Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • Twins News & Analysis

    Twins Daily Roundtable: Grading Molitor


    Cody Christie

    Twins Daily Roundtable is a weekly series. As part of this series, a question will be posed to the site’s writers and they will respond in 200 words or less (Some writers don’t like to stick to this limit). This will give readers an opportunity to see multiple points of view and then add their own point of view in the comments section.

    Paul Molitor is nearing the end of his fourth season as the Minnesota Twins manager. During his first season, the Twins pushed for a playoff spot into the season’s last weeks. There were over 100 losses in 2016. He won AL Manager of the year in 2017 after the Twins bounced back to earn a Wild Card spot. Now in his fourth season, the club is sitting below the .500 mark.

    This week’s roundtable discussion question is: “How would you rank Paul Molitor’s managerial performance? Why?”

    Image courtesy of Marilyn Indahl-USA TODAY Sports

    Twins Video

    Seth Stohs

    I think he's doing fine. A manager's role in wins and losses is vastly overstated (wins or losses). As for the lineup, I'd say he does just fine. He mixes it up pretty well and isn't married to certain hitters in certain spots. Bullpen usage is where most find fault. I definitely think he has a tendency to overwork the reliable relievers which, practically, is understandable. But he will need to find a way to trust others to try to keep those top guys from wearing down. He's obviously well respected in the clubhouse, but I don't know what we can really comment on his role in there. We just don't know. A manager can't be at all places. In terms of analytics, he certainly has the people around him that will encourage it.

    This is an impossible question to answer with any certainty. Managers usually get too much credit when the team wins, and they get too much of the blame when things go bad.

    Tom Froemming

    I'd give him a D. We're not at the point where I'm demanding he be fired, but I definitely think the team would be better off with someone else running the show.

    I'm happy to see the Twins are bunting much less frequently this year, but I'm still depressed at how inefficiently the bullpen has been managed. There's also no shortage of strange lineup decisions. He seems to have no interest in providing opportunities for younger players and caters to the veterans far too often.

    I have a lot of respect for Paul Molitor. He's certainly knows more about baseball than I do, but expertise doesn't always translate to management.

    Cody Christie

    Expectations were high for the Twins heading into the 2018 season and things haven’t exactly gone as planned. Falvey and Levine seemed to have put together some strong pieces to build off of last season’s playoff run. However, no one could have predicted the lack of production from Miguel Sano, Byron Buxton, and Brian Dozier. There’s little a manager can do if the team’s best players aren’t performing or aren’t even on the roster.

    I honestly think the front office will decided to go in a different direction this off-season. I believe Falvey and Levine are going to want to bring in someone younger that fits the mold of “being their guy.” They could give Molitor one more chance to see what he does with the club next year but Minnesota won’t have the likes of Sano and Buxton around forever.

    If the time isn’t now, when will it be? Overall grade, C- but he moves to a C+ with extra credit for AL Manager of the Year.

    Ted Schwerzler

    Molitor was put in a difficult position, but he also hasn’t done himself any favors. This front office likely would’ve hired their own guy had they not been mandated to do otherwise. He saved his skin by winning Manager of the Year in 2017, but he’s continued many of his poor habits this season. Bullpen usage has been questionable, in-game strategy leaves something to be desired, and lineup configuration has been head-scratching at times.

    Nothing he’s done has been egregious, but the sum of all parts seems average at best. It’s hard to gauge his relatability to this roster without being in the clubhouse, but I tend to believe there’re better options in that department. On a grading scale, I’d tag him with a C-. Regardless of his three-year deal, which did seem odd, I don’t know that Falvey and Levine won’t move on this winter anyways.

    Steve Lein

    I'll begin this one by pointing out the cliche that managers get too much of the credit for winning and too much of the blame for losing. The players hit, pitch, and play defense while managers really can only make personnel decisions and have situational influence. But that is where good managers can make their mark.

    As far as personnel decisions go, Molitor doesn’t get a passing grade from me. Overuse of bullpen pitchers has quite clearly affected their performance. Platoon advantages have not been utilized enough. At times I've thought it was like he's spinning a roulette wheel with players names on it to figure out the lineup order he'd throw out. The up and down records of his his teams during his tenure also tells me he may not have that special sauce that extracts the best out of most of his players consistently. That's one idea I do think the great managers accomplish.

    When it comes to the situational side during a game, outside of his use of the bullpen, I do think Molitor does well. He's embraced shifting on defense, I don't think they've done much bunting, and based on his Hall Of Fame playing career I know he’s seen it all. I trust him to make the correct decisions in that sense.

    Overall, I’d rank him around the middle of MLB managers, but his time is running out.

    SD Buhr

    This is really a tough question.

    Obviously, you can’t say Paul Molitor has been an incredibly good manager at this point, based on the results on the field, even though last season’s second half was certainly encouraging.

    But I’m not really sure you can lay the lack of success this season purely at his feet, either. While most of us were looking for a strong year as they prepared for spring training, I think if you’d have told us then that Polanco and Santana would each miss the entire first half of the season and Sano and Buxton would spend so little time on the active roster, our expectations might have been more muted. I’m not sure you can blame the manager for not winning more games when those major pieces were absent.

    Personally, I’d probably give him an overall grade of C+ and, based on that, I won’t really have any objection whether the front office decides to keep him around or bring in someone new.

    If you missed any of the most recent roundtable discussions, here are the links:

    Closing Time

    Prospect Promotions

    Hall of Fame Impact

    Baseball in 2028

    Floundered

    Follow Twins Daily For Minnesota Twins News & Analysis

    Recent Twins Articles

    Recent Twins Videos

    Twins Top Prospects

    Marek Houston

    Cedar Rapids Kernels - A+, SS
    The 22-year-old went 2-for-5 on Friday night, his fourth straight multi-hit game. Heading into the week, he was hitting .246/.328/.404 (.732). Four games later, he is hitting .303/.361/.447 (.808).

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

     

    Understood... I've often said... you gotta look at the people who hire the people. 

     

    Still not comfortable with the word "stuck".  :)

    It's just like players want to play all the time,  the manager decides who plays. Like when Punto got WAY more starts than he probably should have had, that was on Gardy.  Can't blame Punto for playing so much.

    Edited by jimmer

    I give Molitor a C+ for his career. As for this year, I give him a B- because he has done all he could to keep this team from being 52-78 at this point- considering what we have lost over the season in terms of manpower. Heck, the last I looked we were only 7 games under .500. While that is not what we want, it isn't the worst possible scenario. Yes, the bullpen is overworked but show me a team whose bullpen isn't. What I do not understand is why a reliever cannot work 2 innings instead of just one. THAT overworks any pen. we could do better but we could also do worse. The players seem to believe in him and that is big. What we need are better players since we traded away 2 of them. I blame management much more than I do Molly.

     

    It's just like players want to play all the time,  the manager decides who plays. Like when Punto got WAY more starts than he probably should have had, that was on Gardy.  Can't blame Punto for playing so much.

     

    I look at this way. A baseball front office runs much differently than how I run my fantasy baseball team. 

     

    I am willing to bet my house that Terry Ryan authorized the signing of players that he has never seen on the advice of someone else. I believe I'll still be living in my house because I've heard him on the radio say that he hadn't seen a player before he was added to the roster so it's a pretty safe bet for me.  :)

     

    I've heard Falvey say that they take a committee approach to decisions and I got to believe that Molitor is part of that committee. If a manager says I want this guy and the GM says... No. 

     

    That is the beginning of the end and I imagine the same goes in reverse.

     

    We all saw what happened when Philip Seymour Hoffman wouldn't play Scott Hatteberg. Hoffman was out and his next movie only did 28 Million at the box office.  :)

     

    I look at this way. A baseball front office runs much differently than how I run my fantasy baseball team. 

     

    I am willing to bet my house that Terry Ryan authorized the signing of players that he has never seen on the advice of someone else. I believe I'll still be living in my house because I've heard him on the radio say that he hadn't seen a player before he was added to the roster so it's a pretty safe bet for me.  :)

     

    I've heard Falvey say that they take a committee approach to decisions and I got to believe that Molitor is part of that committee. If a manager says I want this guy and the GM says... No. 

     

    That is the beginning of the end and I imagine the same goes in reverse.

     

    We all saw what happened when Philip Seymour Hoffman wouldn't play Scott Hatteberg. Hoffman was out and his next movie only did 28 Million at the box office.  :)

    He played Art Howe, a more fitting role for him.  His next film released was Ides of March, which had a 77 million worldwide box office, which was good for a small budget film

     

    He played Art Howe, a more fitting role for him.  His next film released was Ides of March, which had a 77 million worldwide box office, which was good for a small budget film

     

    Yeah but none of that stuff fits with my joke.  :)

    Can you be sure that Molitor wasn't in the room advocating Grossman on the roster?

     

    I can't... so I'm not comfortable with "stuck".

     

    I'd like to blame Molitor or the front office for everything but I can't be sure where the decisions we see are coming from.

    If the FO sat in a room with Molitor all offseason and decided against going after a free agent to replace Grossman on the roster because Molitor advocated for him, I’m very disappointed in the FO.

     

    If the FO sat in a room with Molitor all offseason and decided against going after a free agent to replace Grossman on the roster because Molitor advocated for him, I’m very disappointed in the FO.

    Only if they were doing a better job than last time they signed someone who was a DH type should you be disappointed that they did not replace Grossman, even if he was at his 100 plus OPS+ peak

    If the FO sat in a room with Molitor all offseason and decided against going after a free agent to replace Grossman on the roster because Molitor advocated for him, I’m very disappointed in the FO.

    I can tolerate mistakes.

     

    I can’t tolerate doubling down on the mistake. If Grossman was selected to make the 25 man. He should have played more with Morrison and Buxton both playing extremely bad. If Grossman isn’t good enough to play in front of that type of performance... then I’m extremely disappointed with the entire room.

    If the FO sat in a room with Molitor all offseason and decided against going after a free agent to replace Grossman on the roster because Molitor advocated for him, I’m very disappointed in the FO.

    But you're okay with Molitor advocating for him? Seems like both would share blame in that scenario.

     

    But you're okay with Molitor advocating for him? Seems like both would share blame in that scenario.

    I didn't say I would be okay with Molitor advocating for Grossman. But, assuming he did, the advocacy would have had to have been at Clarence Darrow levels for me to excuse the FO for making that decision because of Molitor's advocacy.

     

    We don't actually know who advocated for Grossman, but as Jimmer said, we do know for sure that the FO kept him on the team. And they didn't have to keep him if they didn't want him. Molitor, on the other hand, doesn't have that authority, nor that responsibility.

     

    Of course, if you want to make roster construction Molitor's fault in addition to managerial responsibilities, then there's no argument that he's been terrible. I choose not to criticize Molitor for GM responsibilities unless and until they give him a new job title.

     

     

    I can tolerate mistakes.

    I can’t tolerate doubling down on the mistake. If Grossman was selected to make the 25 man. He should have played more with Morrison and Buxton both playing extremely bad. If Grossman isn’t good enough to play in front of that type of performance... then I’m extremely disappointed with the entire room.

    I don't recall saying anything about Molitor's use of Grossman as opposed to Morrison and Buxton.

     

    In an attempt to be clear, all I said was that it wasn't Molitor's fault that he has Grossman on the team, and that having Grossman in and of itself is very limiting to a manager. And just in case that point is not clear, it's because Grossman is very limited defensively and doesn't make up for his defensive limitations with anything special offensively.

    I didn't say I would be okay with Molitor advocating for Grossman. But, assuming he did, the advocacy would have had to have been at Clarence Darrow levels for me to excuse the FO for making that decision because of Molitor's advocacy.

     

    We don't actually know who advocated for Grossman, but as Jimmer said, we do know for sure that the FO kept him on the team. And they didn't have to keep him if they didn't want him. Molitor, on the other hand, doesn't have that authority, nor that responsibility.

     

    Of course, if you want to make roster construction Molitor's fault in addition to managerial responsibilities, then there's no argument that he's been terrible. I choose not to criticize Molitor for GM responsibilities unless and until they give him a new job title.

    That's certainly the vibe you put out with your comment. I'm simply reacting to what you typed.

     

    I don't put much blame on Molitor for roster construction, but I find it hard to believe that he has no input. The two entities should be on the same page and working together, not independent of each other. It's a team sport, and the team does extend beyond the personnel on the field. They all hold responsibility for what happens on the field. Each is simply a different cog in the machine. If Molitor was advocating for a player, why would the FO take the time and effort to replace a guy the manager was happy with? Certainly not all of the blame goes to Molitor, but some most certainly has to in that scenario.

    Edited by wsnydes

     

    I don't put much blame on Molitor for roster construction, but I find it hard to believe that he has no input. The two entities should be on the same page and working together, not independent of each other. It's a team sport, and the team does extend beyond the personnel on the field. They all hold responsibility for what happens on the field. Each is simply a different cog in the machine.

    If I have a legal assistant or paralegal or associate attorney working with me on a case, I like to have their input and I listen to their opinions. If I base a strategic decision on their advice and it doesn't work, I don't blame them, I blame myself.

     

    I'm not sure why people imply that Molitor had anything to do with keeping Grossman and bringing back Belisle. But even assuming that was the case, I don't blame Molitor, I blame the FO.

     

    And for all we know, Molitor was entirely against signing Logan Morrison, and nobody listened to him . . . .

     

     

    I don't recall saying anything about Molitor's use of Grossman as opposed to Morrison and Buxton.

     

    In an attempt to be clear, all I said was that it wasn't Molitor's fault that he has Grossman on the team, and that having Grossman in and of itself is very limiting to a manager. And just in case that point is not clear, it's because Grossman is very limited defensively and doesn't make up for his defensive limitations with anything special offensively.

    Grossman is a serviceable outfielder. Far better than board favorite Arcia when he was stumbling around Target Field. For the 3rd year in a row Grossman has done a solid job, and is no worse than the average 4th outfielder. One of these days he will get beat out in ST, as they will bring in a fair amount of competition every year, which is a it should be. You're not going to get a Trout-type as a 4th outfielder and Wade and Granite are AAAA only.

    Edited by howieramone2

    If I have a legal assistant or paralegal or associate attorney working with me on a case, I like to have their input and I listen to their opinions. If I base a strategic decision on their advice and it doesn't work, I don't blame them, I blame myself.

     

    I'm not sure why people imply that Molitor had anything to do with keeping Grossman and bringing back Belisle. But even assuming that was the case, I don't blame Molitor, I blame the FO.

     

    And for all we know, Molitor was entirely against signing Logan Morrison, and nobody listened to him . . . .

    Fair enough and well put.

     

    I'd add that if I have an employee that actually advocates for something they already have, I'm not going to replace it with something else. I'd certainly shoulder much of the blame in that case, but the employee wouldn't be without fault either. I'm not suggesting they should be fired over it, but it's certainly something that would be discussed.

     

    I think the Belisle stuff is because there is simply no other reason to bring him back. None. Since he was a favorite of Molitor last year, it seems reasonable to suggest that he wanted him back. Does the FO share the blame, certainly. Obviously we don't know what transpired, so one can only look at the FO.

     

    I don't recall saying anything about Molitor's use of Grossman as opposed to Morrison and Buxton.

     

    In an attempt to be clear, all I said was that it wasn't Molitor's fault that he has Grossman on the team, and that having Grossman in and of itself is very limiting to a manager. And just in case that point is not clear, it's because Grossman is very limited defensively and doesn't make up for his defensive limitations with anything special offensively.

     

    It was I that brought up Morrison and Buxton... To be clear... I don't recall you ever bringing up Morrison and Buxton.  :)

     

    That's certainly the vibe you put out with your comment. I'm simply reacting to what you typed.

    I don't put much blame on Molitor for roster construction, but I find it hard to believe that he has no input. The two entities should be on the same page and working together, not independent of each other. It's a team sport, and the team does extend beyond the personnel on the field. They all hold responsibility for what happens on the field. Each is simply a different cog in the machine. If Molitor was advocating for a player, why would the FO take the time and effort to replace a guy the manager was happy with? Certainly not all of the blame goes to Molitor, but some most certainly has to in that scenario.

     

    It's the same page thing that has me the most perplexed. 

     

    If the roles are sharply defined. If the GM is in charge of the roster and the manager manages the provided roster. There has to be communication at every step of the process between them. 

     

    A GM can't independently trade Jose Berrios for Paul Goldschmidt only to find that the manager doesn't believe in Paul Goldschmidt and won't play him. That would be giving away Berrios. 

     

    They say decisions are done by committee... I believe them. 

     

    If I have a legal assistant or paralegal or associate attorney working with me on a case, I like to have their input and I listen to their opinions. If I base a strategic decision on their advice and it doesn't work, I don't blame them, I blame myself.

     

    I'm not sure why people imply that Molitor had anything to do with keeping Grossman and bringing back Belisle. But even assuming that was the case, I don't blame Molitor, I blame the FO.

     

    And for all we know, Molitor was entirely against signing Logan Morrison, and nobody listened to him . . . .

     

    Yes, you would take the blame but you might be inclined to not rely on their counsel the next time in an attempt to not make the same mistake again. 

     

    The front office can and should take the blame but they also need to correct it for the future. 

     

    Although... I've said this many times... I have no idea who is suggesting what. So this all goes strictly into the hypothetical pile. 

     

     

    It's the same page thing that has me the most perplexed.

     

    If the roles are sharply defined. If the GM is in charge of the roster and the manager manages the provided roster. There has to be communication at every step of the process between them.

     

    A GM can't independently trade Jose Berrios for Paul Goldschmidt only to find that the manager doesn't believe in Paul Goldschmidt and won't play him. That would be giving away Berrios.

     

    They say decisions are done by committee... I believe them.

    Exactly. I expect Molitor to have plenty of say in roster decisions. The FO has ultimate decision making power, but it makes little sense for them to make a move without consulting their manager. I have a very hard time believing that Belisle was brought in by only the FO for instance. If I were the GM, I want to know that who I want to bring in will be well received and that the manager knows how he wants to use said player. That goes with Grossman too. I don't believe that Molitor feels that he's stuck with him. I believe that Molitor is asking for guys like Belisle. He may have good reasoning, clubhouse presence or whatever, but that doesn't absolve the FO from culpability when things go astray either.

     

    Obviously since we don't have the inside knowledge to know who is making what decision based on what info, the FO takes the heat rightfully. But I'm not in the camp that feels that Molitor is blameless with any of it, especially when it comes to the roster that heads north out of spring training.

     

    ***Edited for spelling.

    Edited by wsnydes

     

    Exactly. I expect Molitor to have plenty of say in roster decisions. The FO has ultimate decision making power, but it makes little sense for them to make a move without consulting their manager. I have a very hard time believing that Belisle was brought in by only the FO for instance. If I were the GM, I want to know that who I want to bring in will be well received and that the manager knows how he wants to use said player. That goes with Grossman too. I don't believe that Molitor feels that he's stuck with him. I believe that Molitor is asking for guys like Belisle. He may have good reasoning, clubhouse presence or whatever, but that doesn't absolve the FO from culpability when things go astray either.

    Obviously since we don't have the inside knowledge to know who is making what decision based in what info, the FO takes the heat rightfully. But I'm not in the camp that feels that Molitor is blameless with any of it, especially when it comes to the roster that heads north out of spring training.

     

    We are 100% on the same page.  :)

     

    We are 100% on the same page. :)

    Much like I hope the FO and Molitor are. Unfortunately I don't believe that, but I hope that I'm wrong.

     

    Plus, if they're on the same page I can legitimately blame all of them.

    Edited by wsnydes

     

    That's certainly the vibe you put out with your comment. I'm simply reacting to what you typed.
     

    This back and forth started with Riverbrian quoting me when I suggested that the FO "stuck" Molitor with Grossman, and that having Grossman on the roster has limited Molitor's options. I don't think it's reasonable to even get a vibe that I was okay with Molitor advocating for Grossman. The words I typed would indicate almost the opposite of that.




    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...