KirbyDome89

How else are they going to acquire front end starters or pitchers who at least have that potential? Yes, it's a risk but the Twins aren't paying for that pitching in FA. They don't have anybody right now that projects as a strong front end starter, and they have 0 history of developing any pitcher like that.

You seemed pretty comfortable writing him off due to injuries, Idk how to take that other than he's a bust to this point. Agreed, they would've taken heat. I think we can also agree that this FO isn't making decisions based on fan/media approval ratings (they shouldn't be.) I understand it's an unpopular opinion but honestly Idk how this can be a "win." Dozier can walk after next season. If the idea is to trade him, his market was lukewarm after a career year last season, and I don't see the Twins suddenly getting an offer that'll blow them away this offseason coming off a lesser season and with one less year of control. They NEED pitching. Not just back end rotation pieces signed in FA. Those guys might get them to a one game wild card or even the ALDS but they aren't winning playoff series with rotations like that. We've watched the Twins waste MVP and Cy Young talent with subpar rosters. I don't want to see a promising young core exit the playoffs early or fail to make them altogether, because the pitching staff is a disaster. They had a moveable piece at a position of depth and they had a chance to bring in a pitcher with front end rotation potential. I get that I'm in the minority here, but unless they're giving up prospects (which they'll need to keep unless they're planning on a KC like contention window) they aren't going to acquire those types of pitchers, and certainly not for that many years of control. Is it a "win," in the short term? Yes, they made the one game wild card and Dozier was a big part of that but I'm not putting a ton of stock in that. A short playoff appearance this season was a pleasant/unexpected surprise but it shouldn't mask just how uphill the climb to building a playoff caliber rotation is. I feel like they missed out on a chance to do that.

The Twins pitching is horrible and there isn't a ton of help on the way. I get that everybody is thrilled by making the one game WC but if anything that game showed just how far behind the Twins are in terms of pitching. Hell, their "ace," couldn't get past the second inning. They can't rely on a young core to drag a staff that sports a revolving door at the 4 and 5 spots for an entire season. If they moved on from a 2B coming off a career year that very likely will never be repeated and they snagged a pitching prospect who at worse projects to be one of the FA "options," the Twins are looking to hand 12-15 million a year I can't get too upset. Everybody rages about SSS on here but we're now sure JDL is a bust? I hope not making the move for JDL does turn out to be the right decision, but I feel like if you're calling this a "win," already it's more because you want it to be.

How comfortable is anybody with any of the current starting pitchers in a playoff game? Make a serious run at a front end starter either in FA of via trade. If the Twins won't do that (very likely) then I agree that I would rather see them use the money to build a pen. I'm not particularly thrilled about pouring money into a bullpen and hoping a patchwork rotation can get to a "not terrible," level but I think it's a better option than committing $18 - 20 million for multiple years to another back end starter.

You haven't addressed it...in fact all you've done is drone on about Doug's popularity and how it supposedly invalidates the criticism for the way the firing was handled. You keep hiding behind the "this is how the corporate world works," mantra when it's widely accepted that professional sports do not operate under the same guidelines.

Um, you do realize this is a straw man and doesn't address any of the sentiment in my posts, do you not?

Then I guess we'll disagree on who ultimately made the decision to part ways. Falvey is setting the guidelines for running minor league teams as he should. He made the decision to move Doug down a level last winter. I can't see any way in which the decision to let him go was coming mostly from Steil and Falvey simply gave the nod. Call it old school, but if you're going to pass the sentence on a guy who had been in the organization for as long as Doug had, you should swing the sword. Not calling irked me; I understand the "chain of command," everybody is falling back on but businesses have a choice regarding how to handle those situations. I had a much larger issue with the lack of an explanation. IMO it doesn't get much more disrespectful to a former employee to tell them "don't come back, and you don't need to know why."

You believe that Falvey played no part in the decision other than to say "ok?"

So Doug is the most recognizable of the bunch? In no way does that invalidate anything I've said....

It has already been stated a few times in this thread; Doug wasn't the clubhouse batboy, he managed one of a few minor league teams affiliated with the Twins. So, can we stop with the "every firing is a poor decision hyperbole?". It isn't about "fame," it's about somebody who had given years of time with the organization and had reached a high level position. Whether you agree or disagree with his coaching or development approach, he deserved better than a call from Steil and no elaboration on why he wasn't being retained. The same applies to Rasmussen and any other long tenured, high ranking individual who is released from the organization.

Individuals skip levels of command in the corporate world. It happens. Sports is an entirely different animal than the corporate world. Look no further than the team chasing the Twins for the 2nd wild card spot. Scioscia ran their GM out of LA because of his relationship with the owner. If Falvey wanted to make the call he could have. Period. He chose not to; I think that was a poor decision.

I'll grant you that scenario may have played out in that exact manner, but the decision is ultimately Falvey's. The evaluation by Steil follows Falvey's guidelines and I think we can all agree Falvey's assessment of Doug played a large part in his "non-retention," as well. Falvey's fingerprints are all over everything related to Doug being let go except the call to inform him. IMO a call from the person making the decision and an explanation for the rationale behind it is warranted. I think Craig said it perfectly earlier; maybe the issue is that this format for releasing employees is accepted as commonplace.

In the right system, with the right coaches and players around him he looked like a top 5 QB for a while. But, that hasn't been Kaepernick the past few seasons. In reality he's a tough fit for many teams based on the offenses they run. Who knows what kind of money or deal he's looking for, but he has meet with multiple teams and nothing has come of it. I can't imagine the impasse is caused only by one side. His political activism absolutely is part of the reason he hasn't found a team, but it certainly isn't the only factor even though articles like Souhan's portray it as such. Agreed completely on his right to kneel. Like it or not he had the right to use the platform he had. I do think some of that same understanding should be shown to teams that decide not to give him that platform.

I'm not arguing for keeping Doug or letting him go. My quote was in response to a post that said Falvey or Levine calling Doug would be micromanaging and going over middle management's head. I disagreed with that take.

They aren't undermining his job duties. They're his bosses. I can't imagine this decision was made and executed by only Steil.

Wasn't everybody hoping they would come in and make sweeping changes in an organization that desperately needed it? How does letting the massive amount of the old guard still with the Twins continue to operate as they had in the past fix anything?

I see much more criticism of the way he was let go rather than the fact the Twins decided not to keep Doug around. He should be pissed about being fired. I don't anybody who wouldn't. What I don't understand are the comments that his anger is somehow "evidence of his true character," and therefore the Twins needed to let him go. I'm also not sure how his actions during his tenure as a player have any relevancy in the decision to keep him around as a minor league manager. If Doug wasn't willing to go in a direction that the organization felt was necessary then firing him was the right decision. Did the Twins owe it to him for Falvey and/or Levine to call or to give him an explanation out the door? No, but that doesn't mean the situation was handled well.

This is the only post I've seen in multiple threads that brings up fat shaming. That isn't the reason the article is drawing criticism. I have the same issues with the piece as a majority of other posters do: it's a hot take article filled with unsupported claims, and it was published at a convenient time in order to elicit a specific reaction.

So we're certain that Sano isn't at a healthy weight? All I see so far is speculation that he isn't and somehow that is enough to uphold the article and support the claims about about his recovery time.

Why do people think that at 34, Mauer is suddenly going to turn into something he has never been.

The point is that his performance rating has trended down. I don't think it's a coincidence that has occurred following the implementation of a new grading system. Players have made it clear for years, and now there are team and league executives making public statements about his performance to go along with his newly diminished grade(s). I doubt all of that occurs simply because Hernandez might be an a**hole.

"The complaint alleges Hernandez received positive evaluations for most of his big league career, which began in 1993, but says "following Torre's arrival in Major League Baseball's front office in 2011, the notion that Hernandez `just wanted to be noticed' permeated Hernandez's yearly evaluations, as did Torre's general negative attitude towards Hernandez." Torre's response was that Hernandez needs to "gain greater mastery of the official playing rules and replay regulations, continue to improve situation management, and display an ability to refocus and move forward after missing calls or receiving constructive feedback from the office." If his grading isn't declining then why is it a key part of his lawsuit? To me those statements make it clear his evaluations began to reflect his reputation. You're going to have to show me where I called for him to leave the game; that was Kinsler. You can't take the word of a vast majority of players that deal with him on a daily basis because they're biased. A FO executive (mentioned in the OP article btw) who has to remain anonymous or risk being fined isn't valid because of the anonymity. I'm not sure what your issue with Joe Torre's stance is. Are you being objective or just obstinate? I realize you aren't defending him, and you're punching holes in the "evidence," but the standard you've set (personally reading over MLB evaluations) is unreachable. If reporting, polling of players, FO executive comments from both a MLB and team level aren't enough to satisfy you that's fine. Personally I have a hard time believing he can accidentally earn such a poor reputation across that much of baseball.

There is chatter from the catcher or hitter, or dugout on nearly every pitch so we'll disagree on whether a gray area exists for questioning balls and strikes. I don't believe the umpire grades are made public but if I'm wrong feel free to dig. https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/umpire-angel-hernandez-sues-mlb-alleging-racial-discrimination/ His decline in grades are mentioned in nearly every article I read regarding his lawsuit. Being consistently voted one of if not the worst umpire in baseball by all players isn't a small feat. Like I said previously, it isn't just the players, FO members of teams and obviously MLB executives all seem to share the opinion that he isn't doing his job well. I think it's hard to look at that type of consensus across three different levels of MLB and say it's simply bias.

It isn't just missing calls. How would you describe a situation where an umpire's skin is so thin that a comment results in an ejection and affects a game? He hasn't graded well since the system was revamped under Joe Torre. It isn't just Kinsler who has an issue with him. A quarter of the players voted him as the single worst umpire in the game a few years back and he has consistently ranked at the bottom since. If there are executives, players, and a grading system that all say he's doing a poor job then yeah, I think that's enough data. This isn't a he said/she said, it's what Hernandez said vs. the truth.

The point of calling him out publicly is to hopefully force some change. Hernandez acting like a head case and missing calls isn't a recent development. Clearly "private discussion," isn't getting anything done in terms improving his on field antics or his performance. Umpires don't have to worry about calling out poor players because they don't last in the league for 20+ years. That's kind of the point of all of this. You're comparing apples and oranges. The two jobs are completely different. Nobody buys the "if I did this at my job," argument when applying a work situation to MLB. The umpire vs. player debate should be no different.