The Wise One

Silly? Outside ideas? Which organization do you like and tell me if the GM did not come from within or is a retread from being fired. Feel free to tell me then about fresh outside ideas if you can find someone who never was a GM having succeess in a new organization. Fresh ideas come from promoting the brightest person possible in the organization. That is the part that those clamoring for change don't seem to get.(Sidebar I can't resist, in 2007 either they were sadly mistaken about Smith's intelligence, or he was the brightest which would explain a lot. Changing the manager doesn't mean much without changing the talent. The point is changing the manager is not the recipe for improvement. Changing the talent is. That doesn't mean keep Gardenhire. It means if they do not change the talent you will have the same outcome. From what I read in these posts, all the Twins world will be a better place when Gardenhire and Ryan are gone. That is silly.

How many GMs are retreads? How many that are new to the job worked in the organization first. When there is criticism for wanting change, perhaps Nick would like to remember that the bright highly touted GMs worked within the organization first. (Luhnow really hasn't done squat for Houston. See this year's first round draft choice)

Sandy Alderson is a respected baseball GM. Are the mets really any better off? Dayton moore has been selling the hope of mediocrity for about 8 years. It is really not "just that simple". Changing managers improving teams? Does Renteria have the Cubs in the playoff? Changing managers can not change lack of talent.

If Reveere has value it is as a centerfielder, which he is not as good at as compared to RF by defensive WAR. Right fielders with a 93 OPS+ is not really very good for your offense. Reverw's .300 woba puts him near the bottom of qualified centerfielders. Byy WAR he is amongst the worst qualified outfielders in the league. What made him valuable 2 years ago was perceived upside. That upside gets lower with every passing year, injured or not. Spaan was in the league long enough to know that he would be what he is. He still is what he was except for one thing. He will no longer be cheap nor young. With those two factors he loses trade value.

People are responsible for the job they do. Has there been changes in people's jobs over the last few years? Different scouts on the amateur and pro level? Different scouting directors? A change in the general manager position in the last few years. Different trainers and or medical advisers. Somebody, with the changeover in personnel, has been held responsible for the job they do. Some things that really impact an organization no one can be held responsible for, like a knee to Morneau's forehead, the blowout of an arm. Different people through the years have made critical mistakes. The time to correct them is much longer than it is to make them. Bad drafts take years to show their effect, as do good ones. SO I kind of take offense to your statement. People want to blame one person and every thing will be all well. Get rid of this one person and all will be well. Ultimately if falls on the owner who hired the club president, who hired the vice presidents, who hired .....

You blame the manager for the record. All I asked you then what a different manager could have done to have reversed the record. You like hypotheticals and wanted to play the game. I gave you one you could not answer. So then there really isn't anything a manager could have done to change the record as you don't answer the question.Shoot the questioner. It would be nice, to talk merits of something. Please by all means, start anytime.

The scouts who recommend the players, the scouting director who drafts them, the farm director who maps a timetable that is not met, the medical profession for not having a way to identify who will break down, the player who quits working hard, the pro scouts and director who recommend players, God for designing a body that is not a machine and breaks down unexpectedly, whoever noticed something in a pitcher's mechanics or motion and thought they could make them a better pitcher, John McDonalds knee, players having the option of wan't to play where they want, Liriano's psychologist, maybe even the snow in Vermont Is that clear that it is many people's fault I don't care about hypotheticals Given the same group of players, how could a different manager made the record 342-239?

I clearly stated my position that Gardenhire needed to be evaluated objectively on how the young players progressed. It was a simple statement., so I thought. It must be my fault that things are not clear. Kevin Slowey was a hell of a pitcher because he went 13-6. Wins and losses in a team sport to tell how an individual does. Would the record be 239-342 with a starting staff of Mike Leake and Colby Lewis as your top two starters over that period as opposed to not even having one starting pitcher who has pitched with the team over that time frame? The record is reflective of the assembled team than the manager You can"t tell over time if a player is performing better? It is not measurable? I would expect a team that analyzes their players will know if they are making progress. Throw out the f/x machines. Throw out the trackmans. Throw out the computers that can track individual pitches on each at bat. There is no way that all of the data generated from a game can tell you if a player is making progress. You can't see how you can objectively tell if a player is making progress

If I told a statistics guy a pitcher had a 7-9 record and therefore was a mediocre pitcher, they would tell me something like a w/l record is not reflective of the pitchers talent. If I said that the same pitcher had a K% of 25.6 and a K-BB% of 19.7 with a FIP 2.98 so he must be having a decent year, the stats guy would probably like my thinking. To judge a manager on w/l record is like judging a pitcher on w/l record. Stating as reason for dismissal as it is time to move on is like judging a pitcher on w/l record. People post what they perceive . Because they said it, it must be so. I merely proposed that one needs to objectively look at this year at the end of the year and ask the question is Gardenhire making improvements to a young player's game. I meant it as the starting point. If the answer is no, there is no need for any other measure for what is coming for the team. That is construed as defending Gardenhire after I even posted the answer might be more players than not may have failed to develop. I am not going to jump on a bandwagon and grab a cyber bucket of tar and feathers and slop it onto Gardenhire, There have been plenty of exchanges about what is perceived as Gardenhire weakness and rebuttals pointing out that wasn't true. I would prefer here and now data. Not what happened many years ago. Mistakes are made. Was there learning from them? Change the manager if the manager is the problem. Don't change him if he is not. Fix that problem. If that makes me a defender (usually used as a term of evilness) so be it. What I am trying to defend is a process done rationally and objectively.

I never said Gardenhire isn't responsible for veteran talent. I don't think that is a problem for Gardenhire. I did not propose that he be manager for life. I never proposed to trade away youth for veterans. I never said for him to be only judging him on how he deals with rookies. I did say that if he needs to be evaluated on how young players are developed through this year. Is it the only function worth considering? I did not say that it should be. With a team that as early as sometime next year have up to 8 position players and 3 starting pitchers as well as a couple of relievers with careers that would have as yet nowhere near reached a ceiling it would be prudent to have confidence that your field staff is going to get the most out of them. It is not the sole function of the manager worth considering. If he can't do that function, I really don't think the rest matter. I would love to hear your argument for retaining a system that doesn't develop players that you are advocating as you continue to make me think my point is meaningless.

The argument has been the same one the whole thread. Judge Gardenhire on the forward progress of what is going to be part of your team of the near future. I am afraid to say anything more than that as that seems to set off a semantics debate and the point seemed lost. I think the why was covered earlier.

Whatever. Pick, Nitpick, Forget the concept and bicker

That is your opinion on my motive. So define struggle so as to say Arcia, Parmelee, Plouffe, Gibson have not fit that at times this season and very well might finish the season that way. The point you forgot was that going forward on a young team you want the staff to be able to work and improve them. Considering within the next two years the old players on the team may well only be Nolasco Perkins and Mauer , if I am trying to figure out if Gardenhire is still the manager for a young team I don't really care how he manages older players in decline. How does he bring up the younger ones. That will be the core of the team. That to me what is important.

Sorry, thought superior pitcher would be known to all as Santana. I am suprised some did not ask if I was refering to Boof.

I forgot Arcia. I looked at the young players, not players that would probably be in the minors, not established veterans, and not too concerned with players that would not be here in 2 years. Sorry it wasn't clearer to you. The concern though was for the development of young players. Hughes was still mentioned to have upside. In considering other players currently on the roster I thought the players with minimal big leauge time that were over 30 would not be in the plans for the Twins, thus their development not as much of a concern. Their purpose with the club is placeholder. That is also why I ignored Fuld's career year that he is having. It is inconsequential to the future. Established or injured veterans it is about health and maintaining, not developing. At the end of the year, I really don't know if the answer is going to be yes for a few of the players I mentioned and Arcia for if they have developed and improved. My list was not cherry picked.

Aren't AAAA players the ones that have done very well at AAA level baseball but do not have the what it takes to be in the majors?

@ Bombo 25 man roster It was nowhere near static for the other 20 players. IIRC it takes 9 position players as well as 5 starters for the season. There is also a designated hitter. A new 2b and SS every year . Koskie left after 04. They have been trying a new 3b out almost every year since. Radke was pretty much done before the 2006 play off series. Whaat decent number two starter has there been since? Carlos Silva of a career ERA that makes KC look good was the number 3 starter. You are correct that the 5 played together for those years. Of those year 2006 was the only year that Mauer played in the playoffs. He did not hit very well that year.

For the last 3 years, since that appears to be the complaint Were Denard Span and Ben Revere a better players here because of the coaching or other factors? Has any of the boderline pitchers brought through the last few years caught on anywhere at the major league level? Nobody else's ideas seemed to work. At the end of the year you can ask has Hughes, Gibson, Escobar, Parmelee, Plouffe, Santana and Dozier made progress. If the GM's answer is no, then it is time for a change.

What 2 years did the Twins have a starting pitching staff that you would trade even up for Tampa's? Zobreist, Longoria, Upton, Crawford, and even Jennings would not be listed as more inferior to the Twins players at the time as compared to the superiority in the pitching

How many other years was a team patched together? Yep, one year they had one superior pitcher. Takes a few more than that to win a series.

Championships won as a basis to keep a job? There are a whole lot of teams that have been good over the last few years that have not won a championship. Oakland comes to mind. Should they be cleaning house? Bean had a 5 year period where they did not win. Did they can him? No

Change for the sake of change produces nothing. Reread the manager changes previous mentioned. The problem with your argument is that you argue for change with no real reason. It is not based on the manager skills. It is based on an a notion with no basis. He does not have a job for life. If he does not get performances that the players are deemed capable of by the GM, Gardy is gone. If he makes flawed an uncorrectable decisions, he is gone. The results that are measured are not the wins and losses, but the performance of the people he directs. That being said, if and when they do fire (push to retire) Gardy, the line will be Gardy has run his course, it is time for a change, etc. The change will occur when they feel that Gardy is not doing an optimal job. If the powers that be decide that Anderson is the problem and Gardy insists Anderson is not, then Gardy is gone. 3 losses in the LDS and 1 WS loss in 6 years with teams that were superior to what the Twins had , I would not put Maddon in the brilliant category.

Salcedo, Santana, Arcia and Liam Hendricks were all signed bt Ryan as IFA. So it comes down to the money. That 3.15 for Sano was less than the orgional price that Sano expected. There were teams that thought the family was not being truthful about his age. The 3.15 was a bargain compared to estimates, so it would be easy to see Ryan liking a bargain. At the time it was the second largest contract given to a Latin American player. One hopes that he turns out playing better than the 1st place finisher has so far.

Rather than eating alfalfa you could be trying to choke down tumbleweed. Is Renteria getting any better results than Sveum? Brad Mills to Bo Porter, is there a difference in outcome there? Jery Manual to Terry Collins for the Mets? The futility continues there. Are the problems the Phillies are having due to Sandburg being there rather than Manual. In case you are missing the point, bad teams are not made better by changing the manager. The Royals won 14 more games last year than the year before. What made Yost a better manager? He had to lean how to spell Santana and Shields for the line up card. 5 seasons or so ago, Gardenhire was manager of the year. Other than winning and in some cases no longer being young, what are the players doing differently now?