Article: Decision On Paul Molitor Looming

[nytwinsfan]

I know this isn't how it is done, but if I were Falvine, I'd give Molitor a 1 year extension and tell him whether he is brought back for additional years will depend in large part on whether he continues to constantly bunt in stupid situations. I'd say, if you can dial that back, we'd be happy to have you for the longer term. If not, you're gone.

 

The bunting simply has to stop. I know it is kind of cliche now to make this criticism, but it really is no joke. It is putting the team in a statistical disadvantage and just CANNOT continue. I think Molitor's other attributes make him worth keeping, but if the bunting doesn't stop, he needs to go.

 

[SweetOne69]

 

I don't know about that.  Would Molitor have removed his best starter in the top of the first after recording 1 out?

 

I sincerely doubt it.  It's one of his primary weaknesses...his strong tendency to wait until his starter has suffered max damage, and THEN remove him.  And it has nothing to do with the quality of his bullpen.  If it did, he'd leave the starter in after the 3 run HR too.

He had the bullpen warming up and if the Yankees would've kept on hitting Molitor would've made the switch, but Santana retire the next 2 batters after giving up the 3 run homer.

 

Severino wasn't pulled until after the single and double following Rosario's 2 run dinger.  1 more hit and it would've been a 5 run lead with 1 out.  Giardi had to pull Severino at that point.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

I love the No Surrender story in San Diego. I softened on Molly over time. He seems to have the pulse of the team, and I don't know if another manager could have gotten them to the postseason this year.

 

The FO has bigger fish to fry (pitching) than conducting a new manager search, or worse, installing the manager candidate they had in mind when they took the job. They were wrong about the team once already when they sold at the deadline. Just my opinion.

[howieramone2]

 

Yes, this is the disagreement.  IMO he lost plenty of games by leaving his starter in until the damage was done.

You can say the same thing about every manager there has ever been. I personally felt he did a very good job protecting Mejia this season.

[beckmt]

My problem is you have to give a three year contract(that is the standard) at this time.  I just am not sure I want to commit to Paul for 3 years and then have to have Pohlad cut the checks if things go sideways.  I feel if there is to be an extension it will be announced today or tomorrow(it may have to wait due to baseball rules), but if there does not seem to be activity in that direction, they are working on a new position for Molitor.

[Doomtints]

Obviously Falvey, Levine, that analytics folks, Jeff Pickler were involved in those daily discussions, and I’m certain it would have come up in discussions, yet Molitor continued to bunt quite often.

 

 

Statistically, a baserunner bunted over to 2nd is more likely to score. Molitor is using analytics. Those who don't like watching bunts on their TV and vent about it here are not using analytics. So what would the front office be saying to Molitor in this instance? Be more popular with the kids at home, or keep using analytics?

 

The number of managers and front offices in major and minor league baseball who don't like statistics or analytics is at or near zero. When Ryan was quoted saying otherwise, he was really saying that what you see on Fangraphs is mostly useless data. He wasn't wrong about that. The Twins were always collecting statistical data and using it to make decisions. Even Griffith was into it. Sure, in the past what was looked at was often wrong or irrelevant, but the same is true today.

Edited October 5, 2017 by Doomtints

[Mike Sixel]

 

Statistically, a baserunner bunted over to 2nd is more likely to score. Molitor is using analytics. Those who don't like watching bunts on their TV and vent about it here are not using analytics. So what would the front office be saying to Molitor in this instance? Be more popular with the kids at home, or keep using analytics?

 

The number of managers and front offices in major and minor league baseball who don't like statistics or analytics is at or near zero. When Ryan was quoted saying otherwise, he was really saying that what you see on Fangraphs is mostly useless data. He wasn't wrong about that. The Twins were always collecting statistical data and using it to make decisions. Even Griffith was into it. Sure, in the past what was looked at was often wrong or irrelevant, but the same is true today.

 

And, you reduce your odds of scoring more than 1 run. You completely left off the part of the argument that disagrees with your stance. 

 

there literally years and dozens of studies showing that sacrifice bunts early in game decrease your odds of scoring more runs, and of winning. So, yes, we are using analytics. 

Edited October 5, 2017 by Mike Sixel

[ToddlerHarmon]

Coming in to the season, Falvine had to consider whether these players would blossom, how long it would take, and whether Molitor was the right guy to make it happen.

 

It happened, in one season, and with visible, measurable in-season improvements in approach, mechanics, and results by several key players: Buxton, Rosario, Berrios, Gibson, Polanco.

 

That only leaves the question of whether the talent could also turn into wins. It did.

 

I don't see how this adds up to anything but a new contract for Molitor.

[USAFChief]

 

 

 

But what about the bunting? He does bunt too much but I think we should recognize why he does that. How many times this year have the Twins had a runner on second with no outs and not gotten him home?  How many times have we stranded men on third with less than 2 outs? The yin and yang of young players is that they tend not to be good situational hitters and on this Twins team, they all stink at situational hitting except for Mauer. He bunts because his players aren't good at that skill. You watch the good teams play and are good situational hitters up and down the lineup and we just aren't.  It is the second biggest difference between the Twins and the elite teams behind our pitching. Molitor bunts because he has to.  Hopefully that will change as the team and young hitters mature and I don't think we should over criticize him for bunting or have it cost him his job when part of the reason for the bunts is he's trying to mask a flaw in the team by doing so. 

 

 

If the Twins aren't good situational hitters, why would you waste an out bunting, to put the team in a situation calling for situational hitting?

 

If they're not good at getting a runner in from third with 1 out...you bunt to put a runner on third with one out??

 

 

[bizaff]

http://www.tangotiger.net/re24.html

 

"Statistically, a baserunner bunted over to 2nd is more likely to score."  I don't know if there's any data to specifically support this.  What the tables show, all things being equal:

 

1) If you sac bunt a guy from 1st to 2nd, you will score less runs in that inning

2) If you sac bunt a guy from 1st to 2nd, you will be less likely to score 1 run in that inning

 

I read these as both contradicting the quoted statement.

 

The problem is, in game situations all things aren't equal.  If you approach this from an EV (expected value) point of view, situations involving the current batter, current pitcher, and next batter will tweak the numbers somewhat.  If someone hits bad, the bunt may improve either 1), 2) or both.  The thing we DON'T have is context specific information about this batter/this pitcher/next batter.  I wouldn't be a bit surprised if the analytics department HAS calculated these and hands them to Molitor.

 

It's pretty rare you see 2/3/4 bunt; if it's someone that is a worse batter, it may be the best play you have.

 

I'm the first to say, in general, all the bunting is bad.  I am willing to consider that analytics Molitor has that we don't make it the best option.

[spinowner]

Haven't had a chance to read the thread yet, but I just wanted to say that if his contract is not renewed I predict that he handles it with grace, as opposed to how the High-A manager handled it when that happened to him.

[Platoon]

There are so few plain to see, easy to discuss looks inside a managers mindset. The bunting is one. I am not against sac bunting. But there are a lot of caveats, most of them related to the inning, who's AB, who's next, score, location, and opponent of that day's contest. I cannot fathom one that would include a sac bunt in the first 7 innings, let alone early on, or by my 3 hitter. This indicates someone who plays for one run, while owning a pretty poor pitching staff. Odd! Pulling the IF in early seems to give the same impression. Lastly, IF Molitor had say, 3 stellar RP? What's to make anyone think he won't turn them into toast before the trade deadline? Sometimes in a 162 game season, you have to walk away from a game, and let pitchers have that day off. He talks about it, but his game time actions dispute his talk. The team had a nice year, but bringing him back because of the W/L record ignores the fact that this was a weak division, and that when we stuck our heads above the .500 level opponents, we didn't exactly strike fear in anyone's heart.

[yarnivek1972]

I don't know about that. Would Molitor have removed his best starter in the top of the first after recording 1 out?

 

I sincerely doubt it. It's one of his primary weaknesses...his strong tendency to wait until his starter has suffered max damage, and THEN remove him. And it has nothing to do with the quality of his bullpen. If it did, he'd leave the starter in after the 3 run HR too.

After two homeruns and a double? Yeah, I think any manager takes the starter out in the playoffs in that situation.

[Mike Sixel]

It's really, really, really, hard to assess a manager from the outside......on this one, I'll have to just go along with the FO and their decision. IMO, that decision should be  based on whether the manager and the FO are aligned on the plans for the next 2--3 years, and how a team should be run. They don't have to totally agree, that's potentially bad, but they have to be on the same page.

[Broker]

Why even ask this question? The players are probably going to get better as they mature. He managed a playoff team this year. It's not like there is a bunch of experienced managers looking for work.

 

Who knows he might want to retire. He's at retirement age and baseball is a very time consuming business.

[h2oface]

I'm all for replacing Molitor. The virtually inactive new front office needs to implement their own system as soon as possible, and DO IT! Molitor is not part of that. I don't know or care who it will be, but they have been cleaning house in their way from the bottom up. Molitor got his three years. There was no excuse for last year. That counts. I am excited for the future, and hope the new regime surprises me, and actually starts to do something.

[spinowner]

 

They were wrong about the team once already when they sold at the deadline. Just my opinion.

The trades they made at the deadline had no effect at all on whether this team would win the WS this year. I think they made the trades because they felt they were coming out ahead by making them. Just my opinion.

[drjim]

There are so few plain to see, easy to discuss looks inside a managers mindset. The bunting is one. I am not against sac bunting. But there are a lot of caveats, most of them related to the inning, who's AB, who's next, score, location, and opponent of that day's contest. I cannot fathom one that would include a sac bunt in the first 7 innings, let alone early on, or by my 3 hitter. This indicates someone who plays for one run, while owning a pretty poor pitching staff. Odd! Pulling the IF in early seems to give the same impression. Lastly, IF Molitor had say, 3 stellar RP? What's to make anyone think he won't turn them into toast before the trade deadline? Sometimes in a 162 game season, you have to walk away from a game, and let pitchers have that day off. He talks about it, but his game time actions dispute his talk. The team had a nice year, but bringing him back because of the W/L record ignores the fact that this was a weak division, and that when we stuck our heads above the .500 level opponents, we didn't exactly strike fear in anyone's heart.

Regarding your point about relievers, you are aware Giminez made multiple appearances this year right?

 

A new manager would have a hard time improving on the complaints offered in this thread, that he simultaneously used his bullpen too much and also not enough.

[drjim]

I'm all for replacing Molitor. The virtually inactive new front office needs to implement their own system as soon as possible, and DO IT! Molitor is not part of that. I don't know or care who it will be, but they have been cleaning house in their way from the bottom up. Molitor got his three years. There was no excuse for last year. That counts. I am excited for the future, and hope the new regime surprises me, and actually starts to do something.

What do you think these systems are that the front office wants to implement and that Molitor would be incapable of executing?

[yarnivek1972]

I’ve said this before in another thread, but it is worth repeating.

 

Falvey is in charge. He deserves to have a guy of his choosing in the dugout. That’s the bottom line IMO. The decision is less about Molitor and more about Falvey,I think.

[Guest]

I would replace Molitor, because, while he has improved, there are likely better managers out there. It's not like business, where often just being a competent manager makes someone look like an amazing standout. There are only thirty baseball managers - each of them should be fantastic.

 

Btw, I base my opinion only slightly at most on bullpen usage. It seems like nearly every manager is criticized for bullpen usage - leaving the starter in too long, taking the starter out too soon, picking the wrong reliever, riding one reliever, not using the best reliever enough, etc. Memory is that Sparky Anderson was criticized for his bullpen choices and that people would be horrified by how Earl Weaver ran his bullpen. Last year, Joe Maddon - an innovative and excellent manager - was criticized for how he used the best reliever in the world while winning the World Series. Therefore, I cut Molitor a lot of slack here.

 

My main issue is that he seems to be a learner, instead of an innovator, and sometimes he's slow or hesitant (not meaning slow as not smart, because he's plenty smart) at that, which means that he will never come up with something that gives the Twins an advantage. Just learning how to be competent isn't good enough. Secondarily, until the last month, he seemed to be a below-average (for a major league manager) leader, and I'm not sure that the last month was enough to make me think he had become an above-average leader.

[drjim]

[h2oface]

 

 

If true, being good news is definitely a matter of opinion.

[h2oface]

 

What do you think these systems are that the front office wants to implement and that Molitor would be incapable of executing?

 

Nobody knows except the front office at this point, right? I haven't seen any plan. Have you? Does it matter? I stand of the same opinion. I think Molitor had his three years.

[Guest]

Was just about to post reasons to keep him (I would have brought in someone new).

 

1. He's not bad.

2. He's familiar with the players, so less churn would occur.

3. The players seem to like him.

4. He finished the season showing good leadership.

5. Many players showed improvement this year.

[Broker]

Guess that takes care of that.

[drjim]

Per LEN3, whole staff is back too. Kind of surprising.

[Broker]

 

Per LEN3, whole staff is back too. Kind of surprising.

Well they did get the team to the playoffs. That hasn't happened for years. Besides some of the staff have already been replaced.

[drjim]

Nobody knows except the front office at this point, right? I haven't seen any plan. Have you? Does it matter? I stand of the same opinion. I think Molitor had his three years.

Of course I haven't seen the plan, but I also have seen no reason to think Molitor can't adjust and adapt.

 

I would be fine with a new manager, that would be the front office's prerogative. But I do think outside of a handful of bunts Molitor did a really good job this year. Handled a bad bullpen well and oversaw great development from the young hitters.

 

I defend him here because I find most of the criticisms to be weak, unconvincing, and often contradictory. There is not much reason to think a different manager would be all that different (aside from a handful of bunts), and perhaps even worse.

 

I'm glad he's getting another year, I'll be the optimist and say the combination of Molitor and Falvey/Levine might bring out much good in both.

[drjim]

Well they did get the team to the playoffs. That hasn't happened for years. Besides some of the staff have already been replaced.

I thought they would replace Allen.