Mark G

Pohlad gives the same answer every October: "we intend to be competitive not just next year, but every year". Falvey hears that and parrots it. And that is where you are right: what do they tell each other when they are done BSing us? Don't you wish you could be a fly on that wall?

And Rocco has a job right now because he is the apple of the eye of Falvine. Just kidding.........sort of. All managers are where they are because of who they impressed at one point. The are still managing at 73 because they are a proven commodity. Old school.......new age.......funny, but the game itself hasn't changed one iota. Only the way it is managed has changed, and what each one does is open to scrutiny based on wins and losses. Period. Over the course of a career. Right now, Rocco hasn't proven he can win consistently with his analytics; Tony has won over and over without them. When Rocco is done, and he is a proven winner year in and year out, team in and team out, I will bend the knee and buy into the new age. Until then, I stay old school, because it has stood the test of time, as has the game itself. Thanks for the give and take.

I don't mean to argue with you, my friend, but I am not sure whether this is strictly a I hate LaRussa post, or an I love Rocco post; or is it a little of both? The debate, in my extremely humble opinion, is kind of an old school vs. new age debate. Tony could care less what the guys in the clubhouse think, as long as they follow his way of thinking and win, vs. Rocco's I want the guys in the clubhouse to love me approach. Rocco plays everyone all the time, getting everyone into the games, regardless of the production they give. That is not exactly debatable, is it? Tony, on the other hand, may view it differently. He plays things a little more old school, which today is not cool to some. Personally, I like old school, so I am not a fan of Rocco. On the other hand, Tony may be a little more rough around the edges than I might be myself, but he gets the job done. He is still managing, and winning, at 73 (did I get his age right, sorry if I didn't), so Rocco should maybe take a few notes from him instead of his computer. Bottom line: Rocco thinks pitchers can fill any roll he wants them to fill on any given day, and position players should be able to play any position he wants them to play on any given day. Not to mention they should be able to bat in any order he dreams up on any given day.......you get my point. In the long run, not a long term winning way to manage long term.......so to speak. But that, apparently, is the new age way. LaRussa, on the other hand, has won his way for a long time. If Rocco is winning when I am 90, I will apologize profusely. In the meantime, I don't believe he will with his current style. Rocco has abandoned any semblance of old school baseball, and it finally showed this year. When you don't use all the tools in your bag, you limit the ability of your team to match up. Again, it finally showed this year. Next year? Who knows? I guess it will depend on the FO and the players they provide, but I, for one, will not bet on Rocco to bring them to their full potential whoever they are. He simply does not believe in anything other than what his computers tell him to believe in. Just one mans extremely humble opinion.

Good analysis. But I will have no problem blaming Rocco for allowing hitters (more than one, but kepler comes to mind) to stubbornly hit right into the shift all season. That is either an instruction or permission, and I really don't care which; someone has to step up and force the issue or it never gets better and Rocco won't. You know, it is fun to read the NY Post and how they critique the Yankees. They talk about the same shortcomings, and how the general manager and manager may or may not be back and should they or shouldn't they be. They talk about needing to upgrade SS, the bullpen, etc. And they won 92 games!! What do we hear about? Changing hitting coaches and relegating others to "player development" roles. One can only guess how many of those there are buried in this organization. I do not anticipate Mr. P making any major shakeups; he allows himself one a century, and this was it, so I will not hold my breath. I also am not betting the farm on him laying out enough payroll to meet the immediate needs, hoping his farm can provide the pieces that are missing. I may be wrong, I have been before. As a matter of fact, I can still remember the time I was. But unless I am, we may be waiting a while for better days.

I keep hearing and reading that "today's game" needs a FO like Falvine and managers that look at the analytics before they go to the rest room, much less make out a line up card or make a pitching change. I would respectfully disagree; the game hasn't changed at all. Same fields, same mounds, same bases, same distances, etc. etc. etc. What has changed is we have a generation that thinks the computer knows more about the game than the participants; kind of like playing chess against a computer to see if you can beat it. So who (what?) am I giving the grade to? Rocco has been pretty up front about the fact that his analytics show that giving an out for a base (sacrifice) doesn't meet the percentages. Neither does bunting for hits, stealing bases, or at least attempting to, on a regular basis (did I get bases and basis in the right places?), the hit and run, and other old school offense that keeps the defense on their toes and does not allow it to predict us with certainty. As such, I have no idea what grade to give the computer, if that is what is managing the team. I give Rocco a D- for allowing the computer to dictate the game, rather than using his wits and knowledge. ( I shudder to think that maybe he is using his wits and knowledge ) He needs to get back to using the whole field, all offensive tools in the shed, and leaving the computer once in a while and going with players strengths, not grooming half the team to play half the positions on the field and calling it flexibility. Gauge your BP and slot them into roles, so they know what to prepare for game in and game out, instead of always wondering who is up when the phone rings. Pick a player you trust the most and make him your lead off man, period. I could go on but you get the point. 2022 can't come soon enough for me, as I miss baseball when it isn't here. But I have no idea how much hope to hold out with this trio; they don't seem to care what we think. At least it is good we care what they think, I guess. We should know that by April. Let's hope it is worth the wait.

Ah, yes, the 400 pound gorilla in the room - if they can keep their arms healthy. Way too much of the time, they can't, and it does make me wonder if it is because of the power style at such a young age. I am old enough to have seen a few different pitching approaches over the eras and my personal favorite was the pitch to contact.. I may be remembering differently than some, but I do not recall anywhere near as many injuries year in and year out throughout the entire organization as you see in this era. Way too many pitches today, and way too little contact. And not necessarily swing and miss no contact, but too many fowl balls all game every game. The other night NY and Tampa played a 1-0 pitchers duel and it still took 3hours and 3minutes. This is not only turning fans off due to the sheer length, but makes pitchers throw more than I can remember in my life. Maybe it is because too many pitchers simply don't have the control to throw the ball where they want the contact to be made, so they try to over power everyone, but it sure looks to this observer that the power game also leads to more injuries as well as too many relievers pitching every day. Starters going 5 inninngs with 90+ pitches and having to be taken out. Not good for the arm or the game. That is just one mans extremely humble opinion. Thanks for the good post.

I say this with all due respect and I strive to be polite, but i don't know how your first paragraph could be more wrong. Molitor a terrible manager? Baldelli couldn't carry his lineup card onto the field, much less know as much about the game. And the only modernization this FO has brought has been their analytics, which is primarily responsible for the situation we are currently in. The cupboards couldn't have been too bare when they came in, as we were a wild card team in their first year, and a few free agents coming in and having good years gave us 2 division titles. If they get credit for those years, they take full responsibility for this year as well; can't go back 5 years and blame Ryan for 2021. As for organizational depth, it improved by trading away key pieces from the team their first 2 years, and leaving Molitor to take the blame. Really not cool. And where is all of that organizational depth? A lot of it is on the IL, which seems to be the norm for this organization at all levels. I agree completely with the 2nd paragraph, and if they go down that path we can salvage the group that would have to be considered our base. I am rooting for them to succeed. And while I may disagree with a particular assessment, I love the fact we can debate politely.

This is a tough one for me, because if all I was looking at was talent acquisition and evaluation, the FO would come out fair to partly OK. Maybe a B- or so. And, as Greglw3 so eloquently stated, Baldell gets a D (at best) and that is trying to be fair. The thing that makes it tough is I really have no idea how intertwined the FO and the dugout are. Does Baldelli manage the way he does because that is how Falvine wants it done? Or do they let him run the dugout and they just try to give him the best roster they can to be competitive? If it is the former, the FO grade drops to D and Baldelli might get closer to a C. If it is the latter, then my original thought process stands. The FO would get the B- not just because of the talent evaluation, but the fact that there have been too many moving parts in 5 years. We either sign players to extensions, use up their options, or jettison them if the options are up and the jury is still out, then bring in FA's as a stop gap. The players they have brought in have been a mixed bag, but more positive than negative. Hence the B- all told. As for the way the team is managed, it is horrific, and if the FO has anything to do with that the grade drops off the table. Someone is letting Kepler continue to be "stubborn" as JM points out on TV. And he is hardly the only player refusing to adjust to shifts. Just as someone has made calculated decisions to eliminate bunts of any kind, the hit and run, stolen bases or aggressive base running in general, and has determined they can live with the strike out rate this team has produced. Slugging percentage has replaced batting average as a priority, and anything that resembles old school baseball has been discarded. I genuinely don't believe Cave, Simmons, Kepler, Donaldson (average wise), Austidillo, etc. hit as low as they did due to lack of ability; it appears there is a philosophy this team has taken on that certain hitters can thrive in and others can't. Now is that the FO, the dugout, or is there no separation between the two? Hard to give either a grade until that is clarified, and this organization doesn't believe we need to know. It is easy to point to the 2020 season being lost in terms of player development, and it is certainly true, but it is true for all 30 teams and exactly half the teams will finish over .500 this year, including 12 with between 86 and 106(7?) wins, so that can't be our excuse. Just as Shoemaker talked about his pitching style/mechanics being molded in their image while here, you have to wonder how it has been on the hitting side as well. Again, who decides that? I guess my long winded point is, it is a hung jury for me, and I suspect it always will be with this organization as long as they are as closed off as they are to questions. There is one thing they lead the league in; the most meaningless words used to say virtually nothing during interviews. Always give credit where credit is due, I say.

You hit it on the head not only with Simmons, but with Austidillo, and Jeffers as well. Anyone who watches Austidillo and sees him swing out of his helmet and on to his knees, can see he is thinking power all the way all the time. And the one thing that impressed me the most when Jeffers first came up last year is how he would square up on the ball and hit line drives; now he is doing slightly more of an upper angle and, again, looking for power numbers, and not squaring up as often as he is capable of. Austidillo puts it in play 94% of his at bats, and Jeffers can do much better in that area if they both would just use their natural talents. Simmons will do better, somewhere, as well. If we would let them be themselves, they could all do better here and solve a lot of our holes (and not cost too much; did I mention we need money for pitching?). Just my extremely humble opinion.

I realize I am still a minority on this subject, but since I first started truly following the game in the mid '60's, and from what I hear and read decades before that, teams prioritized defense at SS and catcher. Corner infielders, corner outfielders, and sometimes 2nd or center would produce the pop; the two most demanding positions were considered SS and catcher and offense wasn't a first priority. Teams would have .180 and .190 hitters at these positions while their pitchers hit as well. In the '60's the Twins had 2 or 3 pretty good hitting pitchers I used to see pinch hit for position players in late or extra innings, the hitters were not as good but played the field, and the pitchers wouldn't have it any other way. Now, in the AL, we have hitters who do nothing but, so teams are even more capable of keeping the gloves they need. The concept that Simmons has hurt the team is bizarre to me. A .220 hitting exceptional glove, and yes, he is still an exceptional glove, is more than acceptable on a team that is what? 2nd in the league in home nuns and middle of the pack in almost all other offensive categories? If we had a manager who knew anything about manufacturing runs.......arrgg, don't get me started. The only problem I have ever seen with Simmons is his price tag. He needs to come down, and he will after this season, but an affordable Simmons is better than moving Polanco OR taking a flyer on an unproven rookie. The infield needs stability, and constant moving parts are killing us. Keep this group together, and everyone will be more comfortable with each other. And Simmons will pick up the pace; his career record suggests this year was the anomaly, not the norm. (although I might spell Sano on the field a little more often) Don't get me wrong, if we can pick up a top tier SS on the open market, by all means. But the kind of money I see bantered about day in and day out being spent on payroll, isn't as realistic as people would like to believe after 2 straight years of huge losses, as well as a new CBA looming. Put the money into pitching, and keep the gloves behind them and where they belong, not moving around the field like musical chairs. We have enough talent to cover the flaws as we stand today; keep moving the parts and the crap shoot continues. Oh, and did I say we should put our money into pitching? If not, we should put our money into pitching.

Would be nice, but the one I want back is Schoop. Plays 2nd and 1st. He can spell Polanco when he is spelling the SS, and play 1st opposite Kirilloff as a platoon. His runs produced stat is high, and he would only be about 30 next year. Move Sano to DH, or as a package in a trade. Just my extremely humble opinion.

Yea, they brought him in because he is an analytics guy, so it may very well start at the top.

Couldn't have said it better myself. The one stat (I hate analytics) I look at the most for an offense is the one they used to use regularly: percentage of games scoring 3 runs or less, and percentage scoring 4 runs or more. Well, as of yesterday, we have scored 3 runs or less in 48% of our games this season; 75 out of 156. Rocco has made it crystal clear as to his philosophy; he believes giving up an out for a base (sacrifice) is against his analytics. So is the hit and run. So is bunting for base hits; apparently they aren't successful enough of the time. Even stolen bases result in an out too much of a percentage of the time for him, so we are, what? 14th in the American League in stolen bases? 51 in 156 games. 6 sacrifice bunts (non pitcher) all year, etc. etc. When we only take the bases hits and home runs give us, we manufacture nothing. And nothing is what we get 48% of the time. You are right, we have one player locked in to the lineup next year. Every other player is either moved around too much, or might be trade bait before next April. And the answer to your question about the line up is: when pigs fly.......or when Rocco leaves, whichever comes first. It is simply who he is (or who his computer is). And Falvine likes it that way, so I am betting on the pigs.

I love the line about Buxton taking "center stage". Great pun. As for all of the bright spots as we close out, they offer some hope but at the same time leave a lot of questions. I really don't see a lot of proven commodities going into '22. Lots of potential, lots of holes, and lots of questions. Maybe lots of reclamation projects. Or free agents. And I can't get out of my mind the CBA looming out there, and the fact that the team has lost a ton of money the last two years. Will the brass want to soften some of those losses? We all seem to think there is a payroll figure out there that the team will go with, yet is it really there? If the CBA costs a certain amount more, does that affect our number? All of that will determine the FA signings (or lack of them). I can see a scenario where what you see today will be the vast majority of the roster come April. If, of course, there is an April. Could be locked out. Or not. Lots of questions; very few answers. Stay tuned, as it will be an interesting winter.

What is a dominant starter? Someone who strikes out 11 in 5 innings? Or someone who only goes 5 innings? Is it possible to be both? Not when I grew up! 86 pitches? And Rocco admitted he "could probably have continued on and pitched", but, hey.....come on......he threw 86 pitches.....what's a manager to do? Damn it, Rocco, let baseball players be baseball players!! Oh, never mind.....as long as this guy is in charge.....don't get me started!

As we are mulling this over, Max has just hit his 2nd home run in two at bats tonight. Hilarious.

I seem to remember hearing an argument about letting Rosario go because of his less than average corner defense. And what replaced him? IMO, even less than Rosario corner defense without Rosario's run production. I am now hearing the same argument for packing Max and sending him out, as well. All I am saying is until someone actually proves himself better, don't repeat history and end up with both corners being unsettled (unless, of course, he brings a quality arm). Because if Bux walks as well..........?

Until one of the newbies proves themselves to be better, and until we sign Buxton long term (?) I don't have a problem with keeping Max for awhile. Work with him on bunting down the third base line when he is shifted on, and things might open up more. And the fact he can play both right and center at a pretty decent level is quite the insurance policy for Buxton leaving (?) or the newbies taking more time than anticipated. I think he is a reclamation project worth working on, especially at his price. And if the guys coming up beat him out, a trade can be worked out, but what's the hurry? Now, if we can get a decent pitcher for him...........I will deny I ever wrote this.

I have said this before, and it bears repeating; this organization, from the Pohlads on down to the manager (and everyone in between) view this kind of information as being on a need to know basis and the fans are not on the list of who needs to know. They get pre game questions, post game questions, and occasionally mid game interview questions. And yet I have yet to hear them give a straight up honest answer to any of them. Free agents, trades, injuries, long term contract signings........name something, and they won't just be up front with anyone. And, no, they will never take responsibility for the years like this one. Sure will take credit for the '19's, though, and they expect that to be their collateral for all future failures. This crew is no different than any of the others, and it begins and ends in the owners box. Never thought I would miss old Calvin, but at least he was straight up. Do not expect to know anything about what the roster will look like in April until April; we are just the people who pay the bills. We don't count.

We already have the stopgap SS, and moving Polanco and Arraez around, again, isn't the answer. We need a stable infield, not a fluctuating one that moves every time a contract comes up or a player is signed and we put him in a position we already have filled. We have played enough musical chairs with this team, both in the field and in our day to day lineups. Find players you trust, put them in a position to excel, put them in a batting order that makes sense, and trust them to play the game. And if you don't believe in that, explain why; maybe it is me that is KaKa.

I know I will catch it for this, but I hope so. He has the glove, and he is just as much a candidate for a bounce back season as anyone we are talking about here. He is a lifetime .265 hitter who was doing alright until he came here. I think he would do much better with a different hitting coach who has a different approach. He would have to be willing to take less than 10.5 mil, but he most likely won't get that kind of offer anywhere else either, so he might listen. And if an in house guy breaks out and proves himself better, we can celebrate; in the meantime, we need a stable infield and moving Polanco and Arraez around again doesn't accomplish that. Just my extremely humble opinion.

I have always had my doubts about Jeff Nelson. He grades out alright overall, but he is a St. Paul boy, and has appeared to be afraid to be seen as a home town ump when umping the Twins. I am not in his head, but he appears to bend over backwards to not appear to favor his hometown team; it shows much of the time, and has for many years.

Absolutely! Very good observation.

Right on. Once again, all runs on home runs; keep it in the ballpark and we are impotent. 0-9 with a runner on 2nd the last 3 extra innings; guaranteed to lose.

I fully agree on two counts. We have the technology to call balls and strikes accurately, and we need to start using it. Balls and strikes are too much a part of the game, and too important to have as many as we see wrong keep going. What a pitcher would throw on 1-2 vs. 2-1 can mean everything in too many at bats. I watch many of the games on the computer where the screen is, and the number that are clearly wrong (both ways) are far too many to continue to tolerate. 2nd, I read the NY Post a few days a week, and the difference is stark in how they cover their teams vs. how our media covers ours. You wouldn't want to be on the Mets right now, trust me. And the Yankees have been excoriated up and down for several weeks now and they are 16 games OVER .500. We are 18 games UNDER .500 and all we do is look at the minor leaguers and estimate how they would do in the lineup next year. Betsy, in the Pioneer Press, might just as well be a PR person for the Twins FO with what she writes; never even so much as a critique, much less a criticism, and the Trib isn't exactly calling for heads to roll either. And some should, maybe, the way this team has been mismanaged. I miss the days when sports writers were our voice, not the teams. But I digress. You are spot on on those two points.