Mark G

They rank well in those categories, but the numbers can be misleading. The number I look at the most is the old stat of the team scoring 3 runs or less and 4 runs or more, and what the records of each are. We do things like today; 6 homeruns, 8 in the last two games, and that jacks up the numbers but not the record. Through tonight the Twins have scored 3 runs or less in 47% of our games to date and that, more than anything, is why we are 16 games under .500. I have never been much for the SLG and the OPS. I look at runs produced, which comes from runs scored and RBI's. And to do both, you need more than solo home runs now and then. The launch angle and the MPH exiting the bat are fun to see once in a while, but I will take a good average hitter every day, and we just don't have enough. Having said all that, yes, pitching is still a major problem we need to solve.

Yea, and pretty badly at that. I have said for years that Buxton should be getting 30-40 bunt singles a year with his speed, but he doesn't want to. So when we need it the most, he isn't able to. And no one on this team cares, because the bunt goes against the analytics. Frustrating to watch at times.

Best post I have seen in a while. There are times when I wouldn't let Rocco coach my neighborhood little league team.

4 runs before an out is recorded. 11 innings later we come up with a total of 3 hits and 0 runs additional. 0 for 6 with a runner at 2nd in extra innings. Oh, and did I mention that all 4 runs came on home runs? When the pitcher can keep the ball in the ballpark we may be the worst team in this old man's memory; we simply do not move runners along and in to score, even when the runners are handed to us. And check out the ERA's of the 2 pitchers who handed us the 0 for 6 in the extra innings; and the 6 hitters were the top 6 in our lineup. A word to Rocco: put your computer sheets down and play the game of baseball. The team isn't hitting 307 home runs anymore; you need to score the old fashioned way.........or do you not know how?

Wow, I suspect I am putting myself square in the crosshairs here, but I couldn't disagree with this more. As the article stated, we knew going in he had a light bat. We knew he would give better defense. And, again as the article said, he proved it. We expected to be a good hitting contending team that could live with a light hitting good glove shortstop; the fact that the rest of the team fell on its collective face is the reason we are where we are, not Simmons. From what I remember being told when we signed him he lived up to his billing almost entirely. We did expect an average higher than .218, but we knew he was a singles hitter who was not going to make or break the offense and he has done pretty much what he came here to do, which was to give us a solid glove at SS while Polanco settled in at second and the prospects came around. Not only do I believe it was, and still is, a good signing I would sign him right now for 2022 to give the prospects another year to mature. And hopefully we won't have the 3rd worst (or close to it) ERA in the league and Kepler will hit more than .207. And Buxton will stay on the field. And Sano will learn how to play first and hit more than .214, And I could go on, but don't need to. Simmons wasn't, and isn't, the problem. A contending team not only can afford a light hitting gold glove caliber SS, it should want one (the glove, that is). The team had a meltdown, not Simmons. I can't believe I just defended this FO's decision. Maybe there is hope after all.

On the opposite end of that, yes, it is possible to win with 3 runs if the pitching holds up, but so far this season we have scored 3 runs or less 47% of the games we have played through Wednesday night. The 3 run rule will hold up only so long; we need to open up the offense to more than waiting for the 2 or 3 run home run. We have a grand total of (non pitcher) 6 sacrifice bunts the entire season, and 44 total stolen bases. When is the last time we have seen a pure hit and run out of this team? When you can not (will not?) move runners along the old fashioned way, you need 3 hits an inning or a long ball to score any runs. Hence the 47%. That is the management in the dugout, not the players, and we are paying the price for it. So we can talk about pitching all we want, and believe me, I want to, but we need a different approach offensively as well. And this analytic group in the dugout isn't going to give it to us. Which also falls on the FO; they couldn't wait to bring these guys in.

I concur. I have been shy about saying it myself, but Colome has looked pretty good for awhile now, and I am finally starting to trust him in the 9th again. And Alcala has good stuff, he has just given up too many gopher balls; since that has settled down he has looked good as well. And I am liking Gant as back end possibility; I wouldn't write his name in ink just yet, but a light pencil seems appropriate until he proves me wrong. Good observations.

I agree with everything you laid out in the above article, and what you just posted here. And I could have saved you the hours on the internet, too. Almost anyone in my generation of baseball junkies could have told you exactly this without a single stat or WAR, just our eyes and paying attention to the box scores every day. Don't take that as some kind of insult, I say it somewhat tongue in cheek knowing that folks today rely on the analytics. I only point out that sometimes it is overrated (highly overrated?) compared to just old time seeing for yourself. But you are spot on, however you came to the conclusions you did.

They put a rookie in the game at different positions he has never played before (or very seldom) in his professional career and hope he doesn't fall on his face. He doesn't make an error, and he is now Mr. "clutch" at .239 and one good game at the plate. Or at least that is the message I am getting from the article. "He is not a rock star at all positions, but he can cover them if need be" might describe 30 or 40 players in the league. What is wrong with finding a position he is a rock star at and leaving him there instead of trying him out at every position but pitcher and catcher? Maybe if he grows as a hitter they will, but in the meantime we simply do not need anymore .239 hitting utility players. Find a home for him and let him play there! Or play himself out of it, but enough with musical chairs, the baseball version! It isn't working!

A pitcher whose sinker and changeup breaks down makes hitters swing and miss even at slower speeds. A pitcher whose fastball rises as it comes into the zone may make a hitter miss in the same fashion, even at modest speeds for a fastball. He will, though, need another pitch or two that makes hitters nervous so they can't sit on the fastball (which would make it even sneakier fast). In my day, that is what they paid pitching coaches for. We are supposed to have a good one; time for him to earn his money.

I am kind of a rookie here; let me check this out. Love the thought.

Love ya Sample, but........what am I missing?

With all due respect, the Rays didn't beat up the Twins pitching staff, they beat up Albers. And why he was left in as long as he was to take said beating is not only confusing, it is distasteful. I could write a short story right now on Baldelli and some of the things he does with the pitching and the lineups, but I don't think I want the carpel tunnel that would go with it, so I will pass and leave it to cooler heads than mine right now. Looking forward to reading you all instead.

Agreed! I know some home town official scorers like to give hits to their guys instead of errors to the other guys for the home team stats, but a fielders choice goes against a batting average just as much as an error does. And it sticks the pitcher with an earned run he doesn't deserve. Maybe they should give one challenge per game on the official scorer, too.

4 runs in 7 innings (as my own official score keeper I refuse to charge him with Sano's brain fart) will keep us in most games. We would be happy with this out of most other starters on this club; I am going to be happy with it in September of a lost season. Funny, isn't it, that when Ryan gives up 3 in 5, we give kudos but when Dobnak gives up 4 in 7 (again, Sano gets the 5th) we hesitate. Both had a bad inning and otherwise did great, but one is judged differently. I suspect there is no right or wrong here, just what each person sees for themselves. I love reading the folks here; keeps things in perspective.

Couldn't agree more. Through last night, in 47.3% of our games our offense has scored 3 runs or less. Used to be anything over 1/3 was considered troublesome; almost half is need to take a long look in the mirrorsome. The wonder kids in the FO and the dugout need to feel a little heat, and soon, because this is as much their doing as anyone's. Just my version of analytics for the day,

Ah, there in lies the debate. I have never been a fan of using August and September as an early and extended spring training, so I would say play your better players but that argument and 7 bucks will get me a cup of coffee at Starbucks. I have always believed winter ball and spring training is where you try players out; that is above and beyond AAA. Major league games should be played by players who have the better chance of succeeding day in and day out, not players we want to "take a look at". But, again, that is not the prevailing view of the modern day folks in charge, so I grudgingly cede to them. I just offer my extremely humble opinion and take the heat.

I know; that is why I have been in favor of Simmons continuing to play, yet I seem to be a minority there, too. But .140? Even I don't like defense that much.

Actually, the pinch hit at bat by Refsnyder didn't make any sense at all, as it made Rocco use 2 players for one pinch hit (Jeffers had to go in and catch). If Austudillo had pinch hit, he could have replaced Rortvedt and still had a pinch hitter with some power available in Jeffers and a higher average pinch hitter in Refsnyder still on the bench. I also happen to believe that Rooker is in the lineup ever because they are using 2021 as a tryout for 2022 with him. Refsnyder is hitting over 60 points higher and can play the field as good or better. And, for some reason, someone (Rocco? the FO?) has decided not to catch Austudillo again; they would rather have a .140ish hitter instead (another player on a tryout?). So, again, we can debate who is better than who, but I tend to go with the batting averages and the two on the bench are simply hitting higher than the two on the field that I was using as examples. Thanks for the discourse.

Refsnyder and Astudillo are both hitting considerably higher than Rooker and Rortvedt, and Astudillo can catch. Should have is a matter of opinion and so is could have, but the batting averages aren't.

I think a lot of our offensive stats are somewhat skewed by games like last night. Lots of offense in one game and not much in another average out alright, but don't tell the whole picture. When they talk about runs given up, here is a stat about the offense: in 45% of our games so far this year we have scored 3 runs or less; not surprising we are 17 games under .500. There have been too many games we pad our offensive stats and too many games where we don't score, so it looks overall like we have a good offense and it can be deceiving. As for pitching, I posted a few days ago exactly the scenario about not one starting pitcher from opening day pitching today, as well as an unsettled bullpen. I am glad Matthew Taylor noticed.

Is there a lack of communication in this organization, or are we just being lied to day in and day out? Players/pitchers injured throughout the entire 40 man roster and then some, and all we hear is either it is just day to day and we are just being cautious, or we didn't know he was playing hurt and was just trying to play through it. Scanning through the current roster I found 9 pitchers on one IL or the other, and that doesn't include Maeda if he is now hurt nor does it include previous trips to the IL by him and others who have since healed. Add to that 3 players currently on the IL and 5 or more (I counted 5 just at a glance) that have spent a bit of time on the IL earlier and you are talking almost half the 40 man roster either currently hurt or recently hurt. And, frankly, I don't remember being leveled with by this FO or manager as to the causes, the severity, or the time frames of these injuries. Maybe that is on a need to know basis, and the fans just don't need to know. But right now if this manager or FO told me the sun rises in the east, I would call my science teacher for confirmation before I believed it. Oh, and the above is in 124 games. And, yeah, I hear about injuries all over the league, and that also makes one wonder what is going on in the game itself. But that is a discussion for another day, I guess. In the meantime, another game, another injury, and another collective shrug and shake of the head. Berrios and Happ gone (traded), Maeda and Pineda hurt, and Shoemaker dumped for making critical remarks. Not one starting pitcher left from opening day after 124 games. And no one will pay a price. What a gig; where does one apply?

The best post on here.

I do not say this with any malice or glee, but you will never get a stable line-up with this manager; he simply doesn't believe in it. Remember the days when the manager would be standing on the top step of the dugout, intensely watching the game as it unfolds and sees the whole field? Me too. Remember the days when the manager would sit in his chair behind the protective screen with all the computer printouts and manage the game from there? Yea, me neither. But that is what we have in our dugout; this is a computer game to him, and he moves the pieces....er, the players around as the computer dictates. Same with the lineup. Same with the RP rotation. It looks more like a youth league game where the coach has to get everyone in the game somewhere. And the diehards might enjoy the action, but the average fan doesn't get the managed chaos and tunes out. Personally, I know a lot of old time baseball fans; I do not know one at this moment who cares anymore. Not a good sign. Let us hope for better days.

Separating the diehards from the casual fan, as he says, may be fun for us, but when the casual fan doesn't have a clue who they are watching they will stop watching. And how that helps the organization is way above my pay grade. The other thing us diehards should be watching is the attendance figures; this is what may determine how much money is available in the off season. Two seasons in a row of huge losses doesn't help the payroll budget a whole lot, especially if the new CBA is more costly. So we may be seeing this crew long past this September. Learn their names.