Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • Twins News & Analysis

    The Painful Truth?


    Nick Nelson

    Terry Ryan has formed a rock-solid reputation during his decades in the game of baseball, in large part because of his integrity and honesty. Say what you will about the man, but he will always give you his sincere opinion.

    Sometimes, that honesty isn't so refreshing.

    Image courtesy of Brace Hemmelgarn, USA Today Sports

    Twins Video

    Here are three quotes that Ryan has provided on three separate occasions since the season ended:

    “We’re not broke here, we’re bent. We’ve got some issues, and we need to make better decisions. But I feel a heck of a lot better about this club and moving forward than I did a year ago,” Ryan said. “I don’t think we’re all that far away [from contention]. I don’t want to punt on 2015, but it’s still going to be a struggle.”

    - Conference call with season ticket holders (via Star Tribune)

    "No one said this is going to be easy. It’s going to take a lot of work and a little time,” Ryan said. “But the worst thing that could happen is, yeah, we’ve had four bad years. I don’t want it to turn into 14 bad years. Sometimes you make decisions that ultimately are going to benefit you down the line that don’t look exactly like what you want right now.”

    - Phil Miller story from Tuesday's Star Tribune

    "There isn’t any shortcut to this thing. I’m not going to pretend that this thing’s going to come together in the next six months. We’ve got a lot of work to do, I know it. I’m not going to hide and I’m not going to pretend. … I don’t know how long it’s going to take, but for everybody’s sake the sooner that we get this thing going in the right direction, the better."

    - Interview with Parker Hageman for the upcoming Offseason Handbook

    Hey Terry, maybe lighten up a little and leave the doom and gloom to the bloggers, eh? The season ended two weeks ago, for crying out loud! Is there a need to keep not-so-implicitly suggesting that we're likely to be in for another rough one next season when the sting of this year's 92nd loss remains so fresh?

    On some level, I can appreciate what TR is doing. He's being frank and stern in his assessments of a roster that -- objectively -- still appears to be a ways off from contention. He doesn't want to blow smoke after four straight miserable years. I'll take that over the delusional rah-rah Tim Brewster rhetoric.

    But while I'm sure Ryan is more hopeful than the above quotes would indicate, it sure seems like I have more faith in the ability of this team to be competitive next year than he does -- and I'm no eternal optimist.

    Hopefully his actions this offseason don't match his words, but Phil Miller's story in Tuesday's Star Tribune emits little optimism on that front.

    In the article, Ryan and team president Dave St. Peter share the same sentiment: payroll is likely to remain more or less static heading into 2015. In fact, St. Peter would only go so far as to say "we don't see it going down significantly."

    Team execs bristle whenever the payroll topic is brought up, and I'm not one to wave the "spend money because you owe the taxpayers!" torch, but they've got to at least acknowledge that they bring this upon themselves.

    In 2013, the Twins ranked 22nd in the majors with an Opening Day payroll of $76 million. In 2014, thanks to big signings like Ricky Nolasco and Phil Hughes, that number rose to $86 million. But despite the splurge, Minnesota's MLB rank dropped to 24th, because every single team that had sported a lower payroll in 2013 spent even more during the offseason.

    If the Twins stay at $86 million or drop slightly, they'll likely be passed by a couple more teams, because with substantial new revenues flowing into the game from new TV mega-deals that kicked in this year, small-market franchises are spending more.

    That said, it's not the payroll rank relative to other teams that bothers me, nor the dubiousness of this supposed "50 percent of revenue" standard. I'm just dispirited by the messages being conveyed.

    I wouldn't advocate "spending just to spend," and I fully recognize that the Twins are in a position where they basically they have to roll with what they've got, but they have an acute need in left field with no answer in the pipeline.

    I'd like to think that Ryan will at least aggressively pursue a quality player there to supplement his emerging core, but going after the most highly sought assets -- whether in free agency, or trade, or the international market -- requires a willingness to spend.

    To see both the general manager and team president downplaying that whole notion so early in the offseason, at a time where fan morale is dreadfully low and the team is hemorrhaging season ticket holders, seems rather bizarre.

    I'm depressed from reading this stuff as a fan. I can only imagine how the players must feel.

    A friend reminded me of a quote that Glen Perkins shared back in June, after the Twins signed Kendrys Morales:

    “It means a lot to the guys in here,” closer Glen Perkins said Sunday of the signing of Kendrys Morales to be the Twins’ new designated hitter. “Making moves like that, taking chances on making us better, it goes a long way for giving guys confidence, and knowing we’re all on the same page.”

    Hopefully Ryan and the Twins will heed these words from their All-Star closer, and reconsider their stated offseason course. This roster ain't so bad. They need some pitchers to bounce back, but there are some nice young arms ready to make an impact, and the offensive unit is quite strong with elite prospects set to join soon. Youthful teams can emerge from the abyss quite quickly, as the two squads presently facing off in the ALCS can attest.

    Don't sell these kids short. Give them some help. Or at least feign making an effort. When all you've got to sell is hope, it'd be nice to put a little out on the shelf.

    Follow Twins Daily For Minnesota Twins News & Analysis

    Recent Twins Articles

    Recent Twins Videos

    Twins Top Prospects

    Marek Houston

    Cedar Rapids Kernels - A+, SS
    The 22-year-old went 2-for-5 on Friday night, his fourth straight multi-hit game. Heading into the week, he was hitting .246/.328/.404 (.732). Four games later, he is hitting .303/.361/.447 (.808).

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

    "Expected to have" Sano and Buxton, the former having never appeared in AAA, the latter never in AA?

     

    Hughes/Nolasco do not equal Abreu, either.  The money is similar, but the upside was much larger with Abreu (and the possible benefit, as he's signed for 6 years).

    I don't understand what point you're trying to make with your last two responses to me, my friend, but it really doesn't appear to pertain to any point being made by me. I have no interest in arguing in circles or picking a fight, OK?

    I don't think the Twins should do much in free agency this offseason.

     

    I don't think Jon Lester is a good idea.  He's probably going to demand a 7 or 8 year deal.  Committing that much money on a pitcher into his late 30's is a bad idea.  People complain about Mauer's contract.  Lester's likely would look much worse a few years down the line.  Greinke is got a 6/159 contract (26.5).  Hamels has a 7/153 contract (21.8).  Cliff Lee has basically a 6/144 (24).  Sabathia has an 8/182 (22.8).  Felix is 7/175 (25).  All of them except Cliff Lee were younger than Lester when they signed those contracts.  If they could get Lester for $25/per and only 4years, go for it, but I think its going to take $25/per and 7 or 8 years to do it.

     

    Maybe there are other free agent pitchers, but you are likely looking at a risk like Nolasco.

     

    Don't worry about CF this year.  Perhaps buxton will be ready, or Schafer could fill the void until he is.  If you can sign a good defense, decent hitter to play OF, that might be worth it, but nothing more than a 2 year contract.

     

    LF looks like a gaping hole right now, so maybe sign a short term fill in.  However, they need to decide what is going on with Plouffe/Sano before they really go down that road.  They might also consider what they want to do with Mauer/Vargas/Arcia.  Could they move Mauer to LF, Vargas to 1B and Arcia to DH?

     

    In my opinion, they missed a golden opportunity to trade for David Price.  They could have had him for 2014 and 2015, which would have been enough of a bridge to see if their minor league was going to produce quality starting pitchers.

     

    I also think they should make some trades for the missing pieces.  They have a glut of guys who probably should end up at DH (Arcia, Vargas, Pinto).   Could they package one of them with some minor league talent and get a youngish corner outfielder.

     

    As for starting pitching, I think they maybe should also look to trades.  I know its never going to happen, but if they could get a guy like Garrett Richards, that would be awesome.  He would be worth giving up a couple of top prospects.

    I think the context in which the questions were asked is important.  The same answer will have a different impact depending on the context of the question.

     

    I like the way Ryan is sincere about his answers.  And let's be honest: he is going to be criticized no matter which way he answers the question.  If he paints this optimistic picture that you seem to be wanting, others will say he is out of touch with reality and trying to deceive fans and season ticket holders.

     

    A couple of things on that:

     

    You can play the optimist, but you got to do something pretty drastic to transform a horrible team.  Have a plan while you are doing it.  Be transparent.  Hold people accountable. Walk the talk.  When Ryan was optimistic, he did not do the other things.

     

    I think that any leader who goes out and gives the message "we will not be competitive, we know it and we will not do anything to be about it but wait for Sano, Buxton and Godot to make us competitive", should have given his last message as a leader.  

     

    I'd love to see someone of the Twins' Front Office and ownership say:

     

    1. We really sucked the last 4 years and maybe more, because we haven't won a World Series since 1991.

    2. You fans who supported us on building one of the best ballparks in the majors should be mad about it and we are mad about it as well

    3. Our goal is not only to be competitive but to win the World Series every year.   Losing is unacceptable

    4 We are working on it:  We decided that the teams' field management was not optimal and we made a change.

    5., 6. (Describe other weaknesses and ways to address them.)

    7. Act on them

     

    Not sure about optimistic or pessimistic.   How about realistic.  And setting goals. And being transparent and communicative. 

    I don't understand what point you're trying to make with your last two responses to me, my friend, but it really doesn't appear to pertain to any point being made by me. I have no interest in arguing in circles or picking a fight, OK?

    I'm not sure what point I am making anymore either, so at least we're in agreement on that. :)

     

    You just seemed to be very dismissive of improving one's roster using money, like it is a mark of failure, or some kind of unnatural act.  That's kind of the vibe I've always gotten from TR and the Twins too...

    Edited by spycake

    A couple of things on that:

     

    You can play the optimist, but you got to do something pretty drastic to transform a horrible team.  Have a plan while you are doing it.  Be transparent.  Hold people accountable. Walk the talk.  When Ryan was optimistic, he did not do the other things.

     

    I think that any leader who goes out and gives the message "we will not be competitive, we know it and we will not do anything to be about it but wait for Sano, Buxton and Godot to make us competitive", should have given his last message as a leader.  

     

    I'd love to see someone of the Twins' Front Office and ownership say:

     

    1. We really sucked the last 4 years and maybe more, because we haven't won a World Series since 1991.

    2. You fans who supported us on building one of the best ballparks in the majors should be mad about it and we are mad about it as well

    3. Our goal is not only to be competitive but to win the World Series every year.   Losing is unacceptable

    4 We are working on it:  We decided that the teams' field management was not optimal and we made a change.

    5., 6. (Describe other weaknesses and ways to address them.)

    7. Act on them

     

    Not sure about optimistic or pessimistic.   How about realistic.  And setting goals. And being transparent and communicative. 

    This is what I mean.  Whether you like him or not, Ryan is one of the most candid GMs in all of sports.  You could make a case that all of what you wanted in your list has been said by him - its all in the way that you interpret his comments.  This is precisely my point: the article wished for a different tone from him. I'm saying that no matter what the guy says, there will always be a contingent that opposes it. 

     

    Another example: people are calling me an optimist simply because I am pointing out a phenomena that has played out time and again.  In none of my posts have I even indicated if I like the guy or approve of his plan.  It essentially proves my point.....

    Good lord, I've seen this misquoted and misinterpreted so many times, I can't believe it.  Dave St. Peter did not say payroll wouldn't decline, he said their budget would decline.  Mix in the fact that the Twins payroll peaked at 94 million this year after they added Morales, and that they had significant offers out to several free agents (Here's the story), and the Twins budget for payroll probably was sitting somewhere between 94-105 million heading into this year.

     

    Assume that by "significant offers", that the Twins only offered 75% of what the player got (if we don't know what they offered).  The Twins offered Garza 14 million per year (Source), they offered Ervin Santana 10 million per year (Source), Pierzynski got 8 million from Boston, so we'll call it 6 from the Twins, and Rajai Davis got 5 from the Tigers, so we'll call it 4.  That's a total of 34 million in offers.  Now perhaps Santana was only pursused because Garza turned us down, so we'll knock Garza off, and we'll also subtract Suzuki's 3 million (since I rounded Rajai up by .25mil, I'm doing the same with Suzuki), so we'll take 3 million off Pierzynski's offer.  That is an additional 17 million in payroll from 84 million in offers that were declined. 

     

    Again, maybe they would have pulled back some offers if some of these guys would have signed, but characterizing their budget at 85 million is just downright dishonest and poor reporting

    Good lord, I've seen this misquoted and misinterpreted so many times, I can't believe it.  Dave St. Peter did not say payroll wouldn't decline, he said their budget would decline.  Mix in the fact that the Twins payroll peaked at 94 million this year after they added Morales, and that they had significant offers out to several free agents (Here's the story), and the Twins budget for payroll probably was sitting somewhere between 94-105 million heading into this year.

     

    Assume that by "significant offers", that the Twins only offered 75% of what the player got (if we don't know what they offered).  The Twins offered Garza 14 million per year (Source), they offered Ervin Santana 10 million per year (Source), Pierzynski got 8 million from Boston, so we'll call it 6 from the Twins, and Rajai Davis got 5 from the Tigers, so we'll call it 4.  That's a total of 34 million in offers.  Now perhaps Santana was only pursused because Garza turned us down, so we'll knock Garza off, and we'll also subtract Suzuki's 3 million (since I rounded Rajai up by .25mil, I'm doing the same with Suzuki), so we'll take 3 million off Pierzynski's offer.  That is an additional 17 million in payroll from 84 million in offers that were declined. 

     

    Again, maybe they would have pulled back some offers if some of these guys would have signed, but characterizing their budget at 85 million is just downright dishonest and poor reporting

    There are plenty of peole here who can not tell the difference between budget and payroll. Nor do they get the concept that the budget was not spent because Ryan deemed the cost of the player to not be worth the money. Nor does there seem to be an understanding that there are players who can make choices on where they want to play. Part of that choice is not the land of 10000 lakes.

    Edited by The Wise One

    I think you underestimate the intelligence of the posters here.........for me, budget is only relevant if Ryan figures out how to use it. It isn't his job to try to sign players, it is his job to sign players. And the right players. Last year he flushed money down the toilet on Bartlett, Kubel, Guerrier, Pelfrey (and Nolasco). If he had instead spent that money on 1-2 good players, and brought up guys from the minors to be the last spot on the bench, things would have been better. Add in spending almost real money on middle relievers, and this team flushed millions of dollars down the drain, and took up precious roster spots, on guys that had no business being on a rebuilding team.

     

    Saying "we" don't get the difference between budget and payroll is inaccurate, imo. I know I do. I know others here do.

     

    It doesn't matter what the budget is, if TR decides real MLB players are too expensive (like he did over and over in the dome), and keeps signing guys that have no business being on a MLB roster.

    There is a difference between budget and payroll. The budget may not be spent because Ryan deemed the cost of the player to not be worth the money. There are players who can make choices on where they want to play. Part of that choice is not the land of 10000 lakes.

    Moderator's Note: ftfy

     

    Folks, when in disagreement with someone, please stick to the facts as you see them, and don't try to characterize the people with whom you disagree.  When in doubt, choose to not make it personal.

     

    (I chose to be concrete this time by providing an alternate version of someone's post, not to limit the observation to that one person, or to this particular thread.  It's been cropping up lately.  And please don't divert this thread to the tangent of moderation, instead take it to the appropriate part of the forum if you feel the need to discuss.)




    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...