Article: The Painful Truth?

[Otto von Ballpark]

The Twins, OTH, expected to have Sano and Buxton until late in the offseason, but they also had other options, as we saw play out with May, Vargas, Santana, and a few others. So they took the same route of using FA to get Nolasco and Hughes, but Ryan decided against trades to further improve 2014, for better or for worse, depending on your viewpoint.

"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).

[bird]

"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?

[clone52]

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.

[Thrylos]

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. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

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 October 16, 2014 by spycake

[Linus]

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.....

[Secondary User]

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

[The Wise One]

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 October 17, 2014 by The Wise One

[Mike Sixel]

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.

[ashbury]

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.)