Western SD Fan

Almost a quality start for Ober. Not bad considering the lack of velocity on his fastball tonight.

It is supposed to drop about 20 degrees over the next couple of days. Maybe that is a sign of a crooked number for the Twins offense.

Outman, please explain to me why you are still at second base?

They need to have a special graphic when they always bring up the expected runs given the situation. The MLB average expected runs scored and the Twins average expected runs scored.

And of course the contact play strikes again. Now we have the slow footed Larnach to ground into a double play.

Probably the same odds as us trading away Brock Stewart and barely got him shoved out the door before he went down with an injury.

I thought I remembered Cory Provus reporting that they ditched the Trojan helmet after the trade deadline to give this team a fresh start.

"Oh when the Saints come marching in! Oh when the Saints come marching in! Oh how I'd love to be in that number! When the Saints come marching in!" As for Lewis, I wonder if his mechanics are messed up from being rushed back from the IL twice. I know we are talking a long time since his last IL stint. I would guess that he adjusted his mechanics to compensate for the fact that he probably wasn't 100% when he came back from the IL. If those poor mechanics are still prevalent in his at bats, it could be an explanation on why he is still struggling even though he has been given a long run at 3B this season.

I guess this is the joy of following a team in a rebuild. I was listening to some pundits this morning that after one bad game in the field, they were all clamoring that Keaschall is immediately removed from playing second and moved to first or the outfield. I think it's important to consider that Lee now fixated on playing one position (SS) rather than three positions will have the additional effect of helping him focus on his batting. If we can see these issues creeping in with the smattering of metrics that we have available, I find it hard to believe that the coaches do not see the same thing and hopefully have a plan to work with him through the end of the season and maybe give him things to work on in the offseason. Which also makes me channel a 90s song, "Where Have All the Coaches (Cowboys) Gone"? I'm reminded of the conversation that Corey Koskie had in the TV booth on Sunday where TK basically told him that he was unplayable in the field. Koskie basically harangued a coach to fungo bat him to death to improve his defense so he could at least play a passable 3B. I think it worked out for Koskie. Do the current coaches (and manager leading them) not have the skills, time, or patience to work with these younger players? Do the players not have the mental fortitude to overcome adversity and adjust to the majors? I'm hoping that a full youth movement will finally focus these coaches on trying to improve the skills of the younger players and we can see what these players can accomplish. Since we are not chasing any playoffs for the foreseeable future, we have time on our hands to develop these players. Provided that this group of coaches + manager is up to the task.

I don't see how you get away from 9PM CT starts. Just call me ignorant, I guess. In most of the realigned division proposals, the Twins are in the Western Conference, much like they are in the NBA or NHL. Those respective teams still have to play late games on the west coast. The Twins could actually play MORE late games than they currently do if you apply the MLB scheduling formula as so: 3 game series vs other Conference = 48 games (most games are a 6PM CT start) 13 games within division = 39 games (all games would be a 7PM CT start, CHC exception since they love their day games) 6 games vs remainder of conference = 72 games (other than COL, everyone else will be at or near a 9PM CT start) 1 - 3 game series vs an old rivalry that was split up in realignment (this is more for teams like ATL/NYM, NYM/PHI, not necessarily for MIN, although people who love the rivalry from DET/MIN or CLE/MIN could potentially see a revival here, similar to the MIL/MIN home and home we see now) Currently we see at most 15-21 games with the late west coast times. 3 teams from the AL West and up to 3 teams from the NL West. Under a new realignment proposal (using Plouffe's since it's easy to reference), you would see 24 games with a near 9PM CT start (LAD, SDP, SFG, LAA, ARI, SEA, LVA, (por/slc/van)). Note: You'd subtract three9PM CT starts if SLC was given the expansion team.

After reading all of the comments, I like to play a game like we are a jury in a civil case in a state where we are allowed to assign blame in percentages rather than point the finger at one particular person, since I do think that the clubhouse culture "failure" has been driven by the entire organization, from ownership to the players themselves. With that being said, let's try to analyze the "blame game" into percentages: 1. Ownership: Everything starts from the top and I'm not sure this ownership group has a plan other than the Twins are not making them enough money. I haven't been in the camp blaming ownership for not spending enough money on the team. That's the FO's job to fill out a team given the payroll budget set by the ownership. Plenty of other teams are more competitive and spend less than we do (pre trade deadline) such as Cleveland, Tampa Bay, Milwaukee, Detroit, and Kansas City. Where ownership needs to share a lot of the blame is due to the Jekyll and Hyde approach to the team. They sign Correa to the opt-out contract in 2022, and it seemed to work for everyone. Ownership would have had to sign off on the 6-yr Correa contract for 2023 and beyond and subsequently allowed the payroll to rise to the highest it had ever been as an organization for 2023. Then, after we had the best season in over 20 years, ownership pulls the rug out from all of us and says they need to "right-size" the payroll. Again, this isn't as much of a rant that ownership should have spent more. It's more that they switched gears and chose profits over building a sustainable winning team. It's not that easy to build a sustainable winner when only a few of your players are soaking up nearly half the payroll because your FO thought they had a bigger payroll than they actually did. Ultimately, ownership likes to play the hokey pokey with the team, sometimes they are active, sometimes they are not, and nobody knows when the music starts up again. Finally, you add the potential sale of the organization adding confusion to all as nobody knows where they will be from year to year. 2. Front Office: One thing to commend with this front office is that they have typically brought in good vibes or clubhouse veterans, be it Nelson Cruz, Bader, Coulombe, France, Santana, etc. Donaldson was definitely questionable, but he has seemed to be the exception, not the rule. Correa, who I will address later, is definitely more complicated than a straight good or bad clubhouse guy. We can argue over the quality of moves that the FO has done, but that is not the question we are answering here. In answering the question addressed to us, the FO has largely done a good job in bringing in good clubhouse guys into the organization. 3. Manager (and coaches): Ooooh. My favorite subject. Full disclosure. I've been in the Fire Rocco camp for well over a year now, but I will try to bring facts and proper comparisons to my argument why Rocco needs to shoulder a lot of blame for a poor clubhouse culture. Many players have made statements throughout the year that the clubhouse is their domain, and they don't want the manager sticking their head in a place that the players don't believe they belong. Ultimately, it's the manager's job to actually manage, not only the game on the field, but the team personalities off the field, as well as hold the players accountable for their play on the field. I will suggest that Rocco does a better job managing player personalities than he does actually having to manage a younger team that need more of a guiding hand navigating the pitfalls and perils of playing in the majors. Rocco is closer to Aaron Boone, as we have seen with his success managing an older, seasoned team as we did in 2019. With that being said, let's compare Rocco to some other managers: Tom Kelly and AJ Hinch. Both managers have been considered to be player's managers, just like Rocco so there is no argument from that standpoint. Tom Kelly: For those of us who watched the game on Sunday, we heard a story from Corey Koskie where he marched into TK's office and asked why he wasn't getting any playing time. TK responded bluntly that he had no position that he could trust Koskie to play with any level of confidence. Koskie's response? Get a coach to constantly work with him on his fielding by hitting grounders with the fungo bat until Koskie finally improved his fielding. I think it worked out alright for Koskie. Have we heard of an example of this done by Rocco & Co. (Coaches) with any players on the team? We have heard of Correa working with Lewis and Lee and France working with Clemens, but no coaches actually working with these players to improve their skills. Whether that is true or not, the fact that we haven't even heard of players working with their coaches on elements of their game is an indictment on Rocco and Company. AJ Hinch: Probably my best comparison as he has led two teams from youth to the playoffs. Let's set aside the cheating in 2017 for the moment as I want to concentrate on his job managing the Tigers. Hinch told Baez that if he wanted to continue to start on the team that he needed a new position as Trey Sweeney is taking over SS. Baez responded by learning CF and being a utility man as he has played CF, 3B, SS, and 2B this season in which he made the AS team. Another example was with Spencer Torkelson. Torkelson was a promising first round draft pick (1st overall). Sound familiar Royce Lewis? Torkelson wasn't performing, had even been optioned back to Toledo for a time. Hinch comes in and tells Torkelson that if he doesn't improve, he won't be playing. Another case of where it's up the manager to identify what is not working and work with the FO to make the changes necessary for the betterment of the team. To be fair, we have seen this with some players (Wallner, Larnach, Miranda, Julien), but not with Hinch and the Tigers when dealing with a high-profile prospect (Torkelson) nor with the most expensive player on the team (Baez). I've advocated for some time that it may be time to send Lewis down to AAA just to get his confidence back, but it's probably too late for this season and I'm not sure there is anyone in AAA at the moment that is really worthy of taking Lewis's position away from him. This is another case where Rocco and Company do not seem to be impressing on the younger players where they are failing from a fundamental standpoint nor giving them a pathway to improve, which can lead to apathy in the clubhouse and a poor clubhouse when the team is losing. Carlos Correa: Likely going to be one of the most polarizing players the Twins have had in a long time. I believe his 2022 contract was basically a showcase year for him to get a big contract. I also believe that he was told by the FO that the ownership was willing to spend on a winner in Minnesota and his ego needed to prove to the Astros that he could lead a winner with another team after basically being pushed out of the organization for Pena. As we all know, this dream worked for one year and like us fans, reality set in for Correa that the ownership wasn't really serious about building a winner in Minnesota. If the wins came, they came, but that was not their priority. I think this is something we can all agree with so with that, I will address the pros and cons of Carlos Correa's time in the organization. Pros: I believe that Correa was a consummate professional for the most part. Many players have attributed improvements to their eye at the plate, better footwork on defense, or even day-to-day exercises to Correa. He was always in a teaching moment when something didn't go right. Such as warning the on-deck batter on a pitch to watch for or working with Lewis or Lee on footwork or ball placement even in-game. If Lee turns out to be a serviceable SS the remainder of the season, he likely has Correa to thank for working with him. It looked like he did sacrifice his body multiple times for the betterment of the team as shown with the 2023 playoff run and trying to come back in 2024 to rescue the already sinking ship. As we have seen his resurgence with the Astros post-deadline, it does look like that he should have been shifted to 3B a while ago. He still played SS as that was the position that gave the Twins the best chance to win even if he would have been a better 3B than Lewis. Cons: There are a few, but they seem to be poignant and can be concerning in terms of how the clubhouse runs. First, there have been rumors floating around post-deadline that while Correa was great with working with younger players to improve their craft, he wasn't always patient with them. He demanded perfection and was harsh on players that couldn't live up to his standards. Very tough for a team full of younger players that have been bouncing in and out of the minors and puts added pressure on them when they don't perform up to scratch, especially when many of these players have not been given a full chance to claim a spot on the team. This could be construed as another indictment on Rocco and Company as it's the COACHES job to help these players develop and not Correa. Another point on this is the fact that the best ability is still availability. It's tough to listen to a leader when they are on the IL and may or may not be in the clubhouse on a day-to-day basis while being injured. It can be tough to listen to someone criticize you when they are not even on the field. I've always been skeptical of Correa's connections with the FO as it seems like that when things aren't going well, he can just bypass chain of command and go right to Falvey or Zoll with his problems. That seems to emasculate Rocco and Company, and it shows the players that they may not have to listen to the message that Rocco is trying to deliver if they can package their complaints to Correa and have Correa contact Falvey. I have no evidence of this actually occurring, but just speculating on what is the worst that could happen knowing this connection exists. Even at deadline time, Correa had to come in and mediate a meeting between Rocco and Jax. This seems very strange to me. Does this mean that Correa ran the clubhouse with an iron fist and all concerns had to run through him? Does this mean that Rocco was so unapproachable that Correa had to intervene whenever there was strife between the players and the manager? I don't know nor do I want to guess. It all amounts from the rumors floating around that Correa had the clubhouse so tightly wound up with the pressure to win that the clubhouse wasn't fun nor a refuge for players in a place where they are going to spend the most time at during the season. Buxton/Lopez/Jeffers/Vasquez: Some of whom may have been considered other leaders on the team had various roles. We saw this with Vasquez as he was responsible for the HR props the past few years. It appears that these players show more quieter leadership skills as in leadership by example rather than being vocal like Correa was. These players let Correa, for better or worse, be the sight and sound of the players. They may need to bear some responsibility for letting the clubhouse get as bad as it has been reported provided, they did very little to address it privately, as I would expect them to do. The Players: This is kind of a mixed bag depending where you are on the spectrum. If you're a veteran, you likely already have your routine established and you're likely just trying to fit in for the purpose of winning. The better veterans (Bader, France) work with the younger players and give them tips on how to improve their game. If you're a younger player (terms of service not necessarily age), you're just trying to stick with the team and not trying to step on anyone's toes or be thought of as a malcontent that needs to get shipped out. You tend to look up the veteran players and try to see if what is working for them can work for you. You're likely a follower in the clubhouse and just don't want to make waves. I'm sorry for the long comment or short article. I have to flesh out all of my thoughts before I can assign percentages of blame and who should be responsible for the Clubhouse and Twins Culture. Since Correa is part of the conversation, we have to restrict the time frame to where he was a part of the team (2022-2025)> Here are my final results: Ownership: 50-60% - I think it begins and ends with ownership. Their Jekyll and Hyde approach to payroll and expectations left the FO in a lurch and hurt the FO's chances of adding to a team that could have been a contender while hamstringing 1/2 of the payroll to a few players, thus keeping them from making the moves that were needed. Add to that a year's worth of having the team up for sale to pull the team off the market in the end just added to the confusion. I assume that players don't care who owns the team as long as the checks clear, but here is where it matters. Here is where it does matter to the players. The players care about getting paid and winning. Ownership affects both in how hard does ownership go in arbitration to limit the player's paycheck or how does ownership feel about trying to build a winning team. If your ownership is confused about what direction they want to go, the players are confused on what to think about their role in the organization and ultimately the clubhouse, leading to some strife. Front Office: 5-10% - While they do pick the ingredients (players), I would say that the FO has done a pretty good job signing veterans who provide a good clubhouse presence and drafting players who seem to be team-centric. I think they did their job in providing the best clubhouse presence that they could. Manager and Coaches: 20-30% - This may be a tad high and I'm definitely not in the camp that Rocco is responsible for 15 losses each year as other commenters have mentioned. I do think it is safe to say that Rocco is responsible for up to 5 losses each year and it wouldn't be that hard to go back and find them. Rocco is the final voice in terms of managing not only the team, but the clubhouse in general and making sure that his voice is still being received by the players. I'm fine with Rocco not making his discussions with players public. There is a story about Terry Francona when he chided Elly de la Cruz. They had a discussion, Cruz apologized for his actions, and that was the end of it. Nothing was public about what the discussion was about, and Cruz improved his play. Everyone wins. We don't hear this from Rocco on his involvement on trying to correct player's on-field play. We hear more about how players like Correa, Bader, and France have helped the players make changes to their play over Rocco and the coaches. There also comes a point where the manager has lost the clubhouse, much like Scott Servais did in Seattle last year. The players need to have faith in their manager. If they don't, that will definitely affect the Clubhouse culture. Carlos Correa: 10-20% - This likely depends on how much you put on him as a leader in the clubhouse. If you consider his connections with Falvey, his unrelenting desire to make a winner in Minnesota, his demands for perfection, and his willingness to work with younger players, it seems like he had an outsized influence over the clubhouse. If the rumors are true that he had the clubhouse wound pretty tight, then he should deserve an outsized blame for the state of the clubhouse as he was the vocal leader of the clubhouse. Buxton/Lopez/Jeffers/Vasquez: 0-10% - Again, this will likely vary on what you think their role should have been. If you think that they could have done more to cut the tension in the clubhouse, then they should be assigned some responsibility. If you think that their example of preparation and play is enough as a leader, then there likely isn't much responsibility given to this group of veterans. The Players: 0-10% - As stated above, most of these players are either trying to establish themselves or veterans trying to establish themselves on a new team. Few of these players look to rock the boat and likely go along with the established Clubhouse attitude, whether they agree with it or not, to try to make the team better, or if you're a short-term veteran, to showcase your talents so you may be traded at the deadline.

And again, the Twins cannot beat a lefty with and Ouija board channeling his best Jamie Moyer impression.

I've argued this before, and I'll reiterate my point. From an ownership standpoint, Tampa Bay may actually look like the better investment. Sure, currently they have to play at a low-A stadium with the dreams of getting back into Tropicana Field for the next 2-3 years. A new owner will have new ownership vibes that may restart discussions about the Gas Plant project in St. Petersburg or the Ybor City waterfront project in Tampa. Both projects give massive amounts of land adjacent to the stadium that the new owner can develop into a battery-type scenario the Braves have with their new ballpark. All of that means that the land development around the stadium is worth more than the stadium and the team itself and maybe will lead to a larger payroll and make Tampa even more competitive. The Twins have none of that, even with a beautiful Target Field and a great, but apathetic fan base that can't wait to turn the page. This is a 15–20-year play, not a 0–5-year investment.

Houston 1-3 with a run scored, Tait is 1-4 with a rbi for the Kernels.

"Top Men"?

I think if you look at the replay again. The runner was only about halfway to 3rd when Jeffers received the ball. I do think a snap throw to 3rd would have at least made the play close. Maybe he doesn't get him, but it's still another lack of awareness play.

The runner moving over to third is on Ryan. He should have been telling Jeffers to throw to third when it became apparent that the runner was safe at home. We should be out of this inning by now.

Thank you for the clarification. Then this does stink as it's potentially going to be more subscriptions.

Curious to see if the MLB.TV deal from ESPN is any closer to the "proposal" of ESPN supposedly buying the NFL Network. I already purchased MLB.TV this year for the Twins so that money is already gone, just swapped out to a different provider, although I'm not happy with the thought of giving Disney any money. I swap Peacock for Apple+ and I get the same number of games I was getting before. I guess the only question is whether FOX's Saturday baseball is still a thing in the new rights deals.

I'll be curious to see if this lefty from the A's brought his Ouija board with him to channel the ghost of Jamie Moyer.

72 pitches through 4 for Hatch. He may actually get through 5 innings and qualify for the win. Not bad for TBD. Of course, that's provided we can navigate through the rest of the bullpen.

Does someone have a spare Cloverdale summer sausage for the occasion?

C'mon Royce....take advantage of the free pitch.

But we have our newest member of the bullpen, Genesis, fresh for today.

I see Paddack is doing Paddack things.