Astros (Dublin) v Twins (López); 7/5/24 @ 7:10pm CT

[IndyTwinsFan]

Even though it was an interesting and exciting end, we basically got what we deserved tonight.  Another game where largely incompetent pitching did us in again. 

[TwinsCD]

Just now, IndianaTwin said:

As you can maybe tell from my having typed this in the bottom of the ninth, I had gotten away from the iPad for a while, so I was typing after Winder did indeed unravel.

And now the Twins have indeed scored the multiple runs, though obviously against a much lesser reliever.

And now Hader did indeed come in, which was what another poster was hoping for as at least a minor win if it was still a 7-5 game. 

All to say, baseball can be very unpredictable! 😄

Jayson Stark says it every week -- BASEBALL!!

[Parfigliano]

2 minutes ago, Sutter50 said:

Peter is probably very upset

Tomorrow's ruined thats for sure

[IndyTwinsFan]

5 minutes ago, Aggies7 said:

If Margot hits one here I’ll eat my hat 

Your hat is safe for another day. 

[AussieG]

1 minute ago, IndyTwinsFan said:

Even though it was an interesting and exciting end, we basically got what we deserved tonight.  Another game where largely incompetent pitching did us in again. 

And missed chances early with RISP

[IndianaTwin]

5 minutes ago, TwinsCD said:

Well how about that.

NOW YOU SEE WHY I COMPLAINED ABOUT BULLPEN USAGE????

They wouldn’t have been facing Contreras in the ninth. Martin and Farmer wouldn’t have pinch hit. I’m not sure the ninth says much of anything either way.

[Parfigliano]

13 minutes ago, Aggies7 said:

The unstoppable vazquez

2 hits tonight has his BA at .196

[IndyTwinsFan]

1 minute ago, AussieG said:

And missed chances early with RISP

So true!

[mrtwinsfan]

not a pick to click, Pablo and Margo share it tonight,  oh and of course Rocco,    Congrats  Miranda,  

[9moons27]

The usual suspects always complaining about Rocco-YOU ARE INCREDIBLY B-O-O-R-R-R-I-N-G!! Get a new act.

[mrtwinsfan]

Hire Mr, Lee   as a batting coach, 

[USAFChief]

1 minute ago, 9moons27 said:

The usual suspects always complaining about Rocco-YOU ARE INCREDIBLY B-O-O-R-R-R-I-N-G!! Get a new act.

The usual suspects are always making excuses for Rocco

[Sutter50]

Time to flush it and go get em tomorrow 

[IndianaTwin]

11 minutes ago, TwinsCD said:

I can see what you're getting at but we saw Winder unravel after that infield hit.  At that point, it's a 2-run game and it's only the 8th.  Pressley and Hader aren't untouchable.  Plus, at least it gets them into this game and maybe spoils them for the rest of the weekend.  The inconsistency of Rocco taking out one reliever who throws a perfect inning in 10 pitches but letting a Winder situation happen speaks to me that he still has not grasped how to manage a bullpen scenario.

I hear what you are saying, but I think the difference is that Rocco doesn’t let higher-leverage guys go a second inning, while he will let a lower-leverage guy do it, particularly when the win expectancy has reached a certain point. (And I said “win expectancy” intentionally. Folks complain about the “spreadsheet,” but I can imagine that they do indeed have a formula that they use.)

People complain that Rocco lets “winnable” games get away, but a couple years ago the complaint was that he overworked certain relievers so they wore down by year end. Keeping the higher leverage guys at one inning stints is one way of keeping them fresher. It’s a separate discussion, but I think this way of managing reinforces an understanding that Rocco and the FO typically take the long view.

(And to anticipate a comment from someone about my referencing “lower” leverage relievers, note that I didn’t say “low.” I’m not suggesting that there should be someone groomed as a “low-leverage reliever.” I’m saying that in any eight-man bullpen, by definition there are going to be some relievers that are highER leverage than others and there will be others who will be lowER than others. Said another way, by definition, there is going to be a No. 8 guy in the pen. The goal is always to get the No. 8 guy to be as good as possible, but someone’s going to be No. 8 at any given time. For tonight, it was clear that No. 8 was Winder.)

[strumdatjag]

NEVER LEAVE THE BALLPARK EARLY.  You are guaranteeing missing games like tonight’s.  You also guarantee missing the walk-off win.  
For those who say “they lost anyways” or that it was worth “beating the traffic”, you just don’t get it.  
That crowd was Rockin’ and you missed the excitement.   Skip the first inning if you can’t take in a full game. 

[RpR]

24 minutes ago, Patzky said:

Actually no. 

Why not?

[IndyTwinsFan]

11 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

The usual suspects are always making excuses for Rocco

Curious that they seldom pin any blame on the players themselves.  IMO, that's where most of the blame should usually go.

[RpR]

1 minute ago, IndyTwinsFan said:

Curious that they seldom pin any blame on the players themselves.  IMO, that's where most of the blame should usually go.

Not here though, that would be too logical.☠️

[IndyTwinsFan]

1 minute ago, RpR said:

Not here though, that would be too logical.☠️

I'd like this twice, if I could.

[IndianaTwin]

22 minutes ago, Aggies7 said:

Yep. May even happen tomorrow especially if altuve is injured 

I was on the radio, still listening to the Astros broadcast. They gave no indication of Altuve getting hit intentionally. So you’re saying you’re okay with Miranda being hurt for a couple weeks because Winder was having control problems?

 

And for the record, though I’m not a big fan of the retaliation HBP mindset, I thought that if they were going to do it on Sunday, they did it the right way. It was in the ninth inning so there was no chance of the Tigers retaliating for the retaliation. They had already gotten one (maybe even two, I forget?) out. It was lefty on lefty, using up the platoon disadvantage, so they were doing it in such a way that minimized the minute chance of an HBP contributing to a rally.

Similarly, it seemed pretty clear that pinch hitting Martin and Farmer was about Rocco essentially saying, “If you’re going to do, do it now so it doesn’t hurt our best players. If you’re going to hold off and do it later so you can get one of our better players, you may be stuck with doing it at times when the game is much closer.

If the Astros didn’t do it tonight, but plan to do it sometime, I think it’s more likely they will wait and do it on Sunday rather than tomorrow, for some of the same reasons. That could change if tomorrow’s game ends up being a laugher.

[TwinsCD]

8 minutes ago, IndianaTwin said:

I hear what you are saying, but I think the difference is that Rocco doesn’t let higher-leverage guys go a second inning, while he will let a lower-leverage guy do it, particularly when the win expectancy has reached a certain point. (And I said “win expectancy” intentionally. Folks complain about the “spreadsheet,” but I can imagine that they do indeed have a formula that they use.)

People complain that Rocco lets “winnable” games get away, but a couple years ago the complaint was that he overworked certain relievers so they wore down by year end. Keeping the higher leverage guys at one inning stints is one way of keeping them fresher. It’s a separate discussion, but I think this way of managing reinforces an understanding that Rocco and the FO typically take the long view.

(And to anticipate a comment from someone about my referencing “lower” leverage relievers, note that I didn’t say “low.” I’m not suggesting that there should be someone groomed as a “low-leverage reliever.” I’m saying that in any eight-man bullpen, by definition there are going to be some relievers that are highER leverage than others and there will be others who will be lowER than others. Said another way, by definition, there is going to be a No. 8 guy in the pen. The goal is always to get the No. 8 guy to be as good as possible, but someone’s going to be No. 8 at any given time. For tonight, it was clear that No. 8 was Winder.)

I get that too.  In a game that's probably out of reach, you burn the #8 guy.  But in a 2-run game in the 7th, that win expectancy still has to be looking pretty good, especially with the way the Twins offense has been going.  So you toss out the #7 guy (either Funderburke or Thielbar) and try your luck.  I'd have preferred Staumont as he's been pretty good with a clean inning.  Of course, given his return from the TOS, maybe he needs extra days rest between stints.  And OK, I'll concede that guys like Alcala, Jax, Stewart, and Duran probably don't get more than their one inning but after seeing how Winder deteriorated so quickly with a runner on base, he didn't need to be out there in a 2-run game.

[thelanges5]

Wallner had the night off?

[USAFChief]

16 minutes ago, IndyTwinsFan said:

Curious that they seldom pin any blame on the players themselves.  IMO, that's where most of the blame should usually go.

Seldom?

I think it's fair to recognize both poor players AND poor management. They're not mutually exclusive. 

And I don't see many, if any, people who want the manager replaced who don't also recognize and comment on both good and bad play.

And rather ironically, one of my primary complaints about Rocco is his absolute refusal to recognize bad play from his players.

He plays Vazquez at catcher as much as Jeffers, ferpetesakes.

Your beef should be with Rocco, for not placing blame appropriately.  

 

 

 

[IndyTwinsFan]

2 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

I think it's fair to recognize both poor players AND poor management. They're not mutually exclusive. 

 

In some cases, I agree completely with that.  But to imply it's largely the manager's fault alone is being very short-sighted, IMHO. 

I feel that some posters here are taking that approach more often than is probably necessary. 

[USAFChief]

2 minutes ago, IndyTwinsFan said:

In some cases, I agree completely with that.  But to imply it's largely the manager's fault alone is being very short-sighted, IMHO. 

I feel that some posters here are taking that approach more often than is probably necessary. 

Fair enough.

I'm just so done with Rocco I'm not always capable of objectivity on the matter. I try....

 

[IndyTwinsFan]

8 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Seldom?

I think it's fair to recognize both poor players AND poor management. They're not mutually exclusive. 

And I don't see many, if any, people who want the manager replaced who don't also recognize and comment on both good and bad play.

And rather ironically, one of my primary complaints about Rocco is his absolute refusal to recognize bad play from his players.

He plays Vazquez at catcher as much as Jeffers, ferpetesakes.

Your beef should be with Rocco, for not placing blame appropriately.  

 

 

 

I don't disagree with your point at all.  We obviously don't know what Rocco says or does behind closed doors, but it appears as though he's reluctant to blame anyone, as it doesn't seem to be in his nature. 

[IndyTwinsFan]

2 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Fair enough.

I'm just so done with Rocco I'm not always capable of objectivity on the matter. I try....

 

Your efforts on that end are commendable.  Thanks for trying!

[sampleSizeOfOne]

I fell asleep as Contreras came in to pitch the bottom of the 9th.

 

My bad we didn't make it all the way back.

[sampleSizeOfOne]

37 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Fair enough.

I'm just so done with Rocco I'm not always capable of objectivity on the matter. I try....

 

Is objectivity being able to object to things? I think you are very capable.

[IndianaTwin]

4 minutes ago, TwinsCD said:

I get that too.  In a game that's probably out of reach, you burn the #8 guy.  But in a 2-run game in the 7th, that win expectancy still has to be looking pretty good, especially with the way the Twins offense has been going.  So you toss out the #7 guy (either Funderburke or Thielbar) and try your luck.  I'd have preferred Staumont as he's been pretty good with a clean inning.  Of course, given his return from the TOS, maybe he needs extra days rest between stints.  And OK, I'll concede that guys like Alcala, Jax, Stewart, and Duran probably don't get more than their one inning but after seeing how Winder deteriorated so quickly with a runner on base, he didn't need to be out there in a 2-run game.

I don’t think we’re yelling at each other, so thanks for respectful discussion. I’ll continue. 

Apologies in advance. This got WAAAAAY longer than I’d planned.

I’ll be curious to see what the win expectancy was entering the eighth (EDIT to add — it was down to 13 percent, which supports some of my comments below.). I’m sure it’s available mid game, though I don’t know where to look. It would also be interesting to look at it over time and see if there is indeed a general number that seems to be the tipping point of when he makes someone the sacrificial lamb. Even with that number, however, I’m sure there are nuances. For example, in tonight’s game would he have been more likely to go to No. 7 or even No. 6 if Pressly and Hader weren’t available and they would have been going against the Astros Nos. 3 and 4, etc.?

I’m a curious guy by nature and tend to be pretty analytical, so I really would find it fun to be a fly on the wall as those conversations are happening, both with his coaches mid game and more importantly, with their analytics and front office folks in the offseason and pregame, which is where they develop the overarching principles they will abide by in game management. 

Tonight, for example, I’m trying to put myself in Rocco’s head on the decisions about Winder, both to use him at all and then to use him for a second. Here’s what I imagine: 

• I got hurt by Lopez only going five, so I have to get four innings from the pen. Lopez had struggled through five, but I’d really like to get another inning from him. Unfortunately, single-single-single loads the bases. 
• I go to Alcala to hopefully minimize the damage and try to get out of it. Unfortunately, he allows two guys to score, so I’m in position of using my bullpen from behind, rather than tied or even ahead if my offense scores in the sixth. He also threw 24 pitches, so it’s not realistic to consider him for another inning. 
• I don’t want to use Jax and Duran until the eighth and nine, and preferably only with a lead. At worst, with a tie.
• Similarly, I’d rather not use Stewart unless we’re in a spot with a higher likelihood of winning.
• I’d rather not use Staumont because of the rest factor (which I’ll explain later).
• So unless we score some runs, that leaves me with Winder, Funderburke and Thielbar to get through the remaining three innings. The choice is either to use them for one inning each or to use one of them for two innings. If the former, I’m ensuring myself of my three lowest-level guys having each thrown an inning going into tomorrow. If the latter, I need to get two innings out of one of them (or a combination of 1.2 and 1.1, but I prefer fresh innings for guys).
• I (IT speaking) think I agree with the general principle of not using all three and trying to get two innings out of one of them. Since Winder is going to be down by Tuesday anyway, it makes sense to try squeezing two innings out of him. (And since they did squeeze a second inning he threw 43 pitches, he’s realistically shot for Saturday, Sunday and probably even Monday, so I wonder if he actually gets sent down tomorrow for a fresh body that will in turn be sent down when Paddack comes back Tuesday. But I digress.)
• So Winder gets the seventh. Two whiffs, followed by a single that’s listed as to Winder. I wasn’t following closely at that point — was he actually close to getting out with a 1-2-3? Unfortunately, the single happens, as does a 2B and a HBP before a ground ball. 
• Heading to the eighth, again down two, whatever my (Rocco speaking again) win percentage entering the seventh, it’s not even lower. (EDIT to add: It was down to 13 percent.) I still don’t want to use Duran, Jax, Stewart and Staumont for the reasons listed above and Staumont for the reason described below. Thus my choices are another inning for Winder or two innings from either Funderburke or Thielbar. I wonder if my thought process at that point is, “I’m not sure I really trust either of the latter for two innings, and I don’t want to risk needing to use them both. I know I’m going to be sending Winder down. He’s already thrown 21 pitches, so I don’t have him for tomorrow and maybe not Sunday, but if I go ahead and use him a second inning, I can send him down tomorrow and have a fresh body. Besides, he looked good on the first several hitters in the seventh, so maybe he can pull it together.” 
• Unfortunately the eighth didn’t start well, Whatever the win percentage was (13 percent), it went down after hitting Altuve (to 11.2). And even further after Bergman singles (to 8.7). Now what? The likelihood of either Thielbar or Funderburke bailing me out with no runs is slim, and even if they do, I’ve needed to use that guy for a full inning, and I still have to cover the ninth.
• Realistically, by this point, Rocco has now committed to Winder being out there for a while. Best case scenario, he gets out with maybe only one run and we’ve still got six outs to score, though now we have to get three runs to tie. Unfortunately, worst case happens, with a little help from Margot, though that only cost the Twins one run. Even without the error, it still would have been 9-5.
• Instead it was 10-5 and the Twins didn’t score in the bottom of the eighth. So now it gets turned over to Funderburke or Thielbar for the ninth. Unfortunately, more worst case scenario happens. 

So… I don’t know if I would have done it this way (IT speaking again), but there is a logic behind it that I can understand.

 

On Staumont, I’ve been kinda in and out on Game Threads recently, but there have been a couple people clamoring loudly for him. Have you been one of those? I’m actually intrigued by him as well. I had moderately high hopes with the signing, so I was bummed that he got hurt. I do wonder if the caution they’ve shown with him the last two weeks is related to his coming back from injury. His last two outings have come on a whopping six days rest each, but that was on the heels of a stretch of going six games in 12 days, which is pretty intense, particularly when you consider that in three of those he actually went more than an inning. So I wonder if they are going with some pretty extended rest times if possible in response to some initial signs of overuse and in lieu of an IL stint. He also did pitch on Wednesday, though it was only 13 pitches. He probably could have pitched tonight in an emergency. It will be interesting to see their willingness the next couple days if the situation calls for it. At the least, he seems like he’s climbed to at least No. 5 in the pecking order, maybe even ahead of Alcala to No. 4.