Who gets the credit?

It's been about a month since many members felt the need to blame somebody for the sorry state the Twins were in at the time, this despite the fact we were barely 1 month into the new season. During that time blame was mainly given to pretty much anyone and everyone who wasn't a player, including , Gardy, Terry Ryan, Joe Vavra, Rick Anderson, Bill Smith the entire Pohlad family the removal of the trees in centre field and the quality of beer served in a can.

Since that time the Twins have gone 14-12 and while far from being touted as a contender have proved themselves to be a competitive and at times entertaining ball club. So, in the interest of fairness, many have assigned the blame, who now gets the credit for the teams improved play?

Scott Diamond.

Diamond. To a lesser extent P.J. Walters. To a lesser-than-that extent Cole DeVries. This team with average starting pitching would probably be ahead of the Tigers in the division right now. (Given that, if a coach matters, Cuellar deserves credit . . . . but if Anderson is correcting Liriano than he gets credit for that too).

And now a Span-Revere-Mauer-Willingham-Morneau-Doumit 1-6 looks pretty formidable too (IF THEY ALL GET HEALTHY AT THE SAME TIME).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twinsnorth49

It's been about a month since many members felt the need to blame somebody for the sorry state the Twins were in at the time,

---

So they are not in a sorry state right now? Because they are on a pace for only 98 losses a season after they lost 99?

Credit? For having the worse record in the AL while having the 7th highest payroll?
The same:
Ryan, Gardy, Andy, Vavry, Scotty, Liddly and company.

They still have the worse record in the league. The distance has closed some (because of the schedule) but they are the worse team in the AL.
Lots of credit needs to be given for that.

If they are tops on the division by a lot of cushion and they field a competitive team in the post-season, then we can talk positively about the people who are ru(i)nning this team...

So they won a few games, big deal. It doesn't make the future look any more clear than it did a few weeks ago....

The baseball schedule makers?

In all seriousness, I give a lot of credit to the staff in Rochester -- although I'm still waiting for them to really get through to Valencia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JB_Iowa

The baseball schedule makers?

In all seriousness, I give a lot of credit to the staff in Rochester -- although I'm still waiting for them to really get through to Valencia.

---

Beat me to it. This is exactly what's happened. A JV schedule that only gets easier into the end of the month, much like last year- the Rochester guys came up and by mid-July had become thoroughly infected with the cancerous Twins ML culture.

Rochester has yet to get through to Valencia-- or Nishioka, given other's successes moving up and down to the big club, probably says more about them than the coaching staff.

Hard to single anyone person out deserving all the credit, but things seemed to start improving as soon as Diamond and Walters arrived. Of course the bullpen still deserves the most credit for holding onto some tight leads.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by glanzer

Hard to single anyone person out deserving all the credit, but things seemed to start improving as soon as Diamond and Walters arrived. Of course the bullpen still deserves the most credit for holding onto some tight leads.

---

15-14 since Dozier called up. While Dozier has had his ups and downs, his move allowed the infield defense to improve overall (Twins lead the league by far in DPs and are 10th in team UZR @ SS and FIRST in team UZR @ 2B), giving Carroll time at 2B and 3B (Carroll is 3rd overall in FLD ratings @ 3B) and for Plouffe to get sufficient ABs to find his power stroke and find the best option to place his limited defensive skills, also at 3B (he actually hasn't been awful there, like last year's nightmare SS experience). This defensive upgrade obviously helped bolster the rookie starters and the bullpen immensely.

I am pretty cynical much of the time, but those claiming the schedule is the reason the Twins are winning games are real . . . joys . . .

You are all wrong... the "M" hats deserves all the credit for the recent success. Now all they need to do is start growing mullets, and big bushy mustaches circa 1987/91 and we will be back in business.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mauerzy4Prez

You are all wrong... the "M" hats deserves all the credit for the recent success. Now all they need to do is start growing mullets, and big bushy mustaches circa 1987/91 and we will be back in business.

---

Yes but do the "M" hats deserve the credit or do the "TC" hats deserve the blame?

See it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shanewahl

I am pretty cynical much of the time, but those claiming the schedule is the reason the Twins are winning games are real . . . joys . . .

---

Almond or Lemon?

Record of Twins opponents before May 14 : 238-211 .530
Record of Twins opponents after May 14: 161-177 .476 (KC is listed and tabulated twice)

/Cynicism

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shanewahl

I am pretty cynical much of the time, but those claiming the schedule is the reason the Twins are winning games are real . . . joys . . .

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jokin

Almond or Lemon?

Record of Twins opponents before May 14 : 238-211 .530
Record of Twins opponents after May 14: 161-177 .476 (KC is listed and tabulated twice)

/Cynicism

---

I think he meant Kill.........I agree.

Scott Diamond, P.J. Walters, Josh Willingham, and Ben Revere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twinsnorth49

I think he meant Kill.........I agree.

---

15-14 in the Dozier era is hardly time to break out the champagne and commence with the back-slapping. In the last decade, the Twins have made their living dominating the weak teams (near .700 against the bottom-feeders), particularly in the Central and West. How much of their record thus far, with respect to who is on the schedule, is Killjoy cynicism versus cold reality staring them in the face? I was entertained a year ago in June, but other than a few foolish media types who absurdly suggested it was "happening", we all knew that the boomlet bubble would soon be burst. Given the Twins inadequate efforts at addressing the problems and other woes in major aspects of management and personnel, their is little to suggest any other outcome than something similar to last year.

One reason for optimism, Terry Ryan might better be able to pull the trigger and get above-average return as a seller in July (if the Twins finally show their hand and admit the dire position they find themselves in). There are quite a few teams who haven't had a winner in a while that just might be tempted to go all-in to get over the hump in the short-term and some perennial winners who have top-level prospects blocked but are caught short in positions of need.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YourHouseIsMyHouse

Scott Diamond, P.J. Walters, Josh Willingham, and Ben Revere.

---

I love the Willingham addition, a veritable bargain at $7 Mil. But, his production dropped off dramatically in May during much of the early part of the run: 220/366/473/839. Fortunately, he is back to April-like numbers thus far in June, so at least partial credit for this little run is his due.

When so much of the natural world falls into bell-shaped patterns, this thread illustrates a bit of human nature that goes contrary to that. If we think of the edges as those who are VERY quick to assign blame while being very slow to give credit against those who are VERY quick to give credit and slow to assign blame, there is obviously a spectrum between those two poles. Yet I don't think the majority fall into the middle so much as people tend to the edges. Possibly, I suppose, it's more a matter of those near the extremes are the ones we hear more or notice more because of their extremity. OK...back to the topic at hand if I can figure out how to turn off the nerd switch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thrylos98

So they are not in a sorry state right now? Because they are on a pace for only 98 losses a season after they lost 99?

Credit? For having the worse record in the AL while having the 7th highest payroll?
The same:
Ryan, Gardy, Andy, Vavry, Scotty, Liddly and company.

They still have the worse record in the league. The distance has closed some (because of the schedule) but they are the worse team in the AL.
Lots of credit needs to be given for that.

If they are tops on the division by a lot of cushion and they field a competitive team in the post-season, then we can talk positively about the people who are ru(i)nning this team...

---

Worst dude, it's worst.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CDog

When so much of the natural world falls into bell-shaped patterns, this thread illustrates a bit of human nature that goes contrary to that. If we think of the edges as those who are VERY quick to assign blame while being very slow to give credit against those who are VERY quick to give credit and slow to assign blame, there is obviously a spectrum between those two poles. Yet I don't think the majority fall into the middle so much as people tend to the edges. Possibly, I suppose, it's more a matter of those near the extremes are the ones we hear more or notice more because of their extremity. OK...back to the topic at hand if I can figure out how to turn off the nerd switch.

---

That pretty much nails it CDog,, the essence of the question was to illustrate that there is no more reason to "pop the champagne" now, than there was to line up the firing squad a month ago. It's a rhetorical question, reacting on either end of the extreme is illogical and never represents strong organizational direction.

It's funny how many people assign failure with coaches and success with players and other factors though. Never a middle ground.