Rod Carews Birthday

I think this would be an ideal scenario. I like the idea of Nelly being around the team and working with the players. I’m just not sure he is ready to be the head guy, which probably entail much more than that. As an assistant coach, he would be mostly working with players without the need to push the pencil that being the head guy entails. The question is whether Cruz thinks it’s a better gig than the one he has now and whether he would rather work with players directly. He could also be (indirectly) another assistant trainer/fitness guy. I have to admit that most of the successful hitting coaches aren’t guys I’ve ever even heard of, so I don’t think this is a hire that will make me thrilled or disgusted. This is a difficult one on which to speculate.

Awesome article! Tapani was probably my favorite player on the 1991 team. He wasn't flashy, but he was so effective. I agree that he was definitely underrated and definitely deserves a spot in the Twins' HOF for being an essential part of the WS team.

Perhaps the cans should come pre-opened and sitting on a shelf for a day to get that true stale beer taste that the Twins' recent play deserves.

It’s always fun to mock the Sox, but it would be way more fun to be able to mock the Cubs!

Come on. Everyone knows that infants are built more like catchers! He’s a natural.

There is much to agree with in this article. The rotation, except for some bad timing, has been better than expected. But between the bullpen implosions from usually reliable sources and the lack of any sustained offensive production it's pretty hard to win games. In the bullpen, there aren't really any solutions to be had other than "pitch better". As for the offense, the Twins are just out of rounds in their chamber. Santana seems out of gas at 1B, 2B is all over the place, SS is a rookie who looks a little overmatched, 3B is a good player in a major slump, and CF is . . . well. . . we don't really have one right now. But hey! We're OK in the corners and the catching tandem is pretty good! It's going to be tough to get back in control of this thing. Somebody (perhaps unexpected) needs to get really hot and carry this team. I surely don't know who that could be.

Why do you seem to be so attached to veteran players on the Twins? I like veteran players a lot, but sometimes, you've got to move on. In Kepler's case, he's not providing offense, he's not a clubhouse veteran leader, and he's making a lot of money. Wallner, in about half the plate appearances has 2.5 times as much WAR as Kepler this season. Larnach, is a young player making small $$ who has 1.5 times as much WAR as Kepler this season. Kiersey, Jr. . . who knows, but his presence is only necessitated by Kepler (or anyone else) not really playing centerfield. Based on Kepler's current contribution, removing him from the lineup isn't hurting the team.

This is exactly right. He did some promising things right away but never really developed into what he looked like he could be except for 2019 and the occasional hot month or two. I will be happy to see him move on and open up the outfield for some new talent. Best of luck to him on a new team next year, but the Twins will be fine without him.

Yes. This is true. BUT. . . they're going to need to do something right in September to be on a path to do nearly everything right in October. I would be a lot more confident if they played a solid September (maybe +4 or +5 games over .500) than if they make it in based on everyone else losing as much as or more than they do. They could certainly go on a bender in October, and I would like them to. Let's hope it can happen. I know I've said this MANY times in postings like this. The 1987 team was not a juggernaut. They were a decent team that got hot at the right time and won it all. Stranger things could happen.

“This at-bat was typical of one you might expect to see from a crafty veteran hitter. To cover the fastball and slider away, and still to avoid wasting the mistake when it comes, takes a special hitter. Even not quite at his best, that’s what Lewis is. The homer proved that.” I enjoyed the at bat. I enjoyed the excellent analysis. I’m not sure I’m in agreement that he is a “crafty veteran hitter”. That would be Carlos Santana, or should be Max Kepler, but probably not Royce Lewis yet.

Banking on health and a return to star level status for Buxton, Correa, et al, seems like wishcasting. It COULD happen, but given that they don't seem likely to be returning at full health makes high quality play unlikely. The bullpen could be helped by Varland and/or Paddack and/or someone else, but it seems to me that the biggest issue is to get the pitchers currently in the bullpen to pitch like some of them have earlier in the season. That may not be possible given the workloads some of them have endured. Varland could help ease that a little, but it will take more than one guy to improve the current situation. The area that I agree the most with is that somebody, not necessarily Kepler (unlikely) or Lewis (only marginally likely), will need to step up and get hot offensively in order to get this team scoring some runs. A little hot streak from a player or two can be contagious and lead to pretty substantial overall improvement. It could be Larnach or Wallner going on a real tear, or Castro becoming really hard to get out, or one or both of our catchers really finding their stroke over the next couple of weeks. The Twins are in a pretty tough spot at the moment. Something needs to happen or the playoff birth will be in real jeopardy.

I don't know about the Twins "signing up for it" with injured players. A lot (really a lot) of players have injury histories that never have problems again after they heal. Think of the great pitchers that have had TJ surgery, recovered, and never looked back -- it's a long list. The same goes for position player injuries. I do agree with on you on the bottom line however. Ultimately, the reasons why don't matter. The Twins just need to win games somehow, with whatever cobbled together lineup they can muster on a day to day basis. With a month left in a playoff chase, now isn't the time to lament injured players. It's not going to be easy, but it would be really cool if the Twins can still pull it off.

I think you are correct. The injury bug has bit the Twins in a nasty way, perhaps in a way more severely than some other teams. However, all teams have to deal with the same issue. Yes, the solution is to have the best roster in anticipation of injuries, but that only works if you happen to plan for the right ones, which is difficult at best. Injuries will happen and will negatively impact the team. There is probably an upper limit to what you can plan for, particularly in defensively sensitive ones like CF, SS, and the starting rotation.

It would be great if Lee could come back up and be the savior of the season, but I'm not counting on that happening, at least not directly. A really huge part of the benefit of Lee coming back is the fact that he can displace Castro at SS, freeing him up to actually be a utility guy, while likely improving the SS defense as well. I'm not expecting him to hit .350 with power, but I think he will be at least OK, and the domino effect will help the team a great deal. Now, let's hope he's actually healthy.

Just to clarify, is your explanation that Buxton and Correa (and maybe Lewis) just don't want to play and aren't trying to get out there to help the team, instead preferring to only come back when the national spotlight is on them in the playoffs? Wow. Just wow. Professional athletes are performers. They have spent their entire lives, often at the expense of other endeavors, attempting to get themselves to the highest stage (professional sports) in order to show what they can do. There is an amount of pride and competitiveness in these people that overrides pretty much everything else, including money (your suggestion not-withstanding). They absolutely perform for the money, but there is a whole lot more of their being tied up in being a successful athlete than a paycheck. It is nonsensical to suggest otherwise.

This is a good list. I'm sure all of these things have been or are being tried by the Lewis and the coaches. If only it were that easy or predictable. Slumps are crazy things and sometimes the harder players try, the worse it gets -- on the other hand that's the only way out of the slump. One day he will come to the ballpark and the slump will be over, with seemingly little explanation except the tendency of statistics to regress (or progress) to the mean for the player.

Perhaps I'm just not as outraged at the situation. Many (not all) of those moves were reasonable ones at the beginning of the season, particularly under the budget restraints. We're not signing big free agents. We're just not. I'm not woe is me, but that's a lot of things not working out -- a bit of a perfect storm in my mind. Many of the fixes you would like to make involve the team trading players/prospects. I would support that, because all prospects (especially pitchers) are suspects until they are not. However, when the trading time comes, the fans want to label anybody in the top ten as "untouchable" or "way too much to give up for player x". Suffice it to say, they can't have done everything wrong. The team still playing above projections.

So, basically you're saying, "if we had more good players who weren't injured, we'd be a lot better." OK. Let's get right on that. We can only play the game with the team we have, not the one we'd like to have. I would make the argument that the Twins have been hit pretty hard in the injury department to some pretty key players -- CF, SS, #4 Starter, #2 Starter, #5 Starter, 3B, Backup hotshot rookie SS, Top bullpen arm, etc. Is it more or less than the teams hit hardest out there? It's less than some, but more than KC and Cleveland, which are our primary concern right now.

Things really aren't looking good at the moment, as the injuries have sucked up pretty much every bit of depth that they had built up, and then some. Depth is great, but when you are missing your best players, the production is going to take a hit when the replacement is a young guy, or a defensive replacement guy, or a AAA guy. Sometimes, in the bullpen, it's just a "guy" who can be a warm body. There's not much that can be done to fight that problem. If every piece hits just right, you can win, but it takes so little for the whole house of cards to come crashing down, and that's where we are right now. At the moment the bullseye is on the back of the bullpen, but it could just as quickly turn into the rotation or the lineup or the defense, or likely all of the above. When you are missing players of the caliber of Buxton, Correa, and Ryan, while throwing in a few slumps, it's hard to do much better than they have. All of that being said, I don't think things are out of reach. A lucky break or two (we've had NONE of those lately), a player or two getting hot, a player or two returning from injury and things could turn around a little. That might be enough to sneak past Cleveland and KC, or at least get a wild card spot. Unless something dramatic changes though, it would definitely be "limping" into the playoffs.

You just described two opposing scenarios. In case one, you state that a player should not be pinch hit for because he was having a good game, even though he would have an at bat against a same-handed pitcher. OK. Fair enough, as early in the game it’s definitely a judgement call. Yet, in the second case, you want to sit or move down Buxton and Correa, who are obviously left in place due to their historical success. By the same criteria, they should stay where they are. The problem is that “feel” moves around, making it a lot more random than we will admit that it is. Sometimes, a feel move will get a lucky outcome, but often it can become a head scratcher after the fact. I think the point of my post was that we say we want things to happen in particular ways (mostly because that’s our individual opinion, which we are all entitled to), yet we hide behind platitudes of “he doesn’t trust players” or “he manages by the spreadsheet” which don’t really make any consistent sense. It’s ok to disagree with calls that the manager makes, and I do regularly, but we should just own it and not fall back on blanket statements that often are inconsistent and inaccurate.

Oddly, there were a number of former Royals on that team. . . . It's unlikely, but it does make you wonder. I do agree that even the best have clunkers however.

I completely agree on the managers getting far too much credit and far too much blame for their record and what the perceptions are. Funny how teams like the Yankees and Dodgers always seem to have amazing managers. . . . Also, you are right. Comparing managers across eras is pretty difficult. Sam Mele did some impressive things, but have you ever looked at that lineup? Gene Mauch seemed to get a fair amount out of not much, but never really got anywhere (ever). Tom Kelly won two WS championships, but is that enough to make up for poor years with mostly the same team? They all have their warts, and you just hope to match up the right guy with the right moment. I agree that Rocco is OK. I don't think he's amazing but he's a long way from terrible. I also think that we as fans, even though we get to voice our opinions, have a particularly good handle on the job a manager is doing from the outside looking in. Outside of talent, which has nothing to do with the manager, there are some game decisions and the clubhouse atmosphere. One of those most people don't understand (more on that later) and the other, we can't know. Reading through these comments, there are plenty of shoot from the hip reactions. . . Rocco Sucks! He's the Worst! Etc. They have no basis in real analysis. Every article like this one (which was ill timed at best and obnoxiously trolling at worst) invites reactions of the most ridiculous kind. There will be the usual list of "manages with a spreadsheet", "only does what the computer tells him," doesn't trust his players, especially pitchers," "should be managing more with instinct and gut feel," among others. I know I will regret this, because I will likely get beat up by many commenters, but I'm going to ask for some information. Define your terms. What does it mean to manage the game by feel? Is that like my Grandpa telling me it was going to rain because his knee was acting up? How about too much analytics? Is it better to just throw a dart at the dart board for the next move or would you rather the manager took into account the potential for success or failure of the next move? Is being #2 in the league in innings pitched by starting pitchers last year indicative that Rocco has moved on from "not trusting his players?" Do you propose that instead of "using the computer too much" he tries to haphazardly keep the information in his head, or writes it in one of those little flip page notebooks? Does saying the word analytics make him a terrible manager anymore than Ron Gardenhire managing from the gut made him a good one? Analytics are the way of the league and I'm pretty sure more knowledge mostly outdoes less knowledge. YMMV. I return to my assessment. He's OK. Fine. I don't think he's blowing multiple games on his own in the past two weeks. I don't think he's ruining the career of young players. I think he's good enough that he might get us into the World Series at some point, but I don't think it will suddenly make him amazing. The real question for those who would condemn the man is who do you want to be manager (that is available) that would be particularly better than Rocco Baldelli? Obviously Terry Fancona must be better. . . . until he wasn't.

He's not refusing to be a reliever. The team has kept him starting games to keep in line to potentially start games if they need him to do so. I think he is probably destined to be a reliever at some point in the near future, and I'm guessing he does too. However, at the moment, his value to the Twins is as a guy who COULD start if they need him to and can go to the pen later. To expect none of those rookies to hit a wall or get figured out is overly optimistic. Many here are acting as though moving to relief is going to take months of working out of the pen. He's done it before, knows what it takes, and can do it again. My guess is that he needs about 2 weeks or so. So, until September 15, leave him as a starter.

Of the things on the Twins’ to do list, this is among the least urgent unless you think that the bullpen will implode enough to cost the team a shot at the playoffs. I don’t happen to think that and I don’t think the Twins do either. If we’re lucky, and the rotation keeps rolling along, we will be able to do that, just not yet. Varland can be converted into a reliever very quickly at the end of the season, IF he is no longer needed to be the backup to the starting rotation. Once he has been converted to a relief role, moving him back takes more time than the team would have available if a starter goes down (or is completely ineffective.) Right now, much more harm can come to the team and its record without an adequate fill-in on the rotation than without another arm in the bullpen.

Different folks have different ways of evaluating prospects which can lead to surprising results. I would be thrilled if they are exactly correct and he becomes THAT guy. However, I would also be thrilled if he is just really good and not some fantasy dynamo. It also seems a little weird that he is climbing this list during a year in which he has been injured A LOT.