Rockies 5, Twins 4: Varland Strong in Return, but Four-Run Sixth Frame Costs Thielbar, Twins

[bean5302]

2 hours ago, DJL44 said:

I'm saying he's only received 19 innings because every time they extend his outing he's been terrible. They have every reason to keep Louie Varland on a short leash. I thought they were pushing their luck having him go 5 innings.

2022, 2023, 2024, Career xFIP
FTO = 4.27, 4.31, 4.43, 4.32
STO = 3.05, 3.40, 4.62, 3.57 
TTO = 6.69, 5.32, 2.76, 5.12

The problem with him being "terrible" in the TTO is guys allowed to pitch TTO are given the quick hook when things don't go well. Rather than being given the opportunity to pitch out of a jam or pitch after allowing a home run, the manager calls in a reliever. Those runs allowed by the starter (or the reliever who allows inherited runners to score) get hung on the pitcher's TTO ERA and FIP, without the ability to offset them by continuing to pitch under the assumption the pitcher is no longer going to be effective moving forward. This artificially inflates ERA/FIP and perpetuates the TTO myth.

In general, the difference between FTO -> STO is worse than STO -> TTO when I've looked at MLB as a whole for larger sample sizes, and the jump from STO -> TTO has sometimes been negligible in xFIP. The question, though, is not whether or not the pitcher is worse than they started the game, it's whether or not the starter is worse than a reliever you'd replace them with or how the replacement impacts the bullpen's readiness.

[h2oface]

9 hours ago, Doctor Gast said:

Rocco pulled SWR with less than 5 innings, without the chance he could win the game in his 1st outing. The idea was to have SWR leave on a high note & not to jeopardize that. IMO it's the same idea with Varland on his 1st outing back with the chance that he could get the win if we scored & the BP held. That didn't happen, if it had everybody would be happy. No one knows if Varland pitched the 6th & blew up. Now that'd be a disaster. At least we have a good outing from Varland & him flying high.

I'd DFA Thielbar, nobody'd pick him up & he can work on his stuff in AAA. If he corrects what's wrong, great bring him back up. We can't afford him doing it up here 

How is that working for the hitters? Do they get confidence from getting 2 or three hits and then the manager's reward is to sit them the very next game? Or a couple hits early in the game, seeing the ball well, and then get pulled for a guy that is hitting .110, and never getting the chance to hit oppo pitchers? Do they say to themselves "great, at least I didn't have to take another at bat and maybe strikeout. I'm so condident, now."? Would Varland have more confidence, and be way better for it, if he had, this time, while he was pitching well, been rewarded with the opportunity to add the 6th, and maybe the 7th, and DID take the order down the 3rd time? Pulled for Thielbar, and his horrible year, is like Larnach getting pulled for Margot in the 6th, after Larnach had 2 hits early in the game. Really building confidence for Larnach. 

No one knows if Varland pitched the 6th & shut them down. Now that'd be a flying high moment for Varland. 

If you baby players, like if you baby children and don't give them the opportunity to fail, they will always be babies, and not grow up. Now Varland is confident the manager has no confidence in him. How is that a good thing for confidence building? This was a time that a player deserves the opportunity to grow, and break on through to the other side. A good manager would see that and take that chance, rather than banking on this year's Thielbar in a tight game, the game he had only given up one hit and one walk on 63 pitches through 5.

How did it all work for Thiebar's confidence? What if he brings Thielbar in and he fails miserably again? Right. Who cares, eh?

[tony&rodney]

7 hours ago, Ricky Vaughn said:

I don't disagree with you at all. However part of the fun of baseball is its the one sport where if you understand the game at all you can second guess the team management every game. We like to pretend were experts even if we know were not.

Nothing wrong with the disagreements. I'm rarely watch any sport other than baseball but I coached basketball for near thirty years. I wondered why the Timberwolves didn't just let Doncic get his points and take away his passing options. No double. I also wondered why the Wolves seemed to avoid driving on Doncic to make him play both ends of the floor. Yes, I disagree with Baldelli too sometimes. Certainly the game has changed in my seven decades.

It does seem though that some folks belittle Baldelli as if they ever knew  a sliver of baseball knowledge by comparison. Pretend is a wonderful thing but comments should also keep a foot in reality which you clearly do from your reply.

[bean5302]

5 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

Nothing wrong with the disagreements. I'm rarely watch any sport other than baseball but I coached basketball for near thirty years. I wondered why the Timberwolves didn't just let Doncic get his points and take away his passing options. No double. I also wondered why the Wolves seemed to avoid driving on Doncic to make him play both ends of the floor. Yes, I disagree with Baldelli too sometimes. Certainly the game has changed in my seven decades.

It does seem though that some folks belittle Baldelli as if they ever knew  a sliver of baseball knowledge by comparison. Pretend is a wonderful thing but comments should also keep a foot in reality which you clearly do from your reply.

I don't have nearly the experience or behind the scenes baseball knowledge anybody playing or coaching/managing in MLB has. 

I can tell you definitively Joe Mauer was better than Drew Butera or Mike Trout was better than Ben Revere because I can evaluate the players compared to other players. I don't need to be a position player or catcher to do that. I also don't need to be an MLB manager to second guess decision making which appears bizarre or that other teams openly criticize (like the Yankees broadcasters recently).

Btw, baseball coaches, managers and players were not the ones who developed the best stats used to evaluate game performance. Writers and stat heads and geeks were. The very same stats that Baldelli and this front office live and die by, and the stats which have totally changed how baseball is played.

Your comment is nothing more than a smoothed over, pompous attempt at gatekeeping who gets to speak or have an opinion, and how much of an opinion, based on the criteria you have chosen.

[Major League Ready]

12 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

Nothing wrong with the disagreements. I'm rarely watch any sport other than baseball but I coached basketball for near thirty years. I wondered why the Timberwolves didn't just let Doncic get his points and take away his passing options. No double. I also wondered why the Wolves seemed to avoid driving on Doncic to make him play both ends of the floor. Yes, I disagree with Baldelli too sometimes. Certainly the game has changed in my seven decades.

It does seem though that some folks belittle Baldelli as if they ever knew  a sliver of baseball knowledge by comparison. Pretend is a wonderful thing but comments should also keep a foot in reality which you clearly do from your reply.

I would have let Varland go until he allowed a base runner.  However, I never played Milb or MLB.  I have not had countless discussions with MLB pitchers and pitching coaches and I have not experienced the game from inside the dugout or the clubhouse and I don't know Louie Varland.   Understanding stats is not all that difficult.  The experience and critical thinking skills, and leadership ability to use them in the broader context of managing a team not so simple.  Your post is appreciated by some of us even if those who think they are better equipped to manage a MLB team lash out at you.

[tony&rodney]

7 hours ago, bean5302 said:

Your comment is nothing more than a smoothed over, pompous attempt at gatekeeping who gets to speak or have an opinion, and how much of an opinion, based on the criteria you have chosen.

My comment was a mild attempt to remind those who assess MLB employees that it is possible to be reflective and treat entertainment less harshly and enjoy aspects of games, even when your team is unsuccessful.

All opinions are welcome. I have no criteria. 

Your responses are angry and while it is a wonderful thing that you may be an avid follower of baseball, perhaps allow a little happiness into the experience. Try to enjoy baseball.

I'm sorry and apologize for triggering you with my relatively meaningless comments. Peace.

[bean5302]

4 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

My comment was a mild attempt to remind those who assess MLB employees that it is possible to be reflective and treat entertainment less harshly and enjoy aspects of games, even when your team is unsuccessful.

All opinions are welcome. I have no criteria. 

Your responses are angry and while it is a wonderful thing that you may be an avid follower of baseball, perhaps allow a little happiness into the experience. Try to enjoy baseball.

I'm sorry and apologize for triggering you with my relatively meaningless comments. Peace.

You're not sorry so why say it unless it's obvious sarcasm? Also, why apologize to me? I might not even be one of the people you initially insulted.

The backhanded "I'm so smart nobody can tell I'm throwing insults at them" posture you've taken is a bigger insult than the thinly veiled intent of your comments in the first place.

Side note, I'm not at all mad, and my comment has nothing to do with baseball at all. It's a pet peeve of mine when people debate the validity of the person making the argument rather than the subject of the debate, and that's what you've done in the comments I take issue with. I can be hypocritical doing the same thing from time to time, but I try hard to avoid it.