Interesting interview with Terry Ryan

[adjacent]

I'm a pretty big fan that he's willing to accept responsibility. That seems lost these days. That said, this is a rebuilding effort and you cannot just snap your fingers and it's done. The biggest mistake he made this season was the CF/Bartlett situation, but I don't think that miraculously transforms this team into a 90 win team. He's righting the ship in the minors, for that reason alone I'd keep him around another year... not so sure when the team gets good, but when it comes to building a farm, Ryan knows what he's doing.

I don't know if we can't put the blame on him about the Barlett snafu. He was dealing with a very serious health issue at that time.

[tobi0040]

We do know, and his hands were absolutely tied his entire first tenure. The economics of baseball changed after the 1994 strike. Why do you think MacPhail left?

 

 

 

Of course they were, I am surprised that we are debating this frankly.

 

 

Regarding the Santana thing, from my source inside the Twins office.  Many of the trades that were reported, including any deal involving Lester or Clay were never on the table.

 

 

Was Johan a great pitcher?  Yes, but a team needed to give up their best prospects AND turn around and give a 29 year old a 7 year deal at $140M or whatever.  So basically we had 3 teams to negotiate with and a year later, CC could have been signed without giving up any prospects at all. 

 

 

Given that, we still got one of the best CF in the league in the trade.

[TheLeviathan]

I cannot believe anyone is trying to spin the Santana thing as anything but bungled.

 

If we can't criticize Ryan for that we should just close this thread and ban criticism of him from henceforth.  Good gravy.

[gunnarthor]

I cannot believe anyone is trying to spin the Santana thing as anything but bungled.

 

If we can't criticize Ryan for that we should just close this thread and ban criticism of him from henceforth.  Good gravy.

Because he didn't trade Santana. Good gravy indeed.  He also didn't extend him to a team crippling deal, which is what Santana's side wanted.  

[Mike Sixel]

We do know, and his hands were absolutely tied his entire first tenure. The economics of baseball changed after the 1994 strike. Why do you think MacPhail left?

 

What I remember is Ryan always saying this:

 

"the Pohlads have never turned me down when I asked to spend money" or something like that......

 

I think it is presumptuous to believe we know what the budget was, or what the owners said he could or could not do.

 

either way, the point is, the guys he signed during those years were bad. really. bad.

 

I'm done with this, though. It isn't going anywhere. brock and I agree, others agree differently, no one is likely to change their mind.

[bird]

 

birdwacher's best post ever. he should probably retire right now,

 

seriously, I agree with every word here. Every. Single. Word.

best post ever? back that up with some stats. provide links.

[drjim]

I think this is spot on. The Twin's farm system "atrophied" to middle of the pack status. It has never been as bad as Detroit's, Chicago's, or the A's systems are right now. Several factors contributed to the system reaching its low point. The draft order was the biggest culprit, but not the only one by far. Ryan's share of the blame for that is not large, IMO. And since then, the budget's gotten much bigger, the whole department is clicking, and the draft order will be favorable for the 4th year in a row. Which means Ryan's soon in line to get TOO much credit.

 

The problem that led to the Santana debacle and other such catastrophes is still there IMO. The lack of a disciplined and strategic approach to managing player assets is Ryan's Achilles Heal in my view. It's been masked by his accomplishments at getting something for fringe assets like Hollins and Fuld. 

 

Just want to say great post. I 100% agree with the last paragraph, though I would call it his biggest weakness instead of his Achilles Heel - I'm not sure his weakness in that area is fatal when balanced against his other strengths. But he does need to have other people around him who are better at that, and I'm not certain he does.

 

I really have two main complaints when I think of the rebuild so far. The first is that I don't think they were aggressive enough in pursing former failed prospects and give them a chance to rebuild some value when there was reps to be had. A great example is Schafer recently, but that is something he should have been doing more of since he first took over.

 

The second, and that really builds on your point, is that he wasn't as strategic in his free agent signings as he could have been in the sense that he should have been more willing to sign guys who he tried to rebuild value and then flip, especially pitchers. (In my opinion this is the biggest difference between the Cubs and Twins as I compare their rebuilds). In the grand scheme it might not have mattered, if the players never regained value, but it was worth the effort.

 

In his somewhat defense, I would admit there were some mitigating circumstances. The major league roster that he inherited (especially pitching) was such a mess within a year that his top priority was doing what he could just to avoid complete and utter despair that the top priority was stabilizing it to even a semblance of competence before being too strategic. But of course he didn't really get that done until perhaps now (and it is still bad), so he probably should have just tried to sign guys to trade them and collect assets.

[TheLeviathan]

Because he didn't trade Santana. Good gravy indeed.  He also didn't extend him to a team crippling deal, which is what Santana's side wanted.  

 

Unless he was a psychic about the later injury that has nothing to do with lowballing the best pitcher in baseball and destroying leverage to make moves.  

 

My issue isn't the results of the trade, it was the Kahnsian bungling of the situation that led up to the trade.

[tobi0040]

Unless he was a psychic about the later injury that has nothing to do with lowballing the best pitcher in baseball and destroying leverage to make moves.  

 

My issue isn't the results of the trade, it was the Kahnsian bungling of the situation that led up to the trade.

 

Leviathan, why don't you go back and look at the free agents from 2001 to 2010.  You get a budget of $3M to spend from 2001 to 2005.  $4M from 2006 to 2010.  In some of these years I am guessing he had no money because payroll was going up through arbitration for the whole team and many of the moves needed to be made to lower payroll, not add to it.

 

Then you get $10M to spend from 2012 to 2014.  

 

Look at the Twins holes that year and allocate resources appropriately.  Lastly, since you get the benefit of hindsight, please put together a summary of how many players were signed in that dollar range.  That way we can say Terry had a 5, 10, 20% or whatever chance at getting that decision right.

[drjim]

What I remember is Ryan always saying this:

 

"the Pohlads have never turned me down when I asked to spend money" or something like that......

 

I think it is presumptuous to believe we know what the budget was, or what the owners said he could or could not do.

 

either way, the point is, the guys he signed during those years were bad. really. bad.

 

I'm done with this, though. It isn't going anywhere. brock and I agree, others agree differently, no one is likely to change their mind.

 

Imagine that, a GM who publicly supports and defends his owner.

 

If your point was that Ryan did a poor job signing free agents (which I agree with), that is probably better proven than through comparing him to actions before the 1994 strike. You might as well say he didn't sign as good of free agents as the Yankees during the 2000s.

[drjim]

Unless he was a psychic about the later injury that has nothing to do with lowballing the best pitcher in baseball and destroying leverage to make moves.  

 

My issue isn't the results of the trade, it was the Kahnsian bungling of the situation that led up to the trade.

 

You honestly don't think concerns about Santana holding up entered into their hesitancy to offer a long extension?

[TheLeviathan]

Leviathan, why don't you go back and look at the free agents from 2001 to 2010.

 

Because I don't intend to indulge that fallacy.  Hopefully everyone will start ignoring those sorts of challenges - they aren't relevant.

[TheLeviathan]

You honestly don't think concerns about Santana holding up entered into their hesitancy to offer a long extension?

 

Oh absolutely, we all know Ryan was wary of long-term pitching contracts.  (Not incorrectly to his credit)

 

But if that's the case than you don't offer him anything and you deal him.  You don't slap him in the face with an offer, refuse to further negotiate, and then drop it in the lap of a new GM.  That's all but holding a press conference to announce to the league that you're not going to hold on to him and NEED to move him.

 

I'm not making the Kahn comparison lightly.  From the moment that awful extension was offered this mess started.  Just like minutes after the extension with Love was signed.  There was just no LeBron to save the leverage for the Twins.

[tobi0040]

Because I don't intend to indulge that fallacy.  Hopefully everyone will start ignoring those sorts of challenges - they aren't relevant.

 

If anyone wants to say Terry Ryan is "not good" at free agency, they should walk through that exercise because that absolutely, without a doubt was the reality of 2001 to 2010 and 2012 to 2014.  Maybe the budget was $20M in 2014 or whatever to fill about 12 holes.  But the reality is Terry was cutting payroll from 2001 to 2010 or whenver he left.  Arbitration or the one or two contracts he had were higher than the budget he was given.

 

I am also one that believes critcism should be accompanied by a better solution.  So far I have not seen any on the free agent front.  Not one.

[drjim]

Oh absolutely, we all know Ryan was wary of long-term pitching contracts.  (Not incorrectly to his credit)

 

But if that's the case than you don't offer him anything and you deal him.  You don't slap him in the face with an offer, refuse to further negotiate, and then drop it in the lap of a new GM.  That's all but holding a press conference to announce to the league that you're not going to hold on to him and NEED to move him.

 

I'm not making the Kahn comparison lightly.  From the moment that awful extension was offered this mess started.  Just like minutes after the extension with Love was signed.  There was just no LeBron to save the leverage for the Twins.

 

That's fair, and I generally agree, but he was probably in the position that he didn't want to pay him but he also wanted to keep him and try to win in 2007 (and perhaps even 2008). It would have been tough to trade him after the 2006 season but perhaps he should have.

 

I would also say that the Santana situation was probably what drove him out of the game.

[TheLeviathan]

I would also say that the Santana situation was probably what drove him out of the game.

 

I think you're right, I feel like I remember it being heavily rumored that player negotiations had worn him down.

 

It was a hard choice to make with Santana, especially given his well founded concerns about pitcher contracts.  Even still, his approach seriously hurt the team's position.  Getting a better haul for Santana may have totally changed the face of this franchise and he undermined it with some really awful negotiating tactics.

[jokin]

 But of course he didn't really get that done until perhaps now (and it is still bad), so he probably should have just tried to sign guys to trade them and collect assets.

 

Yup.  That was my biggest complaint in the Ryan Era,  sign and flip tactics, gives you the cover for fielding a team that ensures you will at least have a prayer of projecting a semblance more requisite for the major leagues rather than the St  Paul Saints.  Major miss on Ryan's part for not laying out a better plan with plenty of available dollars for acquiring the Scott Kazmirs, Scott Feldmans and Paul Maholms of the world- which was baffling, as Ryan has demonstrated the ability to extract value from low-end expendables and seemingly could have done even better with higher end rented talent.

[tobi0040]

I think you're right, I feel like I remember it being heavily rumored that player negotiations had worn him down.

 

It was a hard choice to make with Santana, especially given his well founded concerns about pitcher contracts.  Even still, his approach seriously hurt the team's position.  Getting a better haul for Santana may have totally changed the face of this franchise and he undermined it with some really awful negotiating tactics.

 

I am confused.  I thought we got a center fielder with an .800+ OPS, on 24 HR and 40 SB last year...an outside shot at 30-30 this year.

[tobi0040]

Yeah, can you believe we got that for a guy that can't even get out of the Orioles farm system this year!  Wow!

 

The distinctions about the Johan mistakes have been very clear and your response is a complete scarecrow.

 

The premise is Ryan's actions were a destruction of value.  The fact is, we got one of the best CF in the game.

 

If Gomez was on our team doing that we would not be having this conversation.  The decision to promote and keep Gomez up here for 2 years when he needed to work on his game in the minors, changing his approach, etc. were not on Terry Ryan.  Sorry that is inconvenient for your theory, but it is true.

[TheLeviathan]

The premise is Ryan's actions were a destruction of value.  The fact is, we got one of the best CF in the game.

 

No, it was not.  It was the destruction of leverage.  What value could have been had with actual leverage is impossible to know because, well, Ryan destroyed it at the time.

[tobi0040]

Yeah, can you believe we got that for a guy that can't even get out of the Orioles farm system this year!  Wow!

 

Your confusion may stem from the fact that we're talking about the situation created at the time of the trade, not the results.  Your response is effectively a scarecrow, one that no one is even remotely discussing.

 

He was a 21 year old in AAA with 5 tool potential.  That potential has been realized and he is a star in this league.  You are overblowing the situation to a huge degree. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

Honesty as Ryan demonstrated in that quote is not uncommon as it is strategically the right thing to say.  However it wasn't just honest, it was extremely frank. 

 

Usually such statements are hedged with auxillary comments like "I like the direction this club is heading" or "We have a solid foundation to build on now."  Those kind of comments always tend to sound like passive excuses to me. 

 

None of those self-serving qualifiers were here though, just a flat out statement that his team is losing too much and no one deserves unconditional job security.  Much respect from me Mr. Ryan.

Although, on the other hand, it's fairly easy to be frank about this stuff when ownership has your back to this extent.

[Linus]

I think some people are simply unrealisitic in their expectations for general managers.  This isn't a video game where things always are perfect.

 

Frankly, I appreciate that he will speak openly about things.  Most GMs don't say anything or offer up cliches and platitudes - he could have not answered the question and this lengthy thread would never have existed.

[Mike Sixel]

Imagine that, a GM who publicly supports and defends his owner.

 

If your point was that Ryan did a poor job signing free agents (which I agree with), that is probably better proven than through comparing him to actions before the 1994 strike. You might as well say he didn't sign as good of free agents as the Yankees during the 2000s.

 

Are you saying it isn't true, and he was obfuscating? that the pohlads did turn him down, that he wanted to spend more, but couldn't?

[tobi0040]

It was a catastrophic loss in trade value thanks to the leverage.  The situation we dealt Johan in was no longer a bidding war - that in and of itself is a tremendous loss of value.

 

You can stop with the fallacy, I have no interest in it.  You can refer to earlier posts about the fallacious nature.

 

I think you dramtically overstate the market for a 29 year old pitcher demanding $140M and a team demanding top prospects to go along with it.  By some reports, the Red Soz and Yankees were not really interested, rather wanted to bid the other up.  The Yankee owner even stated that he wasn't interested in both handing out that kind of money and giving up Hughes and Kennedy.  We got a huge upside guy that turned out to be a stud, that is a fact. 

 

At the end of the day, no GM "would be good with free agents" given the budget he has had and situation (rebuild).  That is a fact and that is why you can't go through the exercise.  Even with hindsight of injuries, etc. it would be very hard to pick guys we can all sit here and be happy about.  The real fallacy is that Terry could be good with free agents given his situation.

[jokin]

 

 

.  Most GMs don't say anything or offer up cliches and platitudes - 

 

Or maybe TR just saves his "better than his numbers", "consistency" and "prepared" platitudes and cliches when signing FAs and publicly considering promotion of his very best pitching prospects?

[TheLeviathan]

I think you dramtically overstate the market for a 29 year old pitcher demanding $140M and a team demanding top prospects to go along with it.  

 

I'm dramatically overstating the value of the best pitcher in baseball?

 

So much so that we should be thrilled with getting a prospect package that featured no one ranked in the top 50 in baseball?  And less than a year removed from Freddy Garcia netting Gavin Floyd and Gio Gonzalez.  Or the massive haul Texeira landed Texas?

 

Cmon, Terry Ryan is a good GM and I like him for many, many reasons.  We'd have been better off if he had stayed as well IMO.  But defending his handling of the Santana negotiations this hard?  To me that just means we're at an impasse that I can't wrap my head around.

[Linus]

Or maybe TR just saves his "better than his numbers", "consistency" and "prepared" platitudes and cliches when signing FAs and publicly considering promotion of his very best pitching prospects?

Whether you like his responses or not really isn't the issue.  He's giving his views in areas that most GMs simply won't address.

[tobi0040]

I'm dramatically overstating the value of the best pitcher in baseball?

 

So much so that we should be thrilled with getting a prospect package that featured no one ranked in the top 50 in baseball?  And less than a year removed from Freddy Garcia netting Gavin Floyd and Gio Gonzalez.  Or the massive haul Texeira landed Texas?

 

Cmon, Terry Ryan is a good GM and I like him for many, many reasons.  We'd have been better off if he had stayed as well IMO.  But defending his handling of the Santana negotiations this hard?  To me that just means we're at an impasse that I can't wrap my head around.

 

1 - It is not that simple as he was the best pitcher.  He was 29 year old and demanding $140M and the Twins were demanding a teams best prospects.  If it was that simple no bidding war would have been needed.  The fact is the Dodgers could have given up a very young player by the name of Kershaw for him and they didn't want to.  We would have traded him to the Yankees for Hughes and they didn't want to.  We would have traded him for Lester or Clay and they didn't want to. If those teams thought those were wise moves they would not have needed to be goated into a bidding war in order to do it.  Right now, would the Cubs give up Kris Bryant for David Price, then pay Price $170M?  That seems like a very, very steep price.

 

2 - Literally only 3 teams in baseball were going to be able to sign him and by all accounts, the interest of two of those has been called into question.

 

3 - some scouts already started to see him slowing down, others suggested his body frame was not going tol hold up from 29-36.  They were right by the way.

 

This is silly, I will give you the last word and not respond.

[drjim]

Are you saying it isn't true, and he was obfuscating? that the pohlads did turn him down, that he wanted to spend more, but couldn't?

 

I would suspect his primary motivation was that he doesn't want to use the lack of payroll as an excuse while also deflecting criticism from his owner. Exactly like a good and honorable GM should do.

 

I think a payroll target is set that he can work with while having a little bit of flexibility if a good opportunity comes along. I also think the past two years he has operated below that payroll mark. I don't think he has the ability to blow past his payroll target by tens of millions of dollars even if he asks Pohlad nicely.