Article: Three-Bagger: Heroic Hildy, Golden Buck & Molitor's Last Stand

[USAFChief]

The owner of the team declared any Molitor discussions out of bounds.

Got a link for this assertion?

[Craig Arko]

 

I'm assuming they have conversations with him all during the year......and that he likes to bunt no matter what the math says. Some people just believe things, no matter what science/math say....

https://www.tfes.org

[ThejacKmp]

 

Well, his overall MLB sample size is pretty small too, but that didn't stop Nick from saying "Hildenberger single-handedly changes the outlook of the bullpen going forward dramatically."

 

I think it's fair to pump the brakes a bit on that.  I don't want the team to say "the bullpen is just fine with minimal changes" yet again this winter...

 

I think he changes it for the rest of the season? He has a hot hand and gives Molyl someone he can hand the ball to in a late game with some confidence (perhaps misplaced but confidence nonetheless). I'd agree with you about going forward into next year though, it's too early to tell.

 

That said, I don't want the Twins throwing money around in bullpen free agency for next year. There are a lot of young arms coming up and I don't want them blocked by guys who are a crapshoot. I'd like to see the Twins make a few low-risk free agent pickups like the did with Belisle/Breslow.

 

I'm not ready to give up on Duffey, Pressley etc. like many here seem to be. I'm also hopeful that a number of minor league guys are going to be coming back from injury and can hopefully contribute. The Twins have a lot of fun young arms and I'd like to see them bringing in some low cost vets to supplement the growing pains of young guys.

 

Mostly, I'd like them to make some decisions on whether guys like Gee, Hurlbut, Sledgers are starters or relievers in the long term. If they're not starters (and I doubt anyone except maybe Slegers is), they should start working them as relievers. Taylor Rogers shows the benefits of doing that (and to a lesser extent Gee, though he's been used as a long man and not a set-up guy).

[Nick Nelson]

 

No reason they couldn't have sat down with him last offseason and done the same thing.  (In fact, it doesn't really make sense not to do that last offseason. I'd want to see how he adjusts with that information before I had to make a decision on re-upping him.)

They were still in the initial stages of getting to know Molitor last offseason. Now they've had a full season of working closely with him in a collaborative manner. I think such conversations would be much more in-depth and substantive this winter. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

They were still in the initial stages of getting to know Molitor last offseason. Now they've had a full season of working closely with him in a collaborative manner. I think such conversations would be much more in-depth and substantive this winter. 

Sure, but I don't think the topics you mention required "getting to know" Molitor to engage in a meaningful way.  "Hi Paul, nice to meet you. What do you think of the state of the team?  Do you have any concerns? [Listen and respond to concerns.] Also, here are some data and tools that we provided Francona with in Cleveland, and they really helped him. Do you use anything like this now?  If not, we'd love to try in 2017. We'll touch base with you throughout to season to see how it's going."

 

If we're nearly a year into it, and he's still trying silly sac bunts in a pennant race, I'm not sure he's passing the "working closely in a collaborative manner" test that should contribute to the decision whether to re-up or not.

[nytwinsfan]

 

Yes, Molitor's love for the sacrifice bunt is painful. And yes, it might have cost them a run here and there. But, when you average it all out over the year, it comes out in the wash. That's why I actually like measurements that try not to take averages over the year, but look at discrete outcomes in a game. But even those are tiny differences usually. And even those wash out when you add them up (some negative, some positive).

 

those are my theories, anyway.

I don't understand what you mean by it all averages out. What reason is there to think that? If he was really good on some kinds of strategic decisions, and really bad on others, maybe that would be the way to look at it. But can you point to one area of tactics or strategy where he is good enough to compensate for the terrible bunting, base stealing attempts (by mediocre runners) and relief pitcher use? I sure can't. And as you say, his player management is difficult to judge, so we don't know whether or not that averages out with his bad strategy/tactics. If I saw Molitor learning from his mistakes, I might think differently. But if anything he is just becoming more and more stubborn.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I don't understand what you mean by it all averages out. What reason is there to think that? If he was really good on some kinds of strategic decisions, and really bad on others, maybe that would be the way to look at it. But can you point to one area of tactics or strategy where he is good enough to compensate for the terrible bunting, base stealing attempts (by mediocre runners) and relief pitcher use? I sure can't. And as you say, his player management is difficult to judge, so we don't know whether or not that averages out with his bad strategy/tactics. If I saw Molitor learning from his mistakes, I might think differently. But if anything he is just becoming more and more stubborn.

 

that was a general statement on averages, not on Molitor in specific. Like, the average temperature in a hospital being 98 degrees doesn't tell me much.....

[Craig Arko]

 

that was a general statement on averages, not on Molitor in specific. Like, the average temperature in a hospital being 98 degrees doesn't tell me much.....

Suggests a possible problem with the thermostat.

[Don Walcott]

 

Suggests a possible problem with the thermostat.

It's the hot yoga classroom.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Suggests a possible problem with the thermostat.

 

nicely played!

[Tom Froemming]

 

Got a link for this assertion?

All the way back in July of 2016, Jim Pohlad was already insisting that Molitor would be the manager this year. Here's a link to a Chip Scoggins piece about it. It includes this quote:

 

"They can do that (hire a manager of their choice) in the future if they want,” Pohlad said. “But for 2017, Paul will be our manager.”

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

All the way back in July of 2016, Jim Pohlad was already insisting that Molitor would be the manager this year. Here's a link to a Chip Scoggins piece about it. It includes this quote:

 

"They can do that (hire a manager of their choice) in the future if they want,” Pohlad said. “But for 2017, Paul will be our manager.”

That's about firing Molitor, though.  Not a prohibition of "all Molitor discussions" as the poster said (or having "a long sit-down with him during the offseason to go over run-scoring matrixes, statistical probabilities and sacrifice bunting" as Nick said in the article).

[Craig Arko]

 

That's about firing Molitor, though.  Not a prohibition of "all Molitor discussions" as the poster said (or having "a long sit-down with him during the offseason to go over run-scoring matrixes, statistical probabilities and sacrifice bunting" as Nick said in the article).

I do get this image of 'you may only communicate by post-it notes delivered in whisky bottles' after reading all the speculation.

[Tom Froemming]

 

That's about firing Molitor, though.  Not a prohibition of "all Molitor discussions" as the poster said (or having "a long sit-down with him during the offseason to go over run-scoring matrixes, statistical probabilities and sacrifice bunting" as Nick said in the article).

Oh, I see. Well, no, there aren't any quotes anyone's going to be able to dig up about that, but committing to Molitor in that way really sent a message.

 

It's entirely possible that the new regime requested that Molitor update his strategy and he simply replied "no thanks." Either way, if Falvey/Levine have any issues with the way Molitor is managing, I'm sure they have communicated that to him. Now whether he needs to listen is another story. Molitor has ownership on his side, so he can do whatever he sees fit as long as that's the case.

[old nurse]

 

I'm assuming they have conversations with him all during the year......and that he likes to bunt no matter what the math says. Some people just believe things, no matter what science/math say....

Some people put a general equation to a specific situation and think they are being scientific. Some people make a generalization based out of dislikes. Over the three year period that Molitor has been manager he has sacrificed 80 times.  American League average over that time is 70.  No great departure there. The Indians lead with  101.  Falvey worked for the Indians. It might be well possible the Indians did a little more in depth research on that aspect of the game than whatever it is the posters here have done.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Some people put a general equation to a specific situation and think they are being scientific. Some people make a generalization based out of dislikes. Over the three year period that Molitor has been manager he has sacrificed 80 times.  American League average over that time is 70.  No great departure there. The Indians lead with  101.  Falvey worked for the Indians. It might be well possible the Indians did a little more in depth research on that aspect of the game than whatever it is the posters here have done.

 

Interesting. I had read it was a lot more than that, compared to the AL average. Thanks for the info. Still hate it. The fact that the Clevelands are that far out front does suggest that perhaps this FO likes it more than the public would think. 

 

Kind of gets to my other point, I'm not sure many managers do all that much all that differently, over 162 games....

[markos]

 

Some people put a general equation to a specific situation and think they are being scientific. Some people make a generalization based out of dislikes. Over the three year period that Molitor has been manager he has sacrificed 80 times.  American League average over that time is 70.  No great departure there. The Indians lead with  101.  Falvey worked for the Indians. It might be well possible the Indians did a little more in depth research on that aspect of the game than whatever it is the posters here have done.

That is only counting successful sacrifices that get marked in the box score as such. There isn't anyone (to my knowledge) tracking sacrifice attempts - successful or not. A manager that calls for a lot of sacrifice bunts with a team that is very bad at bunting may not end up leading the league in the sacrifice bunt category but still wasted a lot of opportunities.

[old nurse]

 

If the team re-ups with Molitor, I do hope that Falvey and Levine have a long sit-down with him during the offseason to go over run-scoring matrixes, statistical probabilities and sacrifice bunting.

Click here to view the article

 

Perhaps as a future article you can go over the different matrices for playing for one run, two runs and scoring in bunches. 

[Tom Froemming]

 

That is only counting successful sacrifices that get marked in the box score as such. There isn't anyone (to my knowledge) tracking sacrifice attempts - successful or not. A manager that calls for a lot of sacrifice bunts with a team that is very bad at bunting may not end up leading the league in the sacrifice bunt category but still wasted a lot of opportunities.

B-Ref tracks sac bunt attempts, though I don't know what their methodology is. Sometimes it can be tough to tell whether a player is bunting on their own/trying to bunt for a hit or if he was asked to lay down a sac bunt. 

 

Either way, according to their data the Twins lead the AL in sac bunt attempts over the past three seasons with 159. Cleveland is second with 151, followed by the White Sox at 143. But the average for AL teams over the last three years is 113. A few teams almost never bunt. Oakland (65), Boston (77) and Baltimore (78) all have bunted less than half as much as the Twins have.

[Tom Froemming]

And despite all their practice, the Twins have been bad at bunting. They're 26th in sac bunt success rate this year at 49%. That's an improvement from the previous two seasons when they ranked 29th both years (49% again in 2016 and 53% in 2015).

[Mike Sixel]

they try more often, and they fail more than they succeed. That seems like a bad formula. But then, I was never a math major. 

[Craig Arko]

 

they try more often, and they fail more than they succeed. That seems like a bad formula. But then, I was never a math major. 

Not too many .500 hitters around, either.

 

I was a Math major.

[old nurse]

When Falvey and Molitor have their rumored season ending conversation the first words Molitor should say is starting pitchers.  He has 2. Cleveland have 4 performing well, and a couple not doing poorly

 

[nytwinsfan]

 

that was a general statement on averages, not on Molitor in specific. Like, the average temperature in a hospital being 98 degrees doesn't tell me much.....

 

I don't understand, but fine. Molitor has made a number of bad decisions in important games, and by "bad" I mean ex ante, without the benefit of hindsight. You can argue those are not bad decisions for some reason, or that other alternatives for manager would make just as many or more mistakes, or you can argue that his player management makes up for his strategic mismanagement.  I don't buy any of those three. Not sure what other arguments you can make.

[old nurse]

 

That is only counting successful sacrifices that get marked in the box score as such. There isn't anyone (to my knowledge) tracking sacrifice attempts - successful or not. A manager that calls for a lot of sacrifice bunts with a team that is very bad at bunting may not end up leading the league in the sacrifice bunt category but still wasted a lot of opportunities.

About 5 years ago the success rate stated in an article was 80%   for sacrifices. No idea how the current data would be at.  Since it looks like you are implying they are bad at it, and do it a lot, perhaps you would like to find the statistics that back it?

[old nurse]

 

Interesting. I had read it was a lot more than that, compared to the AL average. Thanks for the info. Still hate it. The fact that the Clevelands are that far out front does suggest that perhaps this FO likes it more than the public would think. 

 

Kind of gets to my other point, I'm not sure many managers do all that much all that differently, over 162 games....

Some of the teams that are low in sacrifice bunts are higher in GIDP, ie 2 outs instead of 1.  Tricky business this is

[Tom Froemming]

 

Not too many .500 hitters around, either.

 

I was a Math major.

We were talking about successful sac bunt attempts. If you want success rate at bunting for a hit, Fangraphs has that. The Twins have a 31.7 bunt hit percentage over the past three seasons. That's fifth-best in baseball over that stretch.

 

Not too many .317 hitters out there, either. But, those are all singles so it's a very empty .317 batting average.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Not too many .500 hitters around, either.

 

I was a Math major.

 

well, 49% success at sac bunts, not at hitting for a hit. Not sure what you mean, actually.

[USAFChief]

Not too many .500 hitters around, either.

 

I was a Math major.

We're not talking about successful hit attempts.

 

The data suggests the Twins can't successfully make an intentional OUT at a .500 rate. Which is pretty astounding.

[Tom Froemming]

 

Some of the teams that are low in sacrifice bunts are higher in GIDP, ie 2 outs instead of 1.  Tricky business this is

Fair point. The Twins are among the lowest teams in GIDP%, per b-ref, but there aren't huge differences. The Twins are at 9%. They've had a runner at first and less than two outs 1,047 times and have hit into 94 double plays.

 

The Royals have the worst rate at 13.5%. League average is 11%.