Shannon Stewart, Jones, Hunter, Koskie, Cuddyer, Kubel, Crede, Mientkiewicz (minus the power) Hardy, Morneau (though he was also one of their allstars with Mauer) Of those only Hunter became really expensive and that was more star power and defense in CF than just his hitting again Morneau's contract was from when he was MVP caliber.

You do realize that player is almost exactly Denard Span for his disappointing 2013 season right? Of course, without those 20 HR. If you add those in, it looks a lot more like Alex Gordon and a .750 OPS. I don't want 8 underachieving Denard Spans.

 

The other type of hitter listed is effective too. the "piranhas" scored runs because they could get on base and run them aggressively.

The 2008 Twins scored 829 runs, the most by a twins team. They had 4 guys with an OPS over .800. They had speed in Casilla, Span, Gomez, and Punto. They had Morneau and Mauer with great seasons, Delmon had a nice season, Casilla had a nice season, Span, Kubel, Punto... They were just a good team, that didn't even make the playoffs.

 

 

we had 6 division titles in 9 seasons .

Which featured the best pitcher in baseball for 4 of them. Coincidence? Guys like you keep telling me so, but I just don't believe it.

 

Look. The cute little run the Twins had in 2000's was fun. The AL Central was terrible and they caught some breaks with some players. The game has changed dramatically since then. The Twins keep trying to force "the Twins way" on the game and they will continue to lose.

[Thrylos]

Pitching Rule #2: You don't need an ace to win, you need 5 solid starters.

 

Depending on how you define "solid", the 1987 Twins had 1.5 solid starters (Viola, Blyleven) and the 1991, 3 (Erickson, Morris, Tapani.) 5 solid starters was a tall order even for the Yankee dynasty teams... So a few good starters are needed, but the Twins did not have any since 2010 with maybe the exception of Baker in 2011

 

What winning teams (like the 2 Twins' teams) have are:

a. Veteran clubhouse leadership (think Puckett "ride on my shoulders" and Morris' game 7)

b. Pride in winning (those Twins teams rarely lost at home. They just did not let their opponents to beat them at home. Matter of pride.)

c. The ability to perform better as a team. Lots like the #1 the OP mentions.

 

The last 2, in my book, are reflections on the Manager. The first , a reflection on the GM and the Manager.

[Spicoli]

Wow I couldn't disagree more. First off when you say win you don't actually mean win. Because the Twins haven't won since 91', unless you consider losing in the first round of the playoffs every time they made it winning? I don't. The reason the Twins never made it far is because of yours and Ryans idea of how to "Win". To win it all you NEED an ace and you NEED one of the games best players, the Twins always had that but they never had depth. How can you even say you don't need an ace lol? I went and looked at the last 8 WS winners and 7 of them had an ace and a superstar but they all had 1 or the other.

 

SF 12'- Cain/Posey

STL 11'- Carpenter/Pujols

SF 10'- Cain, Lincecum/Solid Lineup all around

NYY 09'- Sabathia/Cano, Jeter, A Rod, Teixara

PHI 08'- Hamels/Utley, Howard

BOS 07'- Beckett/Ortiz, Ramirez, Lowell, Pedroia

STL 06'- Carpenter/Pujols

CHW 05'- Burlhe/Konerko

 

 

You need an ace to win a WS as I have just shown they all had one. And you need a superstar and a solid rest of the lineup. Ryan is the reason we lose, he needs to go.

[Brandon]

[/b]

Define.... win. If winning is having a record above .500 than I agree with you.

 

Your example is terrible. As has already been pointed out, Liriano very much pitched like an Ace and Pavano pitched like a #2. Plus, that team got swept in the playoffs.

 

Outside of that they haven't had any good pitchers! I would not complain about Ryan signing a guy for 10 million a year and get what Pavano gave in 2010. Problem is, there is absolutely no evidence he will spend that much on a FA pitcher. Radke and Pavano were both with the Twins and got extended. He doesn't have that luxury now.

 

It can be, when it works out. Sometimes it isn't that easy. It cost the Twins Ramos to try and get someone that had more than just a pulse.

Some, but not very many. Every year there are everything from great fielding teams to horrible fielding teams in the playoffs. If defense was so paramount, you would not see that much parity. I can agree that emphasis can be put on it, because it does help.

 

Like anything else there is a balance.

 

Wrong again. Sacrifice bunting has been proved to be a complete waste of an out unless we're talking about pitchers or Butera. And hidden secret? When the Twins had a lot of speed on the team obviously they could be effective at base-running. That is why they got the Piranah nickname from Ozzie. The appeal 10 years ago was the small ball little engine that could Twins. The game has changed. That approach proved very ineffective, unless you are considering division tittles and getting swept in the playoffs effective.

 

Plus, I have a hard time seeing any of those Twins teams outside of 2006 and maybe 2010 getting to the playoffs with this division now.

 

You do realize that player is almost exactly Denard Span for his disappointing 2013 season right? Of course, without those 20 HR. If you add those in, it looks a lot more like Alex Gordon and a .750 OPS. I don't want 8 underachieving Denard Spans.

 

The 2008 Twins scored 829 runs, the most by a twins team. They had 4 guys with an OPS over .800. They had speed in Casilla, Span, Gomez, and Punto. They had Morneau and Mauer with great seasons, Delmon had a nice season, Casilla had a nice season, Span, Kubel, Punto... They were just a good team, that didn't even make the playoffs.

 

Which featured the best pitcher in baseball for 4 of them. Coincidence? Guys like you keep telling me so, but I just don't believe it.

 

Look. The cute little run the Twins had in 2000's was fun. The AL Central was terrible and they caught some breaks with some players. The game has changed dramatically since then. The Twins keep trying to force "the Twins way" on the game and they will continue to lose.

 

My main objective in writing this post was to show how I see the Twins building their teams. they are risk averse and cost conscious. People say the Twins don't use statistics and here is how they obviously use stats to their means to an end. they target aggregate team era. That is why they go for a bullpen on the cheep and a deeper rotation that may not have the best number 1 starter because this way on any given night the Twins have a chance if they score more than the aggregate number of earned runs allowed. Most statistical analysis is done on an individual level. how often do you see analysis done on the aggregate? My points again are not to be right or wrong but to show what TR does and to create discussion.

 

I will expand on some of the other concepts like defense and the offense a lot more in a later post as I started a series so I can go more in depth on the concepts I see management use.

[gunnarthor]

I'm not sure I agree with the breakdown of which team was better looking at that comparison, but to each their own. And yes, Cards did some trades we wouldn't do...but you blame salary issues. They've only broken 100M over the last 3 years...during a time we could have done the same. Maybe some of it also had to do with not being willing to trade prospects for quality players (Holliday) or sign some top end FAs (Beltran, Berkman).

 

Regardless, the point still stands...there is talent to be had throughout the draft.

 

Two points to make. You are significantly understating the Cards/Twins payroll differences and the advantage it gave St. Louis. You point out that both teams topped 100m 3x. Another way of saying it would be, since 2005, the Cards payroll has always been more than 83m and the Twins have topped that 3x. And if we're looking at history events here - ie where payroll really did factor - you can't brush that off and say it wasn't a factor b/c the Twins had 100m payroll 3x. You can argue that, going forward, payroll isn't as big a deal.

 

Secondly, yes, there is talent throughout the draft but after the top picks, it's pretty random (and some of the talent that did fall, fell b/c of salary demands, not talent). In another post, you pointed out that there is talent at the #20 pick. Since 1990 (23 drafts) only Mike Mussina, Torii Hunter, Eric Milton, Adam Kennedy, CC Sabathia, Denard Span and Chad Cordero have managed to amass even 7.0 WAR. That's a 30% hit rate and you'll notice that two of those hits were drafted by the Twins and a third we brought into our system. If you go to pick #28, only three guys (Colby Rasmus, Daric Barton and Charles Johnson) meet that cut off. That's a 13% hit rate. 1st pick - 13 so far (57%).

 

Another way to look at it would be to compare the accumulated WAR totals of the picks - #15 picks since 1990 have amassed 129.4 WAR (Chase Utley making nearly half of it). #5 picks have amassed 200 WAR. #25 picks managed 77.8 (basically just Trout, Garza and Cain).

 

So while there is talent, it's not realistic to expect that drafting in the 20s for a decade isn't going to severely hurt your team. In a single year, you can make a nice hit and the Twins have done so several times - Hunter, Span, Revere, Garza, Gibson. But they'll have misses too. Yankees have the same problem now - although that payroll thing (and massive PED use) helps them out some.

[Badsmerf]

Brandon, if this is the way Terry Ryan analyzes baseball, I despise him more than I ever have. Why do you offer this up as if you are an insider that has the ability to tap into these insights?

 

My biggest problem, is that thinking about baseball the way you have shown, will lead to 90+ losses until high end draft picks bring up the talent level far enough to win some more games. I have higher expectations than that.

[Willihammer]

So while there is talent, it's not realistic to expect that drafting in the 20s for a decade isn't going to severely hurt your team.

 

And yet, here we are, 3 seasons of 90+ losses, talking about how to rebuild.

[JB_Iowa]

The club appears to be just a few development years for a few players and a few starting pitchers away from being the same old winning Twins we all know and love. be patient. we've seen the blueprint before and it is in progress again. with this model it takes all parts contributing to Win. but this formula does work as we had 6 division titles in 9 seasons and with the stadium we should be able to keep some of the players a little longer this go round so the minor league system will have more time to develop the following round of Twins as this is an on gong cycle.

 

As I re-read your post, I realize that this last paragraph is what is a huge concern to me. I DON'T WANT the "same old winning Twins we all know and love." Those "old winning Twins", at least under Terry Ryan and Ron Gardenhire, were LOSERS once they got out of the AL Central (except for the 2002 team which did manage to beat the A's in the ALDS).

 

My dissatisfaction with the direction of this team significantly pre-dates the last 3 losing seasons. I cannot stomach the idea that we could go through the depths of the last 3 years without a good plan for taking this team BEYOND where they were in the 2000's. That's part of what TF was supposed to be about.

 

I sometimes wonder if the last 3 disastrous years were just a way to get us to forget about the "something more" of actually contending in the playoffs.

 

Well, I won't forget. And, if you are correct about TR's "plan" as stated in your first post, IT'S JUST NOT GOOD ENOUGH for me. I want that elusive "more". I'm willing to take the lows but I want the highs too. I don't want some dull, vanilla world where competing in the Central Division, putting butts in the seat and making a healthy profit, is good enough. I want the full flavor of a team that is competitive in the post-season. I'm willing to take some bitter regular seasons to get that but I need to know that OWNERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT are committed to more than vanilla.

[AROG]

I didn't have time to read all the comments but, the only problem I have with the original post is the "you don't need an ace" part. Where I agree that you don't need "ace" production from one guy, you do need an "ace". Whether he was a former ace like AJ Burnett for Pittsburg or like we had in Hernandez. You need someone with that mentality. The Twins don't have that now and should look for someone that is older that used to be an "ace" that can help mold the younger pitchers.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I think I get this post. It's sorta laying out how the 2000s Twins were built (although as others have noted, there are some accuracy issues here).

 

But remember, that rebuild took ~6 seasons of BAD baseball. And it only succeeded after a Rule 5 pick started pitching at a HoF level, and it only continued into the latter half of the decade because a #1 overall draft pick also started producing at a HoF level.

 

If that's Terry Ryan's blueprint for rebuilding the franchise again, while avoiding any risk whatsoever in free agency or the international market, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the 2002-2010 renaissance.

[gunnarthor]

And yet, here we are, 3 seasons of 90+ losses, talking about how to rebuild.

 

How long does a normal rebuild take? Cleveland had 4 straight 90 loss seasons. Rays had 10. Pirates had 20 years below .500. Rangers had one winning season in 9 years before they figured it out. Tigers had 12 years of being lost in the desert. Orioles had 14. Oakland had 5 losing seasons before last year. Mets are working on 5 straight losing seasons. Nats had 6 straight losing seasons in their rebuild. Seattle's been a mess since 04. Houston has lost 106 games or more for 3 straight seasons and hasn't had a winning season since 08. Reds had 9 sub .500 seasons before they got back to respectability. Giants had 4 bad years followed by 4 good years before this year. Brewers had 12 years of rebuilding.

[Alex]

How long does a normal rebuild take? Cleveland had 4 straight 90 loss seasons. Rays had 10. Pirates had 20 years below .500. Rangers had one winning season in 9 years before they figured it out. Tigers had 12 years of being lost in the desert. Orioles had 14. Oakland had 5 losing seasons before last year. Mets are working on 5 straight losing seasons. Nats had 6 straight losing seasons in their rebuild. Seattle's been a mess since 04. Houston has lost 106 games or more for 3 straight seasons and hasn't had a winning season since 08. Reds had 9 sub .500 seasons before they got back to respectability. Giants had 4 bad years followed by 4 good years before this year. Brewers had 12 years of rebuilding.

 

There is some variation between "losing season" and 90+ loss season. Well-run organizations don't bottom out, imo.

 

The Giants, for example, had two 90 loss seasons in a row in that time but weren't ever as bad as the Twins have been (and look to be next year). The A's had 3 losing seasons, hit .500 and then lost, but they never lost 90 games in the span you are talking about. The Mets have been bad but not as bad as the Twins.

 

I'd argue that any team with a decade of losing isn't worth considering in any rebuild discussion. They were just poorly run. Comparing us to the Brewers, Tigers, Orioles, Seattle, Wash/Mon during those long spells of futility is an incredibly frightening proposition. But, I think they're fair in that, IMO, the Twins have not been well run in recent years.

[Willihammer]

How long does a normal rebuild take? Cleveland had 4 straight 90 loss seasons. Rays had 10. Pirates had 20 years below .500. Rangers had one winning season in 9 years before they figured it out. Tigers had 12 years of being lost in the desert. Orioles had 14. Oakland had 5 losing seasons before last year. Mets are working on 5 straight losing seasons. Nats had 6 straight losing seasons in their rebuild. Seattle's been a mess since 04. Houston has lost 106 games or more for 3 straight seasons and hasn't had a winning season since 08. Reds had 9 sub .500 seasons before they got back to respectability. Giants had 4 bad years followed by 4 good years before this year. Brewers had 12 years of rebuilding.

 

If the Twins thought they could continue to draft Mike Cuddyers and Joe Mauers in the 20s than they weren't being realistic. As the facts earlier in this thread show, there are only a few of these sort of impact guys that slip through the top ten, the rest of the talent is very thinly spread out. It should have surprised no one that the Matt Moses's, Denard Spans, Trevor Plouffes, Glen Perkins,' Matt Garzas, Steven Waldrops, Matt Fox's, Jay Rainvilles, Chris Parmelees, etc. weren't going to sustain the momentum that Joe Mauer, Mike Cuddyer and Torii Hunter had built - despite the fact that a couple of them did hit pretty good.

 

So the well dried up. Who was held accountable? Bill Smith, the first Twins GM to bring an impact international player into the Twins system, sign a Japanese superstar, and try to diversify the sources of the Twins talent.

 

Stranger yet, the guy who started us down this cycle was brought back to start us down the same cycle again.

 

It doesn't have to be this way.

[gunnarthor]

If the Twins thought they could continue to draft Mike Cuddyers and Joe Mauers in the 20s than they weren't being realistic. As the facts earlier in this thread show, there are only a few of these sort of impact guys that slip through the top ten, the rest of the talent is very thinly spread out. It should have surprised no one that the Matt Moses's, Denard Spans, Trevor Plouffes, Glen Perkins,' Matt Garzas, Steven Waldrops, Matt Fox's, Jay Rainvilles, Chris Parmelees, etc. weren't going to sustain the momentum that Joe Mauer, Mike Cuddyer and Torii Hunter had built - despite the fact that a couple of them did hit pretty good.

 

So the well dried up. Who was held accountable? Bill Smith, the first Twins GM to bring an impact international player into the Twins system, sign a Japanese superstar, and try to diversify the sources of the Twins talent.

 

Stranger yet, the guy who started us down this cycle was brought back to start us down the same cycle again.

 

It doesn't have to be this way.

 

Smith wasn't fired for his international work (although Nishi was certainly used against him). Ryan did a remarkable job in his first go around of bringing in talent outside of the draft - Santana, Lohse, Silva, Milton, Bartlett, Liriano, Boof, Nathan, Punto, etc. He's already shown that ability in his 2 years back.

 

It is unrealistic to expect the Twins to stay at the top. Sports are made to be cyclical. The fact that they were able to stay atop so long speaks to the ability of Ryan, not his inability.

[Willihammer]

I don't expect the Twins to stay at the top all the time, but I don't accept that we have to dive into the cellar for years at a time. The Twins have the new park, and the money to make a better effort than they've made. The GM is just unwilling to make that effot because, I can only assume, he wants the top 10 picks.

[BabyJesusBuxton]

I haven't looked up any specific examples but I would expect some of the stud players drafted either late in the 1st round or later rounds may have dropped because of signability reasons and then the team went way over slot to secure them. This is obviously no longer a possibility with the new CBA. I'd be interested to see how many of the guys signed outside the top 20 picks who have produced at a high level in the majors were signed at or below slot value. Wasn't it a organizational policy not to go over slot during the dome years?

 

Ultimately, with the new rules, the Twins currently have an advantage in the draft and with signing international kids. However, to sustain a quality product and avoid the cyclic pattern people are bringing up they will have to start spending money in free agency and international free agency to offset a poor draft that is bound to happen occasionally when drafting low in the draft. Making smart trades is also a possibility but I'd prefer we keep our young studs and pay them. I'd like to see more than just Mauer start and finish his career as a Twin.

[howieramone1406390264]

I don't expect the Twins to stay at the top all the time, but I don't accept that we have to dive into the cellar for years at a time. The Twins have the new park, and the money to make a better effort than they've made. The GM is just unwilling to make that effot because, I can only assume, he wants the top 10 picks.

Sounds like a sound strategy to me. I think the loveable losers and lastros are copying us.

[TheLeviathan]

Sounds like a sound strategy to me. I think the loveable losers and lastros are copying us.

 

Intentionally losing is never a sound strategy. it has some benefits but its awful strategy.

[Alex]

Intentionally losing is never a sound strategy. it has some benefits but its awful strategy.

 

It's also the least innovative strategy there is and and many teams have proven they don't need it for long term success. Good organizations limit their losing seasons and maximize their winning ones.

[gunnarthor]

I don't expect the Twins to stay at the top all the time, but I don't accept that we have to dive into the cellar for years at a time. The Twins have the new park, and the money to make a better effort than they've made. The GM is just unwilling to make that effot because, I can only assume, he wants the top 10 picks.

 

Ryan wasn't our GM from 08-10. If he had been, I suspect things would have been quite different. I assume the GM is following his own plan, which he ran past ownership. I have yet to read anyone's plan, even with the benefit of hindsight, that realistically improved the Twins this last season. It's all generic "spend money" but it ignores that guys like Marcum, Dempster, Jackson, Haren all sucked pretty hard this year. Or it's unrealistic cries to outbid for Grieinke and Sanchez.