Thursday

I went in a little different direction today with my column. Frankly, I don't want to hear about Torii and Jacque and their board. Why do these two guys think that they have to control the clubhouse? I mean if you are Radke or Mauer or Stewart, are you going to listen to Jacque Jones? The guy will NOT be with this team next year! He was a major liability on the field last year. As for Hunter, he's got a great agent. He's got national advertising now, and he's perceived as a leader on the Twins. He's a great outfielder and a mediocre to good centerfielder at the plate. But, it's not like he's Cal Ripken or anything. As far as players, Morneau, Mauer, Radke, Santana, and Nathan at least are more important to this team.

What do you think? Am I off base with that? I just thought that the article in the NY Times was interesting... it basically said that the exact opposite atmosphere from the one projected by the Twins was the one most conducive to winning.

I struggle with the whole concept of ‘team chemistry’. I am more of a believer in it than most, or at least most bloggers, but as you mentioned in your examples with the Yankees and A’s, etc., I don’t think it’s the biggest thing. I think that talent and success are more important than chemistry, or maybe can at least overcome that. Look at the success of Jeff Kent with Barry Bonds. Clearly they didn’t like each other, but I think that they understood that they needed each other (even if they would never admit it).

For a small market team like the Twins, I think that team chemistry is more important. A lot of decisions need to be made each year, and the guys you mentioned were also good chemistry guys. BUT, I also wonder which players would have also been lost if the team had decided to keep AJ or Dougie Baseball? In my opinion, Radke probably is more willing to leave if AJ is still around. Is Nathan as willing to stick around (poor argument since he wouldn’t be with the team if AJ hadn’t been traded for him, but you know what I’m saying).

As far as Torii and Jacque, I don’t buy it. To me, Torii is the unquestioned leader of the team. There is really no arguing that. I think Jacque just always gets included in any story about Torii. It’s not his fault, but he’s not a vocal guy the way that Torii is. A leader isn’t always the best player. I think it could be argued that the leader should be good, or a starter, or someone who actually frequently contributes to the success of the team. Yeah, Radke, Santana, Nathan, Mauer and Morneau are better hitters/players than Torii, but 1.) Mauer and Morneau are both too young to be considered a leader and 2.) both are too quiet (and should be) at this point. Radke is the elder statesman, but he’s not a talker and hence he isn’t a vocal leader as well. But he is a leader by example, and I’m sure he says things when they need to be said. His longevity and success to me, still make him the leader of the staff. Doesn’t make him the best pitcher, just the leader. And that is why a lot of people may still consider him the ace.

Leadership is a tough thing. Some lead by example. Some lead vocally. Some respond well to vocal leadership, others go about their jobs able to motivate and lead themselves.

To me, it’s kind of like the whole Moneyball thing. The A’s have their philosophies and over the last 4-5 years, it has worked. I like and agree with some of their philosophies. I also agree with most of the Twins philosophies. Now the Yankees have a vastly different philosophy that they’ve chosen to run with. That’s their call. All ways can be successful.

In a round-about way, chemistry can be a good thing or a bad thing. For the Yankees, they’re likely to win 95 games just because of their talent, even if they hate each other. But at the same time, you can’t tell me that Tino Martinez wasn’t a very important part of those championship teams. Many considered him the leader of that team, and those are the years they won. Paul O’Neill, Scott Brosius, these are other guys that weren’t superstars, just good players who helped the superstars realize that it was about doing the little things to WIN, not to make yourself look good.

The Twins, they won with AJ. They were able to handle him and make him work for them. Then they won without him too. They won with Doug and without Doug. Doug was perceived as a leader by the media because he talked so much. Wasn’t necessarily the case, as we found out.

I don’t know what more to say. I happen to think that chemistry is one of those intangibles that probably gets too much credit by some and not enough by others. So much ends up just depending on the whole make up of the team and how the manager and coaches deal with it.