ashbury

Your post wasn't harsh and there's no need to apologize. I was responding to just the first half and should have made that clearer, and the smiley face meant it's largely tongue in cheek. If anything, my making light of a life-changing concussion isn't a tack I might choose outside of this close circle of friends. Some stars can coach and some can't. Just like some players can be stars and some can't. Seems to be a different skill set and without a high correlation. Ted Williams was supposedly good at imparting advice and he had some success as manager; Frank Robinson likewise and probably more so. It's harder to get metrics for coaches than managers, so we're left with eye tests and reputations.

DFA'd and selected off waivers each time is still arguably more promising than the dreck we DFA'd and no one took off our hands and we added again later on anyway. You pay a premium for that kind of desirability. 😀

Yes, because a pitching performance that was noteworthy even in the context of the times, and was on the literal last day of the long season, is relevant to running a full pitching staff 30+ years later.

His career OPS was .873 until the concussion. The league figured out, "get him to take a foul ball off the noggin," and it only took them 5000 plate appearances to do it. 😀

That's not really the bar that a new hitting coach has to clear. Hitting coaches are pretty fungible, often with a short shelf-life even if effective at first. Let the next guy try to get more out of a generally under-performing crew of younger hitters. I don't usually lean toward psychological explanations for things but there might be a budding head-case or two in this group of players and perhaps another coach will do better in that regard too. Popkins isn't a Twins lifer and will move on gracefully to another organization and probably find some success, and the game of musical coaching chairs will continue, as it always has. This offense was pretty unacceptable during the later stages of the season and it's the hitting coach(es)'s job to help the players find answers. If the change is just a band-aid, sometimes first-aid is called for.

I'd be fine with leaving the award vacant for 2024. The biggest positive contributors in terms of whichever metric you like (and the ones I like are contradictory this year) pale in comparison to the best on most other teams. No one on the Twins had the combination of high performance and season-long availability to stand out. Even in the woeful 2016 season, Brian Dozier and Ervin Santana managed to stand out among their respective peers on the team. If that team had been made up of several others at their level, 100 losses would not have occurred. If you replace either of these guys with anyone you choose from the 2024 squad, you wouldn't have any improvement. Very weird, considering that the 2024 squad finished above .500 by a hair.

These grades must be based on expectations a year ago as baseline. No way was Cole Sands better than Jhoan Duran. Duran was given the tough matchups. The grades of F are well deserved. Knowing who in the FO advocated for the two individuals acquired via free agency would count in the grades for those people too.

Baseball-reference.com lists Twins 2024 payroll at $135.76M. Depending on how all the pieces are counted, maybe there's room? https://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/majors/2024-misc.shtml

LOL: OTHER GRADE C+ Prospects: Luis Arraez, 2B; Akil Baddo, OF;...

I'm probably older than you, and Chester Lemon was a very fine player. No, he was better than that - it's always good to go back and refresh one's memory - he's borderline Hall of Fame. It's flattering for any player to be even mentioned in the same post as Chet Lemon. When on the field and not hobbled by something, Buxton has been better than Lemon - as good with the bat and better regarded on defense. The improvement you noted was from a baseline season at age 24 that was wrecked by injury. If you stopped thinking about him in 2018 and only looked at him now, yes I suppose the improvement comes as a shock. Lemon had a far better career than Buxton is likely to achieve. That difference is solely due to availability on the field - almost triple the number of plate appearances Buxton currently has, and Buxton is no sure thing to increase his totals very much going forward. But at similar ages on days where both were healthy? I take Buxton. And like Lemon, unfortunately, he'll still have to buy a ticket to enter the Hall.

When there I will treat folks to their choice of yummy goodie at the concession stand in the back fields. / for those who haven't visited, there are no concession stands in the back fields. Bring your own water, even.

Great interview questions, particularly the follow-ups. Pohlad was left with basically no response after his attempts at evasion.

Not entirely without a cost: depending on the year you might run into me.

So young, and yet so jaded. 😀

My mild rebuttal? A tenth of the ferocity of the criticism itself.

One side is just clear thinking individuals who independently come to the same conclusion, while the other side is a culture. I pick which discussions to get involved with, and this is an example of why I've steered clear on this particular one.

Could fool me, sometimes.

You watch Rocco. 😀

You just named two. 😀 There's a lot of players at their level. No owner/FO believes any manager is anywhere near their level, in terms of wins added. Follow the money.

Yes. Unanswered remains, "why?"

Okay, but the trend here lately has been to challenge people to back up their assertions with facts/data, and when I did on this topic, you completely ignored it and continued on the angle you prefer. Why are managers paid so little if they matter so much?

Who is vehemently defending the guy? Respond to them, not to me. What I question is the whole investment of energy in the topic itself. Which is why I've been mostly silent, and plan to resume that position. If they fire Rocco I won't be yelling about that either.

Managers obviously matter. If they hired me, the Twins' fortunes would plummet. Maybe plummet less if they hired you. The difference among the 30 people who actually hold that title, though, may not be as much as you imagine. There's the source of the disconnect in my view. It's why the notion of "Rocco supporters" seems like a strawman to me, at least as regards most posters not on the Fire Rocco bandwagon. It's not that we don't care, it's that we don't share the opinion it's highly important. Let me ask you this. Here's an article that lists "somebody's" guess about prevailing MLB manager salaries and Rocco's name is missing. Craig Counsell set a record last year with a 5-year $40M contract, sourced elsewhere as well. Pedro Grifol ranked second, and he lost his job during this LOL-worthy ChiSox campaign. I can't find anything elsewhere either Rocco's salary, which may account for his absence from the list, but I assume it might be relatively high among managers, rather than lower than the $1M mark in this top-20 list, on the grounds of the Twins general reticence on topics like these. Teams with aspirations for winning are, by contrast, willing to commit to contracts greater than $200M for players they think may make a difference. The Cubs are the first team, apparently, to be willing to commit even 20% of that for a manager. I'm taking a stab at guessing Rocco made good money, about as much in 2024 as Carlos Santana, a thoroughly average major leaguer at this stage of his playing career. Why would you suppose that is? The people rudely labeled as "Rocco supporters" seem to have an implicit view of the answer to that.

DSP actually has a seat on the board. I presume there is some small-minority shareholder position attached to that, though I don't remember seeing it mentioned. He's a Twins lifer and has been duly rewarded but I can't help the cliche of thinking he maybe has incriminating photos in a locked safe somewhere that accounts for his status. https://www.mlb.com/twins/team/front-office

Quantity plus quality is always desirable. But of course I'll take the latter over the former. Also of course, "thoughtful discussion" is in the eye of the beholder. If in disagreement with my position - wait, nah. 😀