Thread: Beat the Rush: Fire Gardy and Terry Ryan Now!

Even number four starters would be an improvement in what has come up since Garza. Guys that had more than 1 or 2 good years, not great years, good years.

Originally Posted by nicksaviking

Ryan's actually starting to resemble Charlie Brown. Appearnces aside, Lucy would call them both wishy-washy. Ryan was just too indecisive about these matters, it often seemed he waited for a situation to present itself because he didn't want to be agressive and make a mistake. Usually he waited too long and the window closed.

Like with AJP? Seems to me that window was wide open. Teams knew that AJ was available because Mauer was the future behind the plate, yet TR still seemed to get one of the most lopsided trades in recent ML history.

TR made that trade, while Billie traded Garza for Delmon and Hardy for some minor league reliever (is it Hoey? I seriously cannot remember that is how bad that trade was).

Originally Posted by Twins Twerp

Like with AJP? Seems to me that window was wide open. Teams knew that AJ was available because Mauer was the future behind the plate, yet TR still seemed to get one of the most lopsided trades in recent ML history.

TR made that trade, while Billie traded Garza for Delmon and Hardy for some minor league reliever (is it Hoey? I seriously cannot remember that is how bad that trade was).

No like sitting on Hunter when he knew he needed to be traded and sitting on Santana when he knew he needed to be extended and sitting on his hands for the first two months of free agency every year to see how everything shapes out instead of being the guy who goes out and does the shaping. He's indecisive and conservative, that's not what we should be looking for if we want a winning team. Hopefully he's over his Charlie Brown phase.

Originally Posted by mike wants wins

Ryan deserves credit for the trades....but how much credit does he really deserve for buxton? Had he taken Zimmer or Gausmann, the system would rank the same. That part of the system improvement is on the team sucking at the MLB level. If you will not sign free agents, you need to be better than the other teams at drafting and developing players. You can find good MLB players in the 20s.....if you cannot, then you are not better than the other teams, you are the same or worse. So, if Ryan's strategy is to only build through the draft and trades, his choice, then they need to be better than they have been. Or, you can accept that team's have to be this bad, and live with it.....but if that is the strategy, why are Willingham and Morneau still on the roster?

I do not buy the argument that teams cannot draft good players and develop them later in round 1. Not great, but good players.

But you have to remember teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, and other big spenders could take a guy who other teams wouldn't touch because of bonus demands. Those teams would take a guy who had previously stated he would need X amount of money to keep him from going to college. The Twins, in the past, could not afford to do that. Also the Yankees and Red Sox had unlimited amounts of money to spend on Free Agents and Latin American kids. If the Yankees and Red Sox had to do things the way the Twins did during most of the 2000's, they would be in the same boat. Heck, the Red Sox are in the same boat with their unlimited money.

So, my brother, do not say that "the good teams" can draft good players and develop them late in round one because it is not as cut and dry as you seem to make it. The new system which limits money spent on the draft and and on International signings will eventually sway things in favor of the Twins who develop young talent and do not spend lavishly on free agents. I would say the Twins picked the perfect time to have a few down years...don't you think Mike?

Originally Posted by Twins Twerp

Like with AJP? Seems to me that window was wide open. Teams knew that AJ was available because Mauer was the future behind the plate, yet TR still seemed to get one of the most lopsided trades in recent ML history.

TR made that trade, while Billie traded Garza for Delmon and Hardy for some minor league reliever (is it Hoey? I seriously cannot remember that is how bad that trade was).

I think that trade has equalized IMO. Liriano had 1.5 good seasons and Nathan had 6 elite seasons. AJ has gone on to have 9 good seasons since the trade with 500 AB's in each and catching about 120 games. You could argue Nathan and 1.5 seasons of Liriano are better than AJ, but I wouldn't call it the more lopsided in history. Don't give me the "if" Liriano wasn't injured because the Giants traded him because they viewed him as an injury risk.

Originally Posted by Badsmerf

I think that trade has equalized IMO. Liriano had 1.5 good seasons and Nathan had 6 elite seasons. AJ has gone on to have 9 good seasons since the trade with 500 AB's in each and catching about 120 games. You could argue Nathan and 1.5 seasons of Liriano are better than AJ, but I wouldn't call it the more lopsided in history. Don't give me the "if" Liriano wasn't injured because the Giants traded him because they viewed him as an injury risk.

I don't get why the eight years AJ has had after leaving San Francisco helped the Giants in any way.

Originally Posted by CDog

I don't get why the eight years AJ has had after leaving San Francisco helped the Giants in any way.

That isn't part of the debate. AJ's departure is a completely different subject, and failure of the Giants. If the Twins hadn't paid Nathan he wouldn't have logged innings with the Twins either, doesn't mean much.

Originally Posted by Badsmerf

That isn't part of the debate. AJ's departure is a completely different subject, and failure of the Giants. If the Twins hadn't paid Nathan he wouldn't have logged innings with the Twins either, doesn't mean much.

So the actual fact of Liriano's getting hurt is all that matters, and not the potential of what happens if he didn't. But the actual fact of AJ's not being re-signed doesn't matter at all, but only the potential that he could have does. The Giants got one year of AJ in the trade. How does that not matter?

No, the perfect time would have been when Strasburg and Harper were available.....I think there is no good time to have 2 or mire years with 90 loss seasons.

That first part was tongue in cheek.....

all i am reading are baseless excuses for terry "b-but...he is elite" "b-but...he traded for liriano" "b-but...bill smith left him in bad shape"

at the end of the day the twins have had 190 mil in payroll the past two seasons and in each of the last two seasons finished in dead last, results equal results, i am sure ryan is a great guy and at one point a good owner, but the game has clearly passed him up at this point, time for fresh direction!!!!

Originally Posted by CDog

So the actual fact of Liriano's getting hurt is all that matters, and not the potential of what happens if he didn't. But the actual fact of AJ's not being re-signed doesn't matter at all, but only the potential that he could have does. The Giants got one year of AJ in the trade. How does that not matter?

Liriano had elbow issues before the Giants traded him. That's why they were willing to give him up.

What the Giants did with AJ after the trade has no bearing on the trade itself, just as Nathan's contract extension with the Twins doesn't have anything to do with the trade either, and just as the JJ Hardy trade has nothing to do with the Johan Santana trade.

Originally Posted by PatMearesFan

all i am reading are baseless excuses for terry "b-but...he is elite" "b-but...he traded for liriano" "b-but...bill smith left him in bad shape"

at the end of the day the twins have had 190 mil in payroll the past two seasons and in each of the last two seasons finished in dead last, results equal results, i am sure ryan is a great guy and at one point a good owner, but the game has clearly passed him up at this point, time for fresh direction!!!!

The excuse for firing are of no different quality than what you accuse the supporters of.

Originally Posted by nicksaviking

Of course the Twins only had him until 2008 because Ryan might be the only GM that wouldn't love to lock up a 26-year-old left handed Cy Young award winner for more than 4 additional years at a reasonable price.

Santana is probably one of the prime examples Ryan uses when talking about the risks of multi-year deals. The Mets probably loved the contract, up through around August of the second year. After that, it got scary for a year, and then the two years following have been a virtual waste of the money.

Originally Posted by USAFChief

Blaming the Twins draft position (bottom third of the draft order since, like, forever!) is lazy, partially incorrect, and nothing but excuse making. Other teams find good players in the bottom of the first round, not to mention the rounds after that.

Chief, I don't think you can back up this statement. Although I won't accuse you of being lazy. First of all, my statement about the Twin's draft order is in fact almost ENTIRELY correct, is it not? Excepting Mauer, Hicks, and Buxton I believe.

And what makes this excuse making and nothing else? That's a pretty unfair assessment by you. Lastly, haven't the Twins ALSO found good players in the bottom of the first round and in later rounds? It would be lazy and nothing but excuse making to argue otherwise.

Originally Posted by old nurse

The excuse for firing are of no different quality than what you accuse the supporters of.

i just gave you all the examples you need, two straight awful years with big payrolls, no other fan base or team would accept 200 almost loses in 2 years!! how many world series titles do we have because of terry? ZERO how many world series appearances? ZERO time to make a change

Originally Posted by PatMearesFan

i just gave you all the examples you need, two straight awful years with big payrolls, no other fan base or team would accept 200 almost loses in 2 years!! how many world series titles do we have because of terry? ZERO how many world series appearances? ZERO time to make a change

Using the W_L record for two years and the lack of a world series appearance as your criteria for calling for a change is completely understandable and legitimate. Other commenters use different criteria to make their assessment, and their criteria is equally understandable and legitimate. At least to some of us, PatMearesFan.

So, I'm just curious, Chief. Who are these other organizations who had an equally poor or poorer draft order for, like forever, as you put it, that have a farm system ranked higher than the Twins? I can only think of a couple that might qualify: Cardinals, Rangers, maybe Toronto?

That's been my real point. The common tirade, almost always stated as fact, is about how crappy the Twins are at drafting and development. I want to see something substantive to back this up. Not this lazy "what about Adam Johnson" crap.

Over time... A lot of perfectally acceptable babies have been thrown out with the bath water.

Originally Posted by Dilios

If he'd been small or puny or sickly or misshapen...... he would have been discarded.

spartan-babies.jpg

Originally Posted by USAFChief

Blaming the Twins draft position (bottom third of the draft order since, like, forever!) is lazy, partially incorrect, and nothing but excuse making. Other teams find good players in the bottom of the first round, not to mention the rounds after that.

So do the Twins. Whats your point?