Guardians 2, Twins 1: Long, Dry Rain Delay Begets Short, Dry Walkoff Loss

1 hour ago, JD-TWINS said:

Didn’t understand your comment initially - I think we’re on same page:

Pretty sure his ERA after his first start is under 3.00…… shouldn’t have to shutout Teams to get a favorable outcome!!

I’m not in love with Paddack in the rotation (lack of K’s & walks too many) but one has to be fair - he’s pitched well (well as expected) in last 5 consecutive outings.

He has done quite well and if he can hold up hour he'll be well worth $7 million on a contending team. Truly we have given up 1, 0, 1 and 2 runs the last four games. 

Pitching has settled in nicely. 

22 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

Julien is seeing 4.2 pitches per plate appearance. League average is 3.9 p/PA

He's seeing them and not swinging at them.

1 hour ago, LA VIkes Fan said:

This could get interesting. You have to figure that Clemens goes when Lewis comes back. Then it gets a little dicey. When Castro is ready (should be soon), who goes?  Bride has raked since he came and the Twins coaching staff fixed his swing (can't believe I just wrote that). Not only that Bride was a .276/.367/.461 (.818) hitter last year with 11 HRs and a 55/31 SO/BB ratio in 262 PAs and palys 3B, 1B, 2B, and LF in a pinch. Sounds like a good guy to have around. Gasper hasn't been good at the plate (.583 OPS overall, but .686 in the last 7 games), but is a 3rd catcher and he's been a lot better than Keirsey. I was beating the drum for Keirsey last year but it looks like the FO was smarter than me; Keirsey hasn't shown/can't hit MLB pitching. Do we make Castro the 4th OF until Wallner comes back and send Keirsey back to AAA? Do we keep Keirsey for his speed and OF glove and send someone else down? Who is that, Julien or Gaspar? Two weeks ago that would have been an easy answer, now, I'm not so sure.  Are we going to give McCusker a shot in the OF?

I would make a series of moves when Lewis and Castro come back in the next week or two. Lewis for Clemens, Castro for Keirsey, and McCusker for either Julien or Gaspar. Still probably Gaspar goes but that could change over the next week. McCusker and Julien/Gaspar are then playing for who goes down when Wallner comes back. Better hitter stays since none of those guys offer much defensive upside. 

Put this in flow chart form and email it to Ty France. He has their attention and he's all over Instagram lol.

10 minutes ago, Sjoski said:

My guess—and what I thought as it happened—was, "Oh man, Rocco’s back to emptying the pen again." It’s just a flawed strategy. Bibee had nearly identical numbers—1 run, 4 hits—and an even higher pitch count. But Cleveland stuck with him. When Rocco went to the bullpen, I figured the game was probably going to swing their way. It’s not just about who’s hitting; it’s just about probabilities.

And I believe this is what others are pointing out too—Rocco’s pattern of early hooks and over-relying on the bullpen is hurting us.

They were 14th in starter's innings last year ... This just isn't factually true. They were 15 innings short of being tenth. 

2 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

They were 14th in starter's innings last year ... This just isn't factually true. They were 15 innings short of being tenth. 

They are 11 innings over thirty games from being tenth this year. About one out per start. 

40 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Did Rocco remove last night's starter based on a predetermined criteria or not? 

Did he decide, well before a pitch was thrown, that "third time through" was THE deciding factor, or didn't he? 

I think thats a pretty clear yes. Not effectiveness. Not fatigue. Not even pitches, or innings. 

Just a set criteria. 

If you're good with that, fine. Defend it. But the post above is just an ad hoc attack on anyone who dares have a difference of opinion on the manager. It has zero to do with the actual circumstances of last night's game, or for that matter the manager's actual performance, short or long term.

For the record, nobody claimed "things would've ended up great." They scored one run. That's a problem, long and short term. What suggestions do you have to fix that? 

That doesn't mean we can't discuss things that are ongoing managerial weaknesses

 

You have no idea if this is true. But you've decided it is. 

4 hours ago, IndianaTwin said:

Chief, I think you're better than this. Seems "spreadsheet management" would have taken Ober out after five or six innings on Monday instead of letting him pitch into the eighth. Seems "spreadsheet management" would have pulled Ryan after five or six on Sunday, instead of letting him go seven. 

I wasn't able to watch/listen last night, but what I see is Paddack having gone 99 pitches last outing (and it seems "spreadsheet management" wouldn't have let him face six batters three times in that game, which he did, by the way), his having already given up hits to two of the three guys he would have faced in the sixth, his having put the first two batters on in the fourth and a bullpen that was about as rested as could be.

And there's stuff that none of us can see and none of us have access to. For example, it sounds like the decisions made around the rain delay were screwy, so who knows how many starts and stops there were to his prep during a three-hour rain delay. (And why don't people complain when guys get pulled early when they are struggling, when "spreadsheet management" would say that they need to get a full five innings out of that day's starter?)

The Twins didn't lose last night because Rocco's "spreadsheet management" didn't let Paddack come out for the sixth. They lost because they only scored one run. The winning percentage when you score only one run is pretty low. (I'd give you the exact percentage, but it would have to come from a spreadsheet. 😀)

Someone put this damn post on the main page and force everyone to read it. 

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

Why didn't he do it in Paddack's last start then? You know, the game where he threw 99 pitches and faced 24 batters (that's nearly 3 full times through the order if you don't want to do the math)? 

I don't think it's "a pretty clear yes." I think Paddack giving up a lot of very loud contact was very much a factor in the decision. I think Paddack is a bottom of the rotation starter who doesn't get the benefit of the doubt and when he's giving up rockets all over the field the first 2 times through the order through 5 innings and you have a fully rested pen you thank the baseball gods you're still in the game and turn it over to the pen. I think that's a very reasonable choice.

You can discuss the manager all you want, but you're doing what you claim to dislike, just bringing THE factor to the table and making a decision on that. The starter was pulled before the third time through so it's automatically wrong. You don't care about why the decision was made. You don't even care about being open to the idea that there may be other factors as to why the decision was made. You don't even care that a different decision was made the very last time that particular pitcher pitched. 

You just have a set criteria you want to complain about and it presented itself so you complained. Don't act like you're here to have some deep conversation about any of this. You saw an opportunity to complain about Rocco and you took it. Your complaint has zero to do with the actual circumstances of last night's game, or for that matter the manager's actual performance, short or long term. Hi pot, I'm kettle, nice to meet you.

Another one that needs to be gold plated and posted at the top of every thread.  But we've played this game before:

"Well intentioned" Rocco-obsessed posters: Rocco is to blame for everything!

Others: Well....data says the team is league average in starter usage, data suggests that the patterns you claim to be true are false, data shows your complaints appear to have no legs.  Etc.

"Well intentioned" Rocco-obsessed Posters : I'm being attacked!  You can't defend anything!  Prove it!

Others: I....just did?  Here...let me try again...*repeats themselves for the eleventy millionth time*

"Well intentioned" Rocco-obsessed Posters: Nuh uh! *Repeats original claims again as if the entire prior conversation didn't exist*

Rinse, repeat every freaking day.

11 hours ago, BrokenCompass said:

Louie ain't fooling anyone. 

He is fooling himself, thinking he can control where the ball is going..... that is, unless he thinks he can blow it by right down the middle.

14 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Might have been nice for Stewart not to be on back to back outings today. 

Of course, nothing could have prevented that.

You think if Paddock goes one more inning, Stewart sits for a third day, in a close game?