It's the Roster

[BiggestRoccoFan]

12 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

Clearly.  Really?  Have you been in the clubhouse.  Have you observed his interaction with players?  None of us have nearly enough information to offer an opinion and that's assuming expertise in leadership.    

I've seen his demeanor in the dug out and frankly, That is all I need to see.

[BiggestRoccoFan]

31 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Based on what? Outcomes? 

Also, yes or no, the OF hitters on this roster are legit starters? 

I think Kiriloff and Michael A Taylor are legitimate starters. 

Based on Rocco's demeanor and also the decisions he makes on a daily basis.

Do you think the players are playing hard for this guy?

He has lost this team.

 

[DJL44]

2 minutes ago, BiggestRoccoFan said:

I think Kiriloff and Michael A Taylor are legitimate starters. 

Taylor is 39th in WAR among CF. He's a below average player and a marginal starting CF. If Taylor was Plan A for CF they messed up.

[Mike Sixel]

5 minutes ago, BiggestRoccoFan said:

I think Kiriloff and Michael A Taylor are legitimate starters. 

Based on Rocco's demeanor and also the decisions he makes on a daily basis.

Do you think the players are playing hard for this guy?

He has lost this team.

 

You base this on what? We have no idea how the players feel about him. None.

[In My La Z boy]

4 minutes ago, BiggestRoccoFan said:

I think Kiriloff and Michael A Taylor are legitimate starters. 

Based on Rocco's demeanor and also the decisions he makes on a daily basis.

Do you think the players are playing hard for this guy?

He has lost this team.

 

Results are results. How do you measure anything if not by results. We play the games and whoever scores the most wins. How do you evaluate Rocco and this FO if not by the results. We can debate anything and everything and everyone has an opinion. What is not an opinion are the results. I agree he's lost the team based on our results.

[Mike Sixel]

6 minutes ago, BiggestRoccoFan said:

I think Kiriloff and Michael A Taylor are legitimate starters. 

Based on Rocco's demeanor and also the decisions he makes on a daily basis.

Do you think the players are playing hard for this guy?

He has lost this team.

 

As pointed out, no, Taylor isn't close to a legit starting CF. And, there is no indication they want AK in the OF right now (I'd do it, but if you look at AK this whole year, he's not been all that good, yet).

[Mike Sixel]

1 minute ago, In My La Z boy said:

Results are results. How do you measure anything if not by results. We play the games and whoever scores the most wins. How do you evaluate Rocco and this FO if not by the results. We can debate anything and everything and everyone has an opinion. What is not an opinion are the results. I agree he's lost the team based on our results.

You can do the wrong thing, and it works. You can do the right thing, and it doesn't work. You judge people by what they do. 

For example, if you drive home drunk and make it, would you judge that as right? And keep doing it?

That said, I have no idea if Rocco is good at his job, and admit he might be part of the problem (but IMO, the problem is the skill of the players).

[BiggestRoccoFan]

2 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

As pointed out, no, Taylor isn't close to a legit starting CF. And, there is no indication they want AK in the OF right now (I'd do it, but if you look at AK this whole year, he's not been all that good, yet).

Taylor is a gold glove winner man and a decent hitter.

If he played every single day he would be hitting about .250.

How can anyone get good sitting on the bench every other day?

Royce Lewis goes 3-4 one night and rests the next 2 games.

Baseball is not the most taxing sport of all time so not sure why Rocco does all of this load management.

I call him RedCross Rocco.

[In My La Z boy]

2 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

You can do the wrong thing, and it works. You can do the right thing, and it doesn't work. You judge people by what they do. 

For example, if you drive home drunk and make it, would you judge that as right? And keep doing it?

That said, I have no idea if Rocco is good at his job, and admit he might be part of the problem (but IMO, the problem is the skill of the players).

My bank takes back my business if I don't make my payments. They only care about results. Your boss doesn't care about your reasoning/excuses, he pays you for results. Baseball is business. Business is results only. Spare me the reasons you couldn't get your job done. Spare me the reasons why we stink. We stink. We're not talking about life here. We're talking baseball. Whoever scores the most wins, ugly, lucky, drunk, no matter, score more runs and win the game.

[Woof Bronzer]

30 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

You can do the wrong thing, and it works. You can do the right thing, and it doesn't work. You judge people by what they do. 

For example, if you drive home drunk and make it, would you judge that as right? And keep doing it?

That said, I have no idea if Rocco is good at his job, and admit he might be part of the problem (but IMO, the problem is the skill of the players).

Do you think Rocco gets paid to win?  Or does he get paid to have a sweet process?

[chpettit19]

25 minutes ago, BiggestRoccoFan said:

Taylor is a gold glove winner man and a decent hitter.

If he played every single day he would be hitting about .250.

How can anyone get good sitting on the bench every other day?

Royce Lewis goes 3-4 one night and rests the next 2 games.

Baseball is not the most taxing sport of all time so not sure why Rocco does all of this load management.

I call him RedCross Rocco.

MAT has hit .250 twice in his career. In 2019 while playing 53 games for the Nats, and last year playing 124 games in KC. There is no reason at all to think him playing everyday would lead to a .250 hitter. And he's played 73 of their 82 games while missing time after getting hit in the head with a pitch. He's a terrible example for your point.

I do agree with the frustrations around the scheduled off days that lead to sitting guys who are playing well, though.

[Hubie29]

2 hours ago, Jocko87 said:

My friend, you have 12 posts.  Forgive us if we missed one.

At least they are accurate. 

[Woof Bronzer]

Just now, Woof Bronzer said:

Do you think Rocco gets paid to win?  Or does he get paid to have a sweet process?

Actually, I retract the question.  With this FO nothing is off the table.

[Mike Sixel]

4 minutes ago, Woof Bronzer said:

Do you think Rocco gets paid to win?  Or does he get paid to have a sweet process?

I think the problem is the players aren't good. I think I've been pretty clear on that.

To add:

I don't think any manager could win at a decent clip with three bad OFers, CC playing like this, and Buxton being hurt. Not one. So, as I've said, I don't know if I'd fire him or not, because I don't think we know if he can manage a good (complete, with good players hitting and pitching) or not, other than the two years he had that and they won.

[chpettit19]

2 minutes ago, Woof Bronzer said:

Do you think Rocco gets paid to win?  Or does he get paid to have a sweet process?

This, to me, is a very complex question. He's paid to execute the "sweet process" of the FO that they believe will lead to wins. And I think that's part of the hesitation in firing him. He's doing things the way the FO wants them done.

That doesn't mean he's a "yes man" or "puppet," though. The FO hires people who agree with their general approach, and theories, on baseball. The FO firing Rocco, or the coaches, is saying, at least in part, that their approaches, theories, whatever are wrong. It then becomes much harder for them to explain to the Pohlads why they should be allowed more time to fix things.

So, the answers to your questions, to me, are both yes. But the winning is the expected results from the sweet process.

[chpettit19]

55 minutes ago, BiggestRoccoFan said:

I've seen his demeanor in the dug out and frankly, That is all I need to see.

What should his demeanor be? Any modern managers you can point to with better demeanors that we should be looking at as examples?

[Mike Sixel]

4 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

This, to me, is a very complex question. He's paid to execute the "sweet process" of the FO that they believe will lead to wins. And I think that's part of the hesitation in firing him. He's doing things the way the FO wants them done.

That doesn't mean he's a "yes man" or "puppet," though. The FO hires people who agree with their general approach, and theories, on baseball. The FO firing Rocco, or the coaches, is saying, at least in part, that their approaches, theories, whatever are wrong. It then becomes much harder for them to explain to the Pohlads why they should be allowed more time to fix things.

So, the answers to your questions, to me, are both yes. But the winning is the expected results from the sweet process.

This is a great point......it is also interesting, because it is the theory that the hitting coach should be fired. 

If the players are just doing what the coach is saying, then he should be fired because the process he's put in place isn't working. But, as you point out, the FO wants THAT PROCESS. So, unless they admit their mistake and adjust, they are the real issue (if it is process, and not skill). 

[chpettit19]

1 minute ago, Mike Sixel said:

This is a great point......it is also interesting, because it is the theory that the hitting coach should be fired. 

If the players are just doing what the coach is saying, then he should be fired because the process he's put in place isn't working. But, as you point out, the FO wants THAT PROCESS. So, unless they admit their mistake and adjust, they are the real issue (if it is process, and not skill). 

I think it's both. It's a flawed process (building nearly an entire offense around high K, low BA, high HR hitters) that leads to flawed talents since you're attempting to find players that fill your flawed process.

[Major League Ready]

1 hour ago, In My La Z boy said:

The tides roll out, the tides roll in. The sun comes up, and the sun goes down. Routine matters. Familiarity matters. Consistency matters. We are by nature creatures of habit. It is human nature. Baseball players are typically routine and rhythm orientated, as most people are. Yes, their role is to hit no matter, but a coach can facilitate this process by implementing routines and rhythms and continuity. Like a kid or a dog acts and performs better when knowing exactly what to expect and what time to expect it. A coaches job (and front office) is to lay the groundwork and set the conditions for the players to have the best opportunity for success. 

I doubt anyone so mentally fragile that changing their batting order position would impede their performance that badly could make it to the front of a major league lineup.

[Mike Sixel]

6 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

I think it's both. It's a flawed process (building nearly an entire offense around high K, low BA, high HR hitters) that leads to flawed talents since you're attempting to find players that fill your flawed process.

Fair, my main point was that process matters, and the FO dictates the process, and if process isn't working, that's on the FO (as is the skill of the players).

[chpettit19]

50 minutes ago, In My La Z boy said:

My bank takes back my business if I don't make my payments. They only care about results. Your boss doesn't care about your reasoning/excuses, he pays you for results. Baseball is business. Business is results only. Spare me the reasons you couldn't get your job done. Spare me the reasons why we stink. We stink. We're not talking about life here. We're talking baseball. Whoever scores the most wins, ugly, lucky, drunk, no matter, score more runs and win the game.

Results are definitely what matters, and our bosses will fire us no matter what our processes are if we're not getting results, but the company's results won't improve if the processes being executed are the bosses, and don't change. That's why I put this mess on the FO. You have to change them to see real change in the organizations results.

[chpettit19]

Just now, Mike Sixel said:

Fair, my main point was that process matters, and the FO dictates the process, and if process isn't working, that's on the FO (as is the skill of the players).

Oh, I 100% agree. This all starts at the top.

[Woof Bronzer]

17 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

He's doing things the way the FO wants them done.

This is the key point and why I "retracted" my comment.  I have said for a while that even if he's fired (he won't be) he'll just be replaced with a replica.  I will say that sports are a results based business though.  And I wish this organization, from top to bottom, was more focused on results.  Coaches are rarely if ever fired for having a bad process.  They're fired for losing. 

[TwinsDr2021]

9 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

I think it's both. It's a flawed process (building nearly an entire offense around high K, low BA, high HR hitters) that leads to flawed talents since you're attempting to find players that fill your flawed process.

Honest question, do you think the FO thought/thinks Larnach, Miranda, AK high K, low BA, high HR hitters? or have they tried to turn them into something they are not?

To me all of these players can't be this bad, IMO they have looking at the number incorrectly thinking exit velocity is the key to hitting and runs, and when reality is actually being a good hitter leads to exit velocity?

IDK

[Danchat]

1 hour ago, BiggestRoccoFan said:

Taylor is a gold glove winner man and a decent hitter.

If he played every single day he would be hitting about .250.

How can anyone get good sitting on the bench every other day?

Royce Lewis goes 3-4 one night and rests the next 2 games.

Baseball is not the most taxing sport of all time so not sure why Rocco does all of this load management.

I call him RedCross Rocco.

Taylor is not a decent hitter, he hasn't been above average per OPS since 2017, is sub .300 OBP in the past 4 years - even now, in what is a above average season for him (compared to the past 5 years), he has a pitiful .258 OBP. He's a mediocre hitter who is a plus defender in the outfield.

Lewis sitting frequently is probably a plan from the whole collaboration, not just Rocco. Just like Buxton. You can fire Rocco and pretend like that will be the main factor to improving the team, but this front office will just replace him with someone who fits their vision. Resting players incessantly and over-platooning isn't going to come to a total halt without him.

[chpettit19]

11 minutes ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

Honest question, do you think the FO thought/thinks Larnach, Miranda, AK high K, low BA, high HR hitters? or have they tried to turn them into something they are not?

To me all of these players can't be this bad, IMO they have looking at the number incorrectly thinking exit velocity is the key to hitting and runs, and when reality is actually being a good hitter leads to exit velocity?

IDK

I lean towards the idea that they're relying too much on batted ball data. To me, that's why Kepler is still here. I think they've dove off the edge of the analytics cliff. It certainly feels like they really struggle with reading what the numbers are really saying, and are too invested in the numbers at the same time. That's not a good combination.

They have too many specialized players who they see exciting data for in specific areas that they think they can slot in correctly to maximize. And too few just really good baseball players. They feel like undergrads trying to do graduate level mathematics. They may get the general concepts, but can't really execute the formulas consistently enough.

[Woof Bronzer]

36 minutes ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

 or have they tried to turn them into something they are not?

Ask former #1 prospect Austin Martin...

[Azviking101]

Nearly every veteran is having a career worst strikeout season. It’s great that Rocco decided to speak up but this isn’t a coincidence. 
 

The direction that the FO and coaching staff have put this team on is wrong and needs to be remedied. 

[NotAboutWinning]

46 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

I lean towards the idea that they're relying too much on batted ball data. To me, that's why Kepler is still here. I think they've dove off the edge of the analytics cliff. It certainly feels like they really struggle with reading what the numbers are really saying, and are too invested in the numbers at the same time. That's not a good combination.

They have too many specialized players who they see exciting data for in specific areas that they think they can slot in correctly to maximize. And too few just really good baseball players. They feel like undergrads trying to do graduate level mathematics. They may get the general concepts, but can't really execute the formulas consistently enough.

This is spot on! And not at all encouraging that changes in the clubhouse will make any difference.

[Woof Bronzer]

19 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

I think they've dove off the edge of the analytics cliff. It certainly feels like they really struggle with reading what the numbers are really saying, and are too invested in the numbers at the same time. That's not a good combination.

. They feel like undergrads trying to do graduate level mathematics. They may get the general concepts, but can't really execute the formulas consistently enough.

I think this is really astute.  I'd say they are MBAs trying to do high level statistics as I tend to think they fundamentally misunderstand the science and nuance of statistics.  For example, just because data suggests bunts are not the most efficient way to score piles of runs over the long run doesn't mean there isn't a time and place for a bunt.  And large sample size averages are not particularly meaningful for in-game decisions because you need to account for the specifics of the situation which are almost never "average" or neutral.  

Where it gets really odd though is they will also look at a guy like J Lopez or Pagan where almost all the advanced metrics point to them being terrible, but they decide to ignore this and just hope & pray they can change them.

Not to mention other "old school" stuff like only using Duran in save situations.

I won't pretend that process isn't important, but they don't even have a coherent process.