Article: With TR Gone, Can We Trust The Braintrust?

[Vanimal46]

 

What message do you think it sends to the rest of the organization if they hire internally?

 

What message do you think it sends to the rest of the organization if they hire externally?

For an internal hire if I were an employee I'd think not much is going to change. The culture remains status quo, and why wasn't I being considered for the role?

For an external hire if I were an employee I'd think man, maybe things are about to change around here. New person to impress, I better be on top of my game or else I may be a casualty with the new regime. 

[dxpavelka]

The answer to your question is that, like it or not, we have to.  Your other options are twofold.  1.  Become a fan of a different team.  2.  Buy the team.  I'm sensing most of us are not interested in option 1 and lack the financial wherewithal for option 2.  The other thing we have to do, again, like it or not, is not fret over Jim's statement that Molitor will be the manager for 2017.  Yes, if it were me, I would make a move there, but it's not me.  He said 2017, not forever.  The first thing a new GM, especially one from outside the organization, will need to do is evaluate what he has from top to bottom.  That will include the field manager.  If the guy we bring in is concerned that his long term sustainability and success are hinged on 2017 then we got the wrong guy.  Have not seen a lot of names thrown around but I'll go ahead and throw one out.  Randy Bush.

[Willihammer]

"Florimon is our shortstop"

"Sano is our RF"

"TR is our GM"

I'm guessing the new GM fires Molly halfway into 2017.

[Vanimal46]

 

"Florimon is our shortstop"
"Sano is our RF"
"TR is our GM"
I'm guessing the new GM fires Molly halfway into 2017.

"Nick Punto is my everything." - Ron Gardenhire

[Thrylos]

Can't disagree with much, other than calling Goin a "stat guru".   He is not Bill James you know  

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Being the one who conducted the original interview with Rob Antony in 2010, I probably should clarify several things. During a spring training visit in 2010, I attempted to get time with Terry Ryan. I was told that he was unavailable (like he typically is outside of his pre-game huddles) and that Antony would gladly answer my questions.

 

My point was to gauge what the level of knowledge was for baseball analytics inside the organization. In addition to some current event questions, I added a few questions from the book Behind-The Scenes Baseball (the Doug Decatur book discussed what life was like as an analytics “advisor” to several teams in 1984) which would be telling of the mindset of a team’s GM. Those questions were something like, does he prefer RBI to Slugging Percentage? Does the GM know basic advanced stats (I used FIP and BABIP as mine)? As you can see in the link above, Antony shaded toward the old-school mindset, not very familiar with what were, at the time, advanced stat concepts. To be sure, Antony readily acknowledged this short-coming as well, remarking that the organization definitely slanted old-school and mentioned that they had just hired a guy to focus solely on analytics (Jack Goin).

 

Shortly after publishing the interview, Aaron Gleeman shared it on his site and it gained national steam. I was told that there was definite unhappiness about the interview and how it portrayed Antony. In fact, I’m told that the Twins reached out to Gleeman to have him sit down with Antony so he could clarify his position on analytics. Later on, several members within the organization told me later that the interview prompted Antony to educate himself on a lot of those stats and concepts.

 

I haven’t had the opportunity to sit down one-on-one with Antony since the interview was published. I would love to sit down with him again and revisit some of those topics but let me make this much clear: I have been around him during his time leading the pre-game media huddles, I’ve read all of the TwinkieTown interviews with him over the past several years -- he’s a very sharp guy.

 

Would he make a good GM? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

Did Gleeman not sit down with him?  If so, that's rather disappointing.  Honestly, this is the first I've read this and that interview with Antony has been cited extensively here and elsewhere. This says more about the guy than anything else I've read. If anything, that he learns from his mistakes. 

 

It would be nice if he got that opportunity to clarify. He deserves that. 

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

For an internal hire if I were an employee I'd think not much is going to change. The culture remains status quo, and why wasn't I being considered for the role?

For an external hire if I were an employee I'd think man, maybe things are about to change around here. New person to impress, I better be on top of my game or else I may be a casualty with the new regime. 

 

Agree on the external hire, not so much on the internal.  Plenty of internal candidates can/will usher change. It might be more based on who the internal candidate was that would answer that question.

[alarp33]

 

Did Gleeman not sit down with him?  If so, that's rather disappointing.  Honestly, this is the first I've read this and that interview with Antony has been cited extensively here and elsewhere. This says more about the guy than anything else I've read. If anything, that he learns from his mistakes. 

 

It would be nice if he got that opportunity to clarify. He deserves that. 

 

Gleeman wrote in his article on Baseball Prospectus yesterday I believe that he did sit down with him, and came away from the sit down even more convinced Antony had no clue  (not exact quotes, I don't have the article in front of me)

[Vanimal46]

 

Agree on the external hire, not so much on the internal.  Plenty of internal candidates can/will usher change. It might be more based on who the internal candidate was that would answer that question.

I suppose change can happen with internal candidates too. Though as an employee I'd wonder why he or she didn't speak up before to usher in these changes.. 

Kind of like when the Gophers football coach Claeys took over for Kill. His first change he implemented was getting rid of the other coordinator he's been working with for the last 20+ years. Almost made you think "How long have you been waiting to do that?"

[tobi0040]

Gleeman wrote in his article on Baseball Prospectus yesterday I believe that he did sit down with him, and came away from the sit down even more convinced Antony had no clue  (not exact quotes, I don't have the article in front of me)

Here is the article from Gleeman. Your comment was more or less spot on.

 

“Antony was the second-loudest voice at the Twins’ table for all the bad moves. He doesn’t come from a scouting background like Ryan, instead climbing up the organizational ladder after starting in media relations, but Antony has a similarly old-school approach. In fact, as of 2010 he showed a shocking lack of familiarity with basic analytics and touted the importance of RBIs and wins. I was once invited into Antony’s office after writing about some of his old-school quotes and the in-person follow-up further convinced me he hadn’t even progressed to entry-level sabermetrics.”

 

My personal take, contrary to complimenting Antony on improving. I think it says a lot about the Twins that their #2 had been rising the ranks, a heart beat away (and now in his second interim stint) with knowing so little about sabermetrics. Look, these guys will always say they are not behind (like Antony did in the strib interview), but when you have so many unbiased people reaching the same conclusion and such terrible results, you have to lean that way.

 

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=29862

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Shortly after publishing the interview, Aaron Gleeman shared it on his site and it gained national steam. I was told that there was definite unhappiness about the interview and how it portrayed Antony. In fact, I’m told that the Twins reached out to Gleeman to have him sit down with Antony so he could clarify his position on analytics. Later on, several members within the organization told me later that the interview prompted Antony to educate himself on a lot of those stats and concepts.

Thanks for sharing, Parker.

 

I'd say that "educating himself" after that interview, in some way, would probably be the bare minimum expectation for an employee in his position.  I don't think that alone is really a "plus" in his "potential GM" ledger.  Would have been nice for him to learn the RBI/SLG lesson on his own in the first two years of the Delmon Young era.

 

And, even assuming he "educated himself", did it make much difference?  How has he applied those lessons learned since?  Did he lobby to trade Delmon Young after 2010?  His statements on Nishioka vs Hardy after 2010 suggest there were still a lot of concepts he wasn't familiar with... he didn't learn much about resisting Gardy's requests from 2011 (Nishioka) to 2014 (Bartlett) either...

[Blackjack]

 

Sorry, but I just have to jump in here and throw a wet blanket over some of the posted opinions. If this gets rather lengthy, shoot me.

 

1) Regarding search firms. I have had some experience with search firms on a personal level and I have never been impressed. In my experience they are no better or no worse on selecting the "perfect" candidate than an organizational committee. .

 

 

I most definitely agree with number 1!! Its been my experience in private industry that search firms are just a CYA attempt by top management, if the hire turns bad "hey we used a search firm". Internal teams could do the same search for far less money.

 

[alarp33]

 

I most definitely agree with number 1!! Its been my experience in private industry that search firms are just a CYA attempt by top management, if the hire turns bad "hey we used a search firm". Internal teams could do the same search for far less money.

 

You've had a lot of personal experience working at billion $ businesses who used a search firm to hire a CEO or COO (which by all intents and purposes the new GM/ Pres of Baseball Ops is for the Twins)? And those didn't work out, which companies? Interesting

Edited July 20, 2016 by alarp33

[Everyday Eddy]

It's absurd to suggest the Twins don't need a search firm.    Pohlad and DSP don't know baseball, having said so themselves.    Seriously, how is there any resistance to the idea of this team using a search firm?    This might be the most appropriate time in the history of the world for a search firm to be used

[gocgo]

MLB Network just did a little round table on the Twins search for a new GM.  Essentially, TR was a good guy, very respected...but the Twins were behind in terms of analytical stats.  They were "old school".  What they said was that the direction that the Twins go is going to be very telling on whether they embrace sabermetrics and all of the tools that are available to the teams.

[gocgo]

My take on sabermetrics is that, while I love them and go stats crazy, I also recognize that they don't tell the entire story.  There has to be a balance between the eyeball test and the stats.

[drivlikejehu]

There has never been an excuse for how Antony and others in the front office are ignorant about statistics. Not even sabermetrics, but just basic stats. Everyone else in the game has moved on.

 

It is unconscionable. No professional should ever be so uninformed about basic facts within their line of work.

 

I'd be shocked if Antony had done much to learn in the interim. There's zero evidence to support such a notion. There is zero reason to think he is even qualified for his prior job, let alone GM.

[Mr. Brooks]

Agree on the external hire, not so much on the internal. Plenty of internal candidates can/will usher change. It might be more based on who the internal candidate was that would answer that question.

I'm just not sure I'm confident that an internal hire is going to be objective enough to fire a bunch of people that he's known for 10 or more years. He's probably been to their weddings, seen their kids graduate, etc.

 

With hundreds of employees, there is no way that Ryan was the only problem.

Do you trust Antony to fire all the guys who are not among the best at their duties?

[ashbury]

I added a few questions from the book Behind-The Scenes Baseball (the Doug Decatur book discussed what life was like as an analytics “advisor” to several teams in 1984) which would be telling of the mindset of a team’s GM. Those questions were something like, does he prefer RBI to Slugging Percentage? Does the GM know basic advanced stats (I used FIP and BABIP as mine)? As you can see in the link above, Antony shaded toward the old-school mindset, not very familiar with what were, at the time, advanced stat concepts.

Gleeman wrote in his article on Baseball Prospectus yesterday I believe that he did sit down with him, and came away from the sit down even more convinced Antony had no clue  (not exact quotes, I don't have the article in front of me)

Those 1984 style questions were indeed the equivalent of asking a modern day person if he preferred a Model T or a Chrysler Airflow. The latter was obviously newer and more desirable in its day, but not relevant in today's auto environment, so a preference now for a Model T might not even be meaningful.

 

Business Analytics are core to industry and commerce today. That doesn't mean Analytics alone run the business.

 

Much as it's easier to teach a diesel bus mechanic how to drive a bus than to teach a bus driver how to fix a diesel engine, it is easier to teach Baseball to a business analytics person than to teach Analytics to a baseball person. In part, because you're not asking that person to run the team.

 

And hiring only local stats majors barely out of college, as I surmise they are doing, is probably a waste of time if that's all you do in the arena. You need to hire several people with pretty elite skills in this area or you will just flail. Show me they have a mid-30s Wharton hardcore-quant MBA who knows a linear program from a linear regression and I'll feel better. Fuqua or Tuck, even.

 

The analytical role on a baseball team is not fundamentally to come up with new stats, nor new formulas, nor running spreadsheets all day - though these may be important tasks. It is a mindset akin to Systems Analysis.

[ashbury]

My take on sabermetrics is that, while I love them and go stats crazy, I also recognize that they don't tell the entire story.  There has to be a balance between the eyeball test and the stats.

I'd look at it differently. Where the stats and the eyeball agree, there's nothing much to be learned - everybody else is likely to be on the same page as you. Where the stats don't confirm what the eyeball tells you, it might time to ask why not, and see if there's something to exploit in either direction.

 

The same is true of course if one type of stats is at odds with another. Just as when two groups of scouts disagree in their eyewitness reports on something.

[drivlikejehu]

Without a basic understanding of stats, you can't even tell how well a player has performed! Is it seriously tolerable in any way, shape, or form, for a GM or Asst. GM to seriously value RBIs and pitcher wins as they decide franchise-altering moves??!!

Edited July 21, 2016 by drivlikejehu

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

But, who will be the individual who selects the person to assemble the committee that will be vetting the search firms?

 

 

* channeling crarko

[Blackjack]

 

You've had a lot of personal experience working at billion $ businesses who used a search firm to hire a CEO or COO (which by all intents and purposes the new GM/ Pres of Baseball Ops is for the Twins)? And those didn't work out, which companies? Interesting

 

Billion dollar industries was your assumption. Just stating that in my experience, search teams (and consultants) are just a CYA attempt by management. If the hire or result of the consultant doesn't turn out, management has their butt covered. Internal teams and people could accomplish the same results for less money.

[alarp33]

 

Billion dollar industries was your assumption. Just stating that in my experience, search teams (and consultants) are just a CYA attempt by management. If the hire or result of the consultant doesn't turn out, management has their butt covered. Internal teams and people could accomplish the same results for less money.

 

I didn't see any value in the comparison unless it was a billion dollar industry.  

 

Certainly any search firm used by my medium sized company has no comparison to a Major League Baseball team hiring a new president/ gm

[Major League Ready]

 

Regarding a search firm, they are not perfect. But I am guessing they have a rolodex of qualified candidates already established from past searches. And if given the choice between a search firm and DSP/Pohlad running a search, I am going search firm every time. Keep in mind that they are not completely outsourcing the process. The search firm is basically providing some names and an introductory calls with candidates to determine interest, then making recommendations, i.e. here are the five people we recommend you interview and why, who referred them, etc.
Have other clubs used search firms?  I ask because a search firm is not going to have a list of qualified candidates given the very specialized nature of the search unless the Twins hire a firm that has done a MLB GM search previously.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

I suppose change can happen with internal candidates too. Though as an employee I'd wonder why he or she didn't speak up before to usher in these changes.. 

Kind of like when the Gophers football coach Claeys took over for Kill. His first change he implemented was getting rid of the other coordinator he's been working with for the last 20+ years. Almost made you think "How long have you been waiting to do that?"

 

Not disagreeing.  It all depends on the internal dynamics, none of which we have access to. Perhaps said candidate has been very vocal for a while, and has largely been shoved aside but still valued for being contrary... who knows.  I personally tend to lean towards an external candidate (to be clear), but I don't think they should simply toss anyone b/c they already work there... especially if said internal candidate is looking externally to fill several roles.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

My personal take, contrary to complimenting Antony on improving. I think it says a lot about the Twins that their #2 had been rising the ranks, a heart beat away (and now in his second interim stint) with knowing so little about sabermetrics. Look, these guys will always say they are not behind (like Antony did in the strib interview), but when you have so many unbiased people reaching the same conclusion and such terrible results, you have to lean that way.


http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=29862

 

I enjoy reading Gleeman and often find myself agreeing with him, but unbiased is not a word I'd use to describe him

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

I'm just not sure I'm confident that an internal hire is going to be objective enough to fire a bunch of people that he's known for 10 or more years. He's probably been to their weddings, seen their kids graduate, etc.

With hundreds of employees, there is no way that Ryan was the only problem.
Do you trust Antony to fire all the guys who are not among the best at their duties?

 

to be clear, you're most likely right.   I just don't think it's wise to simply toss out a candidate simply b/c they are internal.    I'd be more interested in knowing if they are able to identify what said problems are.

[Otto von Ballpark]

It seems a lot of the pro/neutral opinions on Antony are pushback against a perceived "Antony is an idiot" sentiment, based primarily on the 2010 interview and later Bartlett fiasco.  On that point, the pushback is fair -- I don't believe Antony is an idiot, just like Bill Smith wasn't an idiot.  However, "not being an idiot" doesn't really count as a qualification for MLB GM.

 

In fact, if Antony's biggest selling points are being well-respected, "not being an idiot", and an existing familiarity with our players and organization, why wouldn't you just retain TR?  He has all that and more.

[tobi0040]

I enjoy reading Gleeman and often find myself agreeing with him, but unbiased is not a word I'd use to describe him

That is fair. I wasn't thinking just Gleeman. The ESPN analytic rankings for example.