jokin

Is it really up for debate that when it comes to baseball background, knowledge, training, acumen and savvy...is there another team in baseball with two less qualified men to make such important personnel decisions at the top of their organization than Dave St Peter and Rob Antony? These are guys whose college backgrounds are rooted in communication, marketing and PR- not even a business degree or baseball-player pedigree between them?... might as well use a dart board or ouija board. (You can't make this stuff up)... Dave St Pete's qualifications out of college as an attractive new-hire were realized as a T-shirt salesman in the Gift Shop and then Public Relations correspondent. He does get credit for overseeing the construction and marketing of the new ballpark, but he also seems to have provided some impetus and encouragement in pursuing international FAs, more for the marketing possibilities than for the true MLB talent level- not sure how that qualifies him to spearhead the search for the best available, stilted-culture-busting baseball man, replete with a 21st Century sabre-analytical skillset. Selling the Twins' GM job to some up-and-coming Ivy League brainiac or seasoned proven professional involves a little more persuasive power than some boiler-plate power point presentation at a group ticket sale confab-Somehow, I don't think the prospective GM is going to be swayed by glitzy talk about new food/beverage concessions and the new watering holes DSP plans to open in 2017. Is DSP the guy who is going to identify and then convince the top candidate (willing to interview) that because the Twins culture is so inherently hidebound, the winning GM candidate does not get to choose his field manager? iNot. Going. To. Happen. Rob Antony seems like a nice guy, alway media-accessible... but based on his first stint as Acting GM, I don't think he inspired confidence in anybody that he was future GM material. Does Antony, who presumably hasn't played more than HS baseball- if that, have enough GM cred as presumably, a short-timer in the role, to garner respect for all of his personnel decisions from the HOF manager who ostensibly works for Him? Now let's fast-forward to late last March. Do we think it possible that Paul Molitor sarcastically said "Thanks Alot" in the mirror several times last spring and into the summer for all that help that was promised to him in the offseason? Here's Rob Antony's rationale at the start of Spring Training for failing to fulfill the promise of bolstering the bullpen and signing Park: Huh? $25M cavaiierly committed to Park, based on the recommendations of some Korean stringer scout, David Kim, for his baseball ability, plus he passed all of your nice-guy compatibility tests? Hey Rob, wouldn't "bigger things" than the ones you listed- like, say ready-talent to turn on a MLB FB and accurate assessment of his projected transition to MLB level play over a 10-year scouting process- be the most critical factors in how "strongly" you felt? Especially for filling a redundant need in the lineup? (Antony, tying in with St. Peter and the marketing benefits, later alludes to the excitement in Twinsland over the intense Korean media interest generated by the signing). I actually wish the interviewer had asked Antony why he didn't feel as "strongly" about two guys many of us at TD were pounding the table on, players the Twins Actually Needed and apparently didn't even contemplate making an offer to- Jose Abreu and Aledmys Diaz- to name just two affordable International FAs available recently. Or upgrading instead at SS with a proven major leaguer for 1/3 the cost in Ian Desmond on the "right one or two year deal" he claimed the Twins were stymied on while seeking BP FAs? Speaking of the bullpen guys, Antony missed wildly on his "Big Six" picks to click RP arms going into the season- Jepsen, Fien and Graham all went bust (not difficult to forsee on the first two, and of course the case of Graham has its own unique set of management bungling), it was also obvious from last season that Perkins had huge question marks around his shoulder health- counting on him for Anything in 2016 was whistling past the graveyard, May was grudgingly (on his part) supposed to seamlessly translate to a still-unfamiliar role and the jury was, and still is, out on Pressly. That's essentially Oh For Six. Of course, none of this should have come as a great surprise, given that Ryan had publicly admitted last November that bolstering the Pen was the top priority- demonstrably obvious to all after finishing second to last in the AL in overall team RP WAR numbers in 2015. The only logical conclusion a Twins fan could have is a huge vote of "No Confidence" of DSP's and RA's collective abilities to lead the transition team to both: 1) leading a successful new GM Search and 2) finding and acquiring sufficient talent and upside in the critical July trade market for the bevy of urgently expendable veterans.

There have been a litany of local and national reporters over the entire Pohlad era who have written pretty plainly that Carl's sons have never had anywhere near the passion for baseball and the Twins that their mother, Eloise had.

That's why you hire people to say "No" when you jeopardize the best interests of your business.

Perspective? Nice way to put blatant nepotism over what's best for your business (and a business subsidized by taxpayer dollars)?

Arggh. I need to revise and extend my previous remarks- mea culpa- this quote confirms that I definitely attributed too much blame for the Twins current plight towards Terry Ryan.

I really hope that this is the case, but does Pohlad ever even think thoughts down at such a plebeian level?

This rather strange quote from Pohlad confirms that this organization is rife with both bunglers and meddlers. That concept of "hands off" ownership now strains credulity- it's like Pohlad is pulling a Rip Van Winkle act- waking up from 18 years of slumber and feeling unjustifiable urgency to keep Molitor on board no matter what- Hey Jim! Molitor retired in 1998- there's nothing all that special (besides being "St Paul's own" for whatever that's still worth) that suggests that keeping Molitor in place is non-negotiable! With all of the high potential prospects just beginning to inundate the roster, why would you make the GM job less attractive by restricting the new GM's ability to implement his vision for how best to use his assets?

Very un-Twins-like..... But this move is only "stunning" in this market- the team has all of 33 wins; Park was an epic flop; Sano to RF was an unmitigated disaster; his first big trade, Span for Meyer officially imploded; the pen not only wasn't shored up as TR promised; May is struggling in his role; and the "prize" mid-season trade from last season blew up in TR's face. Your logic is sound, though. Smith was canned when push came to shove about $$$. Was there an offer on the table for Santana, Nolasco, et al, with the Twins picking up salary?

Thanks, Seth. So you're quite confident that Javier won't have to repeat DSL in 2017 even if this injury situation isn't resolved quickly and satisfactorily?

Can the Twins blow it both on the upside and the downside in the same season. Advocating for trading fixes that involve trying to win 10 more meaningless games, and finishing 15 games behind the White Sox for 4th place, instead of 25 games behind them... and thereby blowing the chance for the #1 overall pick next June is really pretty foolish thinking. For marketing purposes, if the Twins want to sell season tickets for next year on "the plan", it's all about selling fans on the number of future stars in the making with more on the way, not patching a few more waiver claims and other castoffs in order to juice the present number of meaningless wins.

Lots of good points in this post... but I really hope that this is not true... and if true, how do they come to that decision, he fails both the eye and sabre tests. (And don't get me wrong, I lobbied for the Twins to put in a claim for Nunez when the Yanks DFA'd him. And I am very happy for him finding success in his first full-time chance- he's easy to like and root for. But the fact is- he is a flawed MLB player, who in all likelihood is having a career year- if the Twins aren't actively seeking out indications of interest for him they are committing malfeasance).

Yep, it would take either a trip to the DL or trade of Dozier to get Polanco up here. Either zero Twins confidence in giving Polanco a shot at SS or unwillingness to have him share the position and play irregularly- Ironic that Nunez of all people is now doing the blocking- but he has earned his playing time and needs to continue being showcased in hopes of solid trade offers coming in by the end of the month.

It looks like Santana has just had his role changed from Utility OF to Utility IF. An all-youth OF of Rosario, Buxton and Kepler, besides offering the best defensive trio, is certainly intriguing as a developing offensive force- but they all have demonstrated that they face the likelihood of severe intermittent struggles at the plate. If Buxton continues to struggle below the Mendoza line, I'd look for Santana or Mastroianni to take his roster spot, with Rosario getting a look in CF.

Wander Javier was pulled in the 1st inning of his first game back from injury on Friday. Do you have any information on his health status? It would be a shame if this turns out to be a completely lost season for him- if true, this will probably put his timetable to full season MiLB ball back.... maybe not until 2019?

Perhaps it has been discussed elsewhere... but I noticed that Wander Javier was replaced in the 1st inning Friday night in his first game back from injury. Major or just minor setback?

Because Desmond by turning down lucrative multi-year offers was highly incentivized to rebuild value on a one-year-deal. Because you can get the pick back the next season, or possibly trade Desmond for a package of prospects with more predictable outcomes. Because it's in actuality a low-risk move, not a high-risk move, and in the meantime solves other problems regarding faulty roster construction.

I get what you're saying on risk and being willing to make an unconventional attempt at finding market inefficiencies. I'm not really sure that this was all that aggressive or a "step in the right direction". Signing Park was a low cost move that caused as many problems that it might have solved- even if it had/still well worked/work out. Signing Desmond would have been both a smart, splashy AND aggressive move. A move that could have solved: * the veteran leadership problem w/ the departure of Hunter, * the historical poor performance in the middle infield problem, * the gaping holes in the batting lineup problem, * the build on the success of 2015 problem * where to play and avoid injury to Sano problem And even if Desmond and/or the Twins pennant hopes hadn't panned out: * signing him still would have forced Ryan to clear the roster clutter and make way for better, cheaper players currently being blocked * RPs with more value and better track records could have been acquired in the process of clearing the veteran roster clutter * Desmond could have been moved in June/July for a nice haul of prospects, or, * Desmond could have made a QO and gotten a 1st round pick, or * The Twins move easily past Desmond's one-year deal with a younger, higher-upside roster composed of more of their vaunted prospects, a deeper RP corps and/or potentially a better, younger catcher option.

I'd rather sign proven 30 year old guys that solidify us at premium positions of need on incentivized one-year deals that help clearing up a backlog of redundant or replaceable expensive veterans... and fervently hope we don't invest in more unproven 30 year olds from a league that has proven difficult to properly translate to the Majors and that only adds to the backlog and redundancies inherent in the already-existing roster.

Did you actually read the post???... . Nothing posted required 20/20 hindsight. It was noted that some of us are on record for pursuing Desmond a year ago- when he most definitely appeared to be "Decline Phase" Desmond. And again in the Free Agency period before Park was signed. That's why I noted Desmond was a "buy-low" bounce back FA- who, as it turned out, also filled the criteria in my original recommendation of a year ago as well as last December- to be signed by Ryan only in the event that Desmond was interested in a one-year contract. The possibility and contingencies were plainly allowed for in the body of the article for the risk involved here.

Yep, and I noted that in the article. And.. there are people really anointing Kiriloff as the heir apparent Twins' Savior already, really?

Off course, assuming that Desmond was signed with the resulting player dominoes traded away, the net payroll is close to wash, leaving payroll room for Ryan/Next GM/Captain Ahab to pursue that next mysterious white whale.

Source: Park vs, Desmond- Another case of misdirected FA $$$

After last night's game ugly loss- rather than seek out a Primal Scream Therapy group, I think it's time for another well-reasoned rant. In another sad ironic twist in this Season of Twins Fans' Discontent Disgust- the brutallly-struggling-at-rookie-Aaron-Hicks-levels-of-futility, Byung-Ho Park, is mercifully dispatched, or maybe, Deep-Sixed, to the minors in AAA, sinking to a level that may be more commensurate with his maxed-out ability, or maybe not (if he's to ever be a MLB hitter, he needs to be seeing more FBs, not more AAA junk). Want to continue the irony? Park turns 30 on July 10. Fellow off-season FA acquisition target hits town the same day that Park is dispatched, in one Ian Desmond, who is also currently 30 years of age. The guy we got is no more (at least for now)... the guy we should have gotten just handed us our lunch in extra innings. Even before Free Agency formally kicked off in the previous offseason- think around this time one year ago- myself, along with other posters, suggested that the time and conditions were right to aggressively pursue a buy-low FA signing in the form of Ian Desmond. Desmond had a horrible first half in 2015- .580 OPS, only to recover nicely and suggest he wasn't washed up in the second half of 2015 with an OPS of .777 (Desmond's career OPS is .750) . Desmond and his agent ultimately signed with the Rangers on a one-year deal worth $8M. Apparently, Desmond was more than willing to gamble on himself in restoring value and possibly re-enter the FA market in 2017 in a better position to consider multiple, multi-year offers. Also apparent, the lack of solid offers from the rest of the League meant they were largely uncertain which Ian Desmond was the player going forward- Decline-Phase First Half Desmond or Fluke-Filled Second Half Desmond? Gotta like a guy highly incentivized and willing to go all-in on a full-fledged Me-Against-The-World attitude to prove himself worthy, right? In more irony, he ultimately considered the Rangers deal, as his best option, with the apparent implicit understanding that he wouldn't be the first choice at the premier defensive position, the position he'd played all his life, Shortstop. Talk about a guy very amenable at gladly doing what's best for his employer...! even if it carried grave unknowns, such as potentially diminishing his perceived image as one of MLB's top shortstops, and the distinct possibility at failing in an unfamiliar, but still critically important defensive position, CF. So let's not hear any talk of a player not willing to come to Minnesota. Clearly based on the 2016 results thus far, Ian Desmond is a guy who was ready to meet the self-imposed challenge, and exceed all expectations, in his campaign to return to blue chip vet respectability and relevancy. His batting line after tonight: .323/.376/.535/(.911) OPS+ 132 fWAR 4.0 Cost to the Rangers- $8M (over 1 season) Is there even any point in listing Park's line? .191/.275/.409/(.684) OPS+ 81 fWAR 0.1 Cost to the Twins- $12 M (over 4 seasons) Sooo.... the Twins have a four-year commitment of $12M to Park- despite their ugly history of badly mis-assessing East Asia talent translation to MLB. He now occupies a precious roster spot, already over-loaded on the current 40-man with similarly profiling MLB players and MiLB prospects- * plus Palka is waiting in the wings needing a roster spot, * a decision will need to made on Walker by end of next year on his 25-man status or lose him to MiLB FA, * what if Sano can't cut it at 3rd- he needs the DH ABs * plus signing the aging Park has cost the Twins in losing much younger talent (Arcia, and soon, Vargas), by putting them in position to fail to receive adequate compensation for the MLB potential they both still represent. Now here's where it gets more damning- Let's consider that the Twins had followed our recommendation in pursuing and signing Desmond last December. The Rangers ultimately got him for $8M. Assuming Desmond was fine with a one-year deal and playing out of position in the hopes of rebuilding value, why wouldn't he have been very interested in signing with the Twins?- requiring the Twins to overbid- to say, $9.25M for one year. The Twins do that, and the middle of the IF is now highly solidified. This clears the way to let Sano take 3rd base, and Plouffe traded for one or two proven RPs playing for $1-2M- and/or a current young back-up catcher making the minimum- plus one or two of mid-level prospects. Here's the important financial part- Plouffe's $7.25M is now off the books (with maybe a max of $1-2.5M in contract received back in trade). It gets better. Signing Desmond last offseason means you just got a guy with a proven track record of playing every day- he's one of baseball's most durable athletes, that means that one, or both, of the Eduardos can be shipped out for prospects. Escobar made $2.15 this year, Nunez made $1.5M. That's 3.65M together. If both players are moved- four Twins league minimum players immediately move up into utility depth roles- if both Eduardo's are moved, D Santana becomes the #1 utility guy, with Beresford as the immediate alternative, plus both Polanco and Vielma (when healthy) waiting in the wings to seize the opportunity. The financial savings on shedding these three vets are anywhere from $8.75 to $10.9M in moving some combination of Plouffe/Escobar/Nunez. It's difficult to say for certain, but there's a fighting chance that after all of these logical moves, the Twins would have: * bolstered the MI with one of baseball's steady shortstops * improved the offense with Desmond's proven superior bat @ the position * added the winning leadership presence of a veteran that was lost when Hunter retired * used the excess position players to fill other major areas of need * signing Desmond for one year gives you other options: such as- 1) flipping him to a contender in exchange for a very decent haul of prospects 2) making a QO at season's end and receiving a 1st round compensatory draft pick 3) offering Desmond an extension if the "fit" is mutually right for both parties 4) easily walking away if Desmond doesn't pan out * last but not least- by signing Desmond @ $9.25M for 1 year, roster space is cleared in the resultant moves, Sano is playing where he should be, plus it's entirely possible that the net cost in acquisition and trades would be very close to a financial wash. Conclusion- Instead of signing a proven vet at a premier position- and only taking on one year's worth of risk @ $8M, the Twins took a much greater gamble on an unproven player of a similar age and playing at a non-premier position- and having this unproven player potentially occupy a roster space for four years- or the Twins eating $12M.. One more case where a little more intrepidness, more focusing limited FA dollars on more proven talent plus more forward and creative thinking, would have given Terry Ryan everything he wanted- * a strong veteran leader- even if his production had been more Hunter-like pedestrian, * a demonstrably better ballclub roster to start the 2016 season, * more roster flexibility and less blockage of prospects, * multiple chances for TR to do what he does best w/ the trades- plucking hidden prospect and recyclable talent, * and , what TR revels in- not financially costing the team any appreciable increase in payroll.

Your opening sentence is both a run-on and a non sequitur- hard to follow your logic. And believe me, I've yet to hear anyone cite the Twins's logic in an understandable way in how they handled Arcia this season, especially how it ended with so many other better options. Perhaps that isthe real reason why it is so difficult to cite the level of competence of Twins' management in this instance? And in your response to your "confident" conclusions.... I beg to differ to the contrary... I'm both confident and comfortable on one side- the objective side of the fence... and that I, among many others- in this thread and countless previous threads going all the way back to before Spring Training concerning how best for Arcia to be utilized in 2016- have laid down a string of facts as well as proposals in pursuit of a successful outcome surrounding Arcia's likely denouement season... i ncluding the culmination of this affair with Molitor's own acknowledgement that Arcia was not given a fair chance.

Uhh... not even close.. Arcia's flaws and deficiencies are virtually universally acknowledged- and certainly by me. Why would the FO keep a guy with a "valid argument" attached to him that he's "not been very good." The fact is, you look to sell young guys with "issues" and who are still mostly only about potential and when perceived value is yet to be realized... ala Delmon Young and Alex Meyer, to name a couple. If you've done your due diligence and have properly made the decision that he has the potential or likelihood towards the "issues" but can still drive value in the marketplace after a very solid rookie season, of course you look to move him. And why keep him for 2.5 months this year in the apparent hope to raise his value, and then make sure not to do the things necessary to then implement any value-enhancement strategies? (ie, regular ABs, platooning, DH, play only in RF, look for as many match-ups as possible vs. inexperienced pitchers or pitchers with whom he has had previous success) Let's put it back on you in the converse, are you arguing that this whole fiasco was an example of a "competent" move? I'll hang up and listen...