Article: The Twins' Cheapness Isn't The Problem; It's The Symptom

[MikeBates]

 

You know that's profoundly untrue. And insulting to boot....

 

Let's not promote any of these common false negatives, like that they don't care, or don't try, or they lie, or they lack ambition.

 

I'm not sure why you feel it's insulting. This isn't a referendum on you.

 

Nowhere did I say that they don't care or don't try. But I think there's a natural tendency not to rock the boat once you get too comfortable in a position. And I think that's where a lot of the Twins' front office lives. There's no one to impress anymore. There's no desperation. Again, that's my interpretation. You're welcome to disagree and to present counterexamples that might support your point.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

The Bill Smith era was a time of uncharacteristic risk taking for the franchise. Lengthy extensions for Mauer, Moreau, Cuddyer, Nathan, Baker and (gulp) Blackburn. Trading Santana, Garza, Gomez, Hardy and Ramos. Expensive international signings like Sano, Kepler and (gulp) Nishioka. Only in the draft did they play it safe, probably because they so rigidly held to recommended slot values. 4 years of riskier transactions, at the end of which a team that had been successful for a decade was in shambles.

 

Being risk averse to begin with, I'm not surprised that the Twins have had a reaction back toward "safer" moves, especially in the midst of the rebuild. But, like Bill, Mike and some other posters, I hope they'll have the guts to pay what it takes to fill roster holes with impactful additions now that their window of contention is opening again.

Their record at the end of the Bill Smith era was poor, but it's a great mis-representation to suggest that the organization was in "shambles" and that 4 years of aggressiveness undid a decade of solid work.  The Delmon, Hardy, and Capps deals were bad, and some other moves were questionable, but that 2011 club was snakebit.  Their farm system overall was pretty good, and they still had the makings of a solid team when healthy.

 

Not that I wanted Bill Smith in charge going forward.  We needed smart aggressiveness, not more roster moves suggested by Gardy and bounced off Antony.

[James]

 

I'm with you on Plouffe specifically, there wasn't any demand for 3B.

 

But I don't think the Twins are particularly tight-lipped about trades.  They're obviously not among the self-promoters of MLB, but I think the Twins only seem quiet because they almost exclusively fish in the waters fewer people care about.  For example, no teams were connected to Jepsen last summer at MLBTR, and that was our splashiest trade in years.  We heard a lot of pre-trade rumors when selling Morneau, Willingham, etc. too.  Similarly, our pursuits of certain FA (Hunter, Buehrle, etc.) were pretty well-documented, even if most of the time we were trying to strike quickly in the offseason so things didn't drag out.

You're right, we did hear a lot of pre-trade rumors about Morneau and Willingham and Liriano, but those were also obvious trade candidate.  All of them were on expiring contracts on a team that was pretty much already out of the playoff picture.  

 

From the other FA guys that we were pursuing, there is always a chance that this sort of info was leaked by the agents to help increase their players value.  But, it could have been leaked from the Twins FO.  There's no way of knowing.  I agree some stuff leaks out about the Twins and FAs though. 

 

A more recent example was the Hicks/Murphy trade.  That one had no trade buzz leading up to it.  So it could be reasonable to assume that they had also talked to teams about Plouffe during that time, but we really have no way of knowing. 

[Riverbrian]

Nolasco was necessary... Nolasco was impossible to escape.

 

The Twins had no choice at the time. Deduno was our best pitcher... We needed 5 starters. The Twins could not stand still because Deduno was our best pitcher at the time. They had to pay the price.

 

Tanaka was the top FA pitcher that year and the Yankees grabbed him for 155 million. The Twins can't spend 155 million on one pitcher when Deduno is your best pitcher and even if they did... It would most likely take more than 155 million to sign him because Deduno was your best pitcher and Tanaka would have preferred to pitch with others who can compete with him... At least you would imagine he would.

 

Also... It was a horrible FA SP class that year. Nolasco was near the top of the available pile.

 

I won't use Nolasco and Hughes as an example of conservative or bad decision making. Nolasco was an example of what has to happen when Deduno was your best pitcher the year before.

[Vanimal46]

This article is nice breath of fresh air. As fans we all like to point the finger at someone as to why the organization is run this way. It may all boil down to the culture set at the top. It's no secret that it's a very stable organization, with almost a country club type atmosphere. It can be a very bad thing (Cleveland Browns come to mind) when an organization changes direction, philosophy and voices too much. I'd argue it can be just as bad when the same voice and philosophy remains the same for too long.

I think complacent is a perfect word to describe the current status of the Twins. No one near the top of the hierarchy is in jeopardy of losing their job. When that's the case, who's pushing them to be better? And who's telling them to think outside the box and take chances? I can't imagine the Pohlad's are doing this. So when everything remains the status quo for so many years, why should we as fans expect different results? TR's comfortable doing the things he's doing, almost too comfortable.

TR does good things for this organization. He knows how to draft and develop talent, which is a good trait to have with a mid-market team. However, Mike Sixel said this well in the Not a TR fan thread, that I don't trust TR to be the closer when the team needs to be more aggressive to get them over the hump. I agree with what he says. 

I think right now would be a great time to find a young, hungry baseball executive and put a plan in place that he or she will take over as FT GM in the next 2 years. TR can teach his ways of scouting, development, and drafting, and the new person will have a more aggressive mentality when the time is right to do so.   

Edited February 24, 2016 by Vanimal46

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

A more recent example was the Hicks/Murphy trade.  That one had no trade buzz leading up to it.  So it could be reasonable to assume that they had also talked to teams about Plouffe during that time, but we really have no way of knowing. 

I thought of that one too, but ultimately it was a swap of role players that came immediately after the postseason ended.  Was there any advance buzz for the Yankees trade of Jose Pirela to the Padres that same day?

 

I'll take TR at his word that he didn't make Plouffe available, and give him credit for understanding there just wasn't a market for him.

[mazeville]

 

Now, don’t get me wrong, signing Hughes or Santana or, hell, even Nolasco isn’t enough to hamstring even a team that pretends they can’t spend money, like the Twins. However, Minnesota stacked these signings on top of one another, reducing their flexibility this year to the point where there isn’t room for more than one of higher-upside, lower-salary guys like Tyler Duffey, Trevor May or Jose Berrios in the starting rotation (and, even then, it probably necessitates shifting Nolasco to the bullpen).

 

This is perfect. I don't agree with everything in this, and would characterize the Twins' system as overly cautious and underaggressive. That is who Terry Ryan is. 

 

But the team's foray into free agency was both early and a mistake. They signed too many guys, blocking the way for younger, cheaper and higher-upside talent while effectively preventing the team, which is now a potential contender, from going out to get one guy who really could push the team over the top.

 

In any event, the team SHOULD have had a lower payroll in recent years while it stocked its roster with young talent. It should have made more aggressive moves of all sorts to stockpile young talent. And then, once that talent started to mature and produce results, it should have gone out into the free agent market to get a couple of guys who could put the team over the top. 

 

Instead, the Twins' efforts appear to be more of a scattered series of signings designed to assuage the masses. It just doesn't seem very well organized.

[TheLeviathan]

 

The Twins have a profound lack of ambition in virtually everything they do?

 

Really Mike? You know that's profoundly untrue. And insulting to boot.

 

 

It may be strongly worded, but I'm not sure it's profoundly untrue.  The team takes a "little engine that could" approach and seems perfectly willing to just sit back.  Most of what you went on to say is exactly the point being driven at here.  

 

The team is determined to win, I believe that about them.  But I think they count wins 3 years ahead at the expense of wins in the present and that does require a lot of complacency.  

Edited February 24, 2016 by TheLeviathan

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Nolasco was necessary... Nolasco was impossible to escape.

The Twins had no choice at the time. Deduno was our best pitcher... We needed 5 starters. The Twins could not stand still because Deduno was our best pitcher at the time. They had to pay the price.

Tanaka was the top FA pitcher that year and the Yankees grabbed him for 155 million. The Twins can't spend 155 million on one pitcher when Deduno is your best pitcher and even if they did... It would most likely take more than 155 million to sign him because Deduno was your best pitcher and Tanaka would have preferred to pitch with others who can compete with him... At least you would imagine he would.

Also... It was a horrible FA SP class that year. Nolasco was near the top of the available pile.

I won't use Nolasco and Hughes as an example of conservative or bad decision making. Nolasco was an example of what has to happen when Deduno was your best pitcher the year before.

That same FA SP class featured Ervin Santana.  I remember his original demands were high, but I wonder if we made an early offer to him, and what it was.  By March, we had a rumored 3/33 offer to him before he took the one-year deal with the Braves -- maybe if we had been more aggressive on him earlier, we could have signed him to, say, a 4/65 deal and not bothered with Nolasco?  The increased cost would have been offset by getting Santana's age 31 season instead of the age 35 season we eventually guaranteed him.

 

And don't confuse the original Hughes contract with the extension.  The original Hughes deal was fantastic.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

That same FA SP class featured Ervin Santana.  I remember his original demands were high, but I wonder if we made an early offer to him, and what it was.  By March, we had a rumored 3/33 offer to him before he took the one-year deal with the Braves -- maybe if we had been more aggressive on him earlier, we could have signed him to, say, a 4/65 deal and not bothered with Nolasco?  The increased cost would have been offset by getting Santana's age 31 season instead of the age 35 season we eventually guaranteed him.

Yeah, there were other options. Santana and Garza were available that offseason. I liked picking up a decent starter, was unsure why they chose Nolasco over the other guys.

 

Though in all fairness, we still have no idea what a "good" Ricky Nolasco looks like. Ricky was coming off three consecutive 190+ inning seasons so we can't blame the Twins for choosing the guy who suddenly decided to turn injury prone.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I think right now would be a great time to find a young, hungry baseball executive and put a plan in place that he or she will take over as FT GM in the next 2 years. TR can teach his ways of scouting, development, and drafting, and the new person will have a more aggressive mentality when the time is right to do so.   

And the fact that they've never had a "baseball guy" in the #2 GM spot under TR is pretty good evidence of the other claims made here.  Heck, TR already retired once, saw the organization get messed up a bit with a non-baseball guy in command, came back with an interim tag, and later stepped aside briefly due to health reasons -- and we STILL haven't got a "baseball guy" in the #2 spot!

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Yeah, there were other options. Santana and Garza were available that offseason. I liked picking up a decent starter, was unsure why they chose Nolasco over the other guys.

 

Though in all fairness, we still have no idea what a "good" Ricky Nolasco looks like. Ricky was coming off three consecutive 190+ inning seasons so we can't blame the Twins for choosing the guy who suddenly decided to turn injury prone.

If it was just injury with Nolasco, I would be more understanding.  But it feels like more than that.  And he seems very un-Twins like in personality, which suggests the Twins indeed targeted him more out of desperation than aggressiveness, which is a bad way to operate in FA.

 

I get the impression they had the same basic offer out to multiple FA starters that winter, namely Nolasco, Santana, and Garza.  Nolasco was the first to sign, then the other offers came off the table (only to return later, modified/reduced).  Just knowing his history and upside, I probably would have put a lower offer out to Nolasco, closer to the Jason Vargas deal (4/32), and pushed harder to land Santana.  Better to get the guy you really want for a little more than you want to pay, than to get a guy you don't necessarily want for exactly what you are willing to pay.

[Steve Lein]

 

This topic is somewhat of the dead horse being whipped again.  Plouffe being traded for prospects that don't pan out turn into the "why did we trade Span/Revere/etc" argument.  There was no market for an average 3B, so we may as well keep him.  

 

I don't necessarily agree with all of this.

 

The Span/Revere/etc... argument had Aaron Hicks as the guy coming up to fill the void.

 

The Plouffe argument has Miguel Sano for that void.

 

One is considerably better than the other.

 

Answer me this, is the team better with:

 

Sano at 3B

Arcia in RF

Park/Vargas/Mauer for 1B/DH

+ whatever return could have been had for a package with prospects and Plouffe as the pieces (say: Polanco, Plouffe, Stewart, Walker as a starting point. I think that could get you something very useful)

 

or...

 

Plouffe at 3B

Sano in RF

Park/Vargas/Mauer for 1B/DH

 

Scenario A improves 3B, RF, and whatever the return might have been based on what they're going to go with now.

 

Scenario B does what exactly, to move the needle, based on the results of last year?

 

This is what I'm getting at with their propensity to think to small, and settle for what they have. I will say, next year may be the better year to pursue this, but that currently leaves this years team with the issues I already laid out.

 

 

 

 

[Jgcarew]

there's been no trade value in plouffe for 3 years.

Imagine the return you'd have gotten in 2012.

But who wanted to trade him then? I did. But so what.

Even cutting bait comes a cost. Prudent GMs are gems.

We are lucky to have one

[REPETE]

 

I don't necessarily agree with all of this.

 

The Span/Revere/etc... argument had Aaron Hicks as the guy coming up to fill the void.

 

The Plouffe argument has Miguel Sano for that void.

 

One is considerably better than the other.

 

Answer me this, is the team better with:

 

Sano at 3B

Arcia in RF

Park/Vargas/Mauer for 1B/DH

+ whatever return could have been had for a package with prospects and Plouffe as the pieces (say: Polanco, Plouffe, Stewart, Walker as a starting point. I think that could get you something very useful)

 

or...

 

Plouffe at 3B

Sano in RF

Park/Vargas/Mauer for 1B/DH

 

Scenario A improves 3B, RF, and whatever the return might have been based on what they're going to go with now.

 

Scenario B does what exactly, to move the needle, based on the results of last year?

 

This is what I'm getting at with their propensity to think to small, and settle for what they have. I will say, next year may be the better year to pursue this, but that currently leaves this years team with the issues I already laid out.

I concur 100%.  Assuming Sano can't play OF, which I'd say 97% of the earth's population is wary of, the team would be better off with scenario B.  However, having Plouffe for insurance, rather than trading him for a used ball bag, may turn out well.  Perhaps they move him in Spring training.  Perhaps they have their own injuries the require his services.  I'd much rather have Plouffe (who, for the record is a "nice" player, far from a "necessary" player) now, than settle for giving him away for less than market value.  Worst case, Sano goes to 3rd, and Plouffe becomes a bat off the bench.  I'd say that's a pretty decent PH, and no extra money was spent.    

[REPETE]

 

I don't necessarily agree with all of this.

 

The Span/Revere/etc... argument had Aaron Hicks as the guy coming up to fill the void.

 

The Plouffe argument has Miguel Sano for that void.

 

One is considerably better than the other.

 

Answer me this, is the team better with:

 

Sano at 3B

Arcia in RF

Park/Vargas/Mauer for 1B/DH

+ whatever return could have been had for a package with prospects and Plouffe as the pieces (say: Polanco, Plouffe, Stewart, Walker as a starting point. I think that could get you something very useful)

 

or...

 

Plouffe at 3B

Sano in RF

Park/Vargas/Mauer for 1B/DH

 

Scenario A improves 3B, RF, and whatever the return might have been based on what they're going to go with now.

 

Scenario B does what exactly, to move the needle, based on the results of last year?

 

This is what I'm getting at with their propensity to think to small, and settle for what they have. I will say, next year may be the better year to pursue this, but that currently leaves this years team with the issues I already laid out.

Sorry, scenario A, not B.  

[Brock Beauchamp]

If it was just injury with Nolasco, I would be more understanding. But it feels like more than that. And he seems very un-Twins like in personality, which suggests the Twins indeed targeted him more out of desperation than aggressiveness, which is a bad way to operate in FA.

 

I get the impression they had the same basic offer out to multiple FA starters that winter, namely Nolasco, Santana, and Garza. Nolasco was the first to sign, then the other offers came off the table (only to return later, modified/reduced). Just knowing his history and upside, I probably would have put a lower offer out to Nolasco, closer to the Jason Vargas deal (4/32), and pushed harder to land Santana. Better to get the guy you really want for a little more than you want to pay, than to get a guy you don't necessarily want for exactly what you are willing to pay.

Agreed.

[DocBauer]

Plouffe: like him, but thought he'd be gone. Not so sure he shouldn't be, for the best deal available and let the incumbent,Sano, take the job and find someone else to play RF or platoon RF. Actually, that would be the Twins way. But keeping Plouffe for now, while jamming up the works a bit, because he's insurance over unknowns just doesn't get me badly worked up.

 

Moves vs non moves: I don't think the team is complacent either, just risk adverse and a bit conservative in nature. Some of that isn't just Ryan, but years of actually being the little team that could playing in the dome. While the Twins will never have the finances of a NY, Boston, LA, Chicago, etc, they are no longer the sisters of the poor either.

 

The checkbook is bigger now. But I think they are still learning how to spend their new wealth. Nolasco was a solid signing. I can't play revisionist history now. But it didn't work, the Twins still lost, and maybe better moves with Hughes and Santana. If only you could go back in time!

 

The rebuild isn't totally done yet, but there have been trades, FA signings and promotions. I think we're close. And I think you will see more moves made to suplement. But I do feel as though they don't know yet exactly HOW to spend.

[HitInAPinch]

 

You can care, and try, but it is a scale, right? Not an on/off switch, it is a more like a dial. How far are they willing to turn the dial to 11, instead of 6, when they have a real chance to win?

Didn't they try that once with Tommy Herr?

[HitInAPinch]

Terry Ryan “adding, not subtracting”. 

[Jack Goin]

 

And the fact that they've never had a "baseball guy" in the #2 GM spot under TR is pretty good evidence of the other claims made here.  Heck, TR already retired once, saw the organization get messed up a bit with a non-baseball guy in command, came back with an interim tag, and later stepped aside briefly due to health reasons -- and we STILL haven't got a "baseball guy" in the #2 spot!

What's your definition of a "baseball guy"?

[alarp33]

 

What's your definition of a "baseball guy"?

 

Not Rob Antony, someone with a PR/media relations background. 

[Jack Goin]

 

Not Rob Antony, someone with a PR/media relations background. 

20 years in baseball ops doesn't count? Theo started in media relations. Jeff Lunhow was a consultant. AJ Preller who started as intern in the Phillies ticket office. Most people don't just get a job in baseball ops out of the shoot. There are not a lot of jobs available.

[Mike Sixel]

 

20 years in baseball ops doesn't count? Theo started in media relations. Jeff Lunhow was a consultant. AJ Preller who started as intern in the Phillies ticket office. Most people don't just get a job in baseball ops out of the shoot. There are not a lot of jobs available.

 

I have to say....I have no idea what Rob is good at, or not. But Jack is right. If people are going to argue for the Twins to be more advanced at math.....then you will have "non-baseball" people in the org, who become baseball people. There are things I don't agree with at Twinsland, where people start their careers is not one of them.

[alarp33]

 

20 years in baseball ops doesn't count? Theo started in media relations. Jeff Lunhow was a consultant. AJ Preller who started as intern in the Phillies ticket office. Most people don't just get a job in baseball ops out of the shoot. There are not a lot of jobs available.

 

A Yale alum in Theo Epstein is a tad different than someone who evaluates pitchers by W-L and couldn't tell you what BABIP stood for.  

 

Ignoring all of that, handing a GM job to the 2nd in command of an unsuccessful operation wouldn't seem to be progress at all.  

[alarp33]

 

I have to say....I have no idea what Rob is good at, or not. But Jack is right. If people are going to argue for the Twins to be more advanced at math.....then you will have "non-baseball" people in the org, who become baseball people. There are things I don't agree with at Twinsland, where people start their careers is not one of them.

 

Maybe its not fair to point where he started, but its fair to say he does not complement TR well... Ie; his lack of knowledge or understanding of advanced metrics. From the outside, I see him as more of a TR clone, minus the years of scouting experience. 

[Jack Goin]

 

Maybe its not fair to point where he started, but its fair to say he does not complement TR well... Ie; his lack of knowledge or understanding of advanced metrics. From the outside, I see him as more of a TR clone, minus the years of scouting experience. 

I think I've had this argument with you before so I am not going to have it again. Looking at your signature quote you have your mind made up. I'm sorry you feel that way. By the way, Theo's degree is in American Studies.

[bird]

 

I'm not sure why you feel it's insulting. This isn't a referendum on you.

 

Nowhere did I say that they don't care or don't try. But I think there's a natural tendency not to rock the boat once you get too comfortable in a position. And I think that's where a lot of the Twins' front office lives. There's no one to impress anymore. There's no desperation. Again, that's my interpretation. You're welcome to disagree and to present counterexamples that might support your point.

 

It's insulting to the ones accused, Mike. Leave me out of it please.

 

Had you used the language you chose in this reply, fine.  Although I take minor issue with it as well. 

 

But you said the Twins have a profound lack of ambition in virtually everything they do. Think about the meaning of this phrase for a second. It's insulting language, and not a fair description of their state of mind. You've been on TD enough to have read comments in the past that were equally unfair and insulting. I think this comment fits in snugly with all the "don't care don't try greedy deceitful" rhetoric we occasionally endure here.

 

 

I do take issue with your description above and would need some examples to be swayed. But first, I share a common belief with many here that the organization is too conservative and too risk-averse, but for me only moderately so. I believe that Terry Ryan does have certain bad tendencies. He has been stubbornly resistant to change in some areas, because he has a naturally high conviction level.  I'd change how much he seems to detest the possibility of getting into a bidding war, because my sense is it closes him off to opportunities. I'd like him to show less patience. I'd like him to demonstrate less loyalty to the "good guys" like Duensing and Pelfrey.

 

I think what's frustrating you is their operating philosophy. I don't believe it has anything at all to do with comfort level. I'm glad no one feels "desperation", which is a state of mind most likely to cause irrational acts and mistakes that can and have set franchises back for years. The organization thinks long term, practices fiscal discipline, and values stability. A profound lack of ambition? Nonsense.

 

There are "counterexamples" of ambitious and admirable risk-taking and innovative strategies adopted by the organization. Just as there are examples of the damage caused by risky decisions throughout baseball, including this organization. While I think they could occasionally take more risk, they take more than gets acknowledged. They just signed Wander Javier for $4M, risking their entire pool for the year. They rather ambitiously pursued Sano. They were early in Europe, early in Australia. They outbid teams for Park this winter.

 

My point is that we can take issue with how much risk they're taking, or how much urgency they're signaling without questioning something as fundamentally important as their level of ambition or calling them complacent.

Edited February 25, 2016 by birdwatcher

[USAFChief]

 

  By the way, Theo's degree is in American League Studies.

Wow, I must admit, I didn't even know Yale offered such a thing.  

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

20 years in baseball ops doesn't count? Theo started in media relations. Jeff Lunhow was a consultant. AJ Preller who started as intern in the Phillies ticket office. Most people don't just get a job in baseball ops out of the shoot. There are not a lot of jobs available.

Thanks for the response, Mr. Goin.

 

Bill Smith had 20 years in baseball ops too when he took over as GM, and 24 years experience when he was subsequently removed from that role.

 

In 2010, 15 years into Rob Antony's Twins baseball ops tenure (having become Director of Baseball Operations in 1995, before replacing Smith as assistant GM in 2007), when asked if he "were going to sign a free agent, would he go after the guy with a higher RBI total or slugging percentage, Antony replied that he would prefer the player with the higher RBI total." http://www.startribune.com/where-traditional-scouting-and-statistical-analysis-intersect/88615982/

 

Then in 2014, Antony was the acting GM during the Bartlett and Kubel reunion, featuring Dave St Peter's infamous tweet of amazement "at focus on 25th man on the roster", followed 3 weeks later by the sudden retirement of the club's interesting choice for said 25th man.

 

I am sure they are great people and hard workers who have done a lot of great things for Twins baseball behind the scenes, but you have to forgive me if I am skeptical about their ability to head the baseball side of the organization (again) in a post-TR world.