chpettit19

Ober is where my head goes with this, too. He's a tough one to handle this year. The only times he's gone beyond 100 innings pitched in a season in his life were his freshman year of college (2014), and 2021 between AAA and MLB. Those were 106.2 innings, and 108.1 innings years. He's at 81.1 this year between St Paul and the Twins. Twins have 88 games left. That's roughly 17 more starts per pitcher. Even if he only went 5 innings per start that's still another 85 innings if he makes every start he has left. I don't see anyway they let him jump to 160+ innings pitched this year. I don't think they'll go straight 6 man rotation with continually cycling through 6 guys in order. But I wouldn't be surprised at all to see them do a 6 man rotation by skipping a few Ober starts by plugging in Maeda or Varland or whoever isn't in the normal 5 man rotation at the time. So don't throw off the other 4 starter's timelines between starts, but sit Ober for a start every couple weeks.

I'm with @DocBauer on this one. That is not an impressive list. Which goes to show how terrible Kepler has been, and how mind blowing it is that he's still on this team. Nobody could honestly say they'd be happy to have Cave around. Cave over Kepler? What's the point? Neither are worthy of the job. Refsnyder would be a better fit as a right handed utility guy on this roster. But, again, is that really some saving grace for this team? The Rooker trade has looked bad for 1 month. It was an otherworldly month, but he's back down on earth, and back to being the Brent Rooker he's been since he was a Twin. There's a reason 2 other teams, including the offense starved Royals, waived him last year. I don't miss Brent Rooker 1 bit. He'll be 29 before the end of this season, too. No loss there. Eddie Rosario was fun, and I enjoyed his ability to make contact with pitches he had no business hitting, and how clutch he was (or at least it felt like he was clutch). He was unplayable in Cleveland. Barely playable in Atlanta before destroying everyone in his path in the playoffs. Back to being bad in Atlanta. And is now back to being pretty good. I'd certainly take him over Kepler, but he's not a difference maker for this team, either. Wade for Shaun Anderson has not turned out well. He was a heavy platoon guy his first year out there, and was really good against righties. He was flat out bad last year. But seems to have had some things really click this year. He'd be really nice to have back for sure. Wade, Refsnyder, Eddie, Kepler, Cave, Rooker would be my order on these guys. Wade being the only one I'd really want. Refsnyder just being a better roster fit as a righty bat. And Eddie just being a slightly better all around player who was more fun to watch.

That was fun, depressing, and rather accurate all at the same time. Not a big basketball fan, so I mostly follow the wolves by chatting with my buddies, and reading articles in The Athletic. But those comps seem pretty accurate. And that's not encouraging.

You don't see any difference between the wear and tear on one's knees playing 8 innings of defense and hitting 4 times a game with maybe 1 trip around the bases included? Just the jogs to and from CF for 8 innings is as much wear and tear on his knees as an average offensive day.

Oh, so you've just defined BP how you want to. Got it. I follow now. You know they have live pitchers in the cage, too, right? I mean unless you think someone is actually getting on the Target Field mound and throwing real pitches like they're in a real game during the season. That doesn't happen. The only difference in what you're describing is the lighting/backdrop. They have real human beings who go into the cage and throw real baseballs in the cage, too. But I get the disconnect now. Yeah, I understand that's what you want. And, as this conversation started, we will never agree on that. That's fine. We're well aware of our differences on that subject. And we'll never agree on that last sentence either. Since you're still mad after they've publicly stated what Buxton is doing today. So, like I said from the beginning, what they say really doesn't matter, and hasn't changed anything. You're still unhappy. You want them to do things the way you want them done, and it doesn't seem you'll be happy until that's the case. Unless they play better. Which has been my point all along. All that really matters is what they play like.

I wish he'd play great instead of just feel great!

Why do you keep saying "Doesn't take outdoor BP" doesn't actually mean "doesn't take outdoor BP?" Like I honestly want to know. That's not a sentence I've ever said. They have cages inside. You know that, right? They can take batting practice (I assume we're both meaning batting practice when we say BP) inside. That's where that velo machine you want him to use is. Why are you attempting to make it sound like I'm saying something I'm not? Byron does his batting practice inside. Why is that a crazy idea? If I'm remembering correctly, Mike Trout only does his inside, too. Yes, extreme example, but I'm confused on this obsession with the word "outdoor." You do accept that "doesn't take outdoor BP" doesn't mean "doesn't take BP," right? Like those are 2 different things? You've added the word "outdoor" to that second quote multiple times now. I've never had the word "outdoor" in that second quote. I mean you can go back and look at the comments you've quoted of mine. You've added that word in some weird attempt to make it sound like I've said something I haven't.

You know they have cages inside right? Like lots of players take BP inside? I mean you know there's a difference between not taking outdoor BP, and not taking BP at all, right? You using the same quote twice there is literally changing the meaning of what was talked about in the article, and what I said. Again, the word outdoor feels like it's getting a little too much emphasis here. Why are you so obsessed with him doing it outdoors? Do you think there's a lot more BA in Buxton? You think if he took more BP outside instead of inside that lifetime average would .280, or what? Why? Is the velo machine what was needed, or just something you want him to use? What's the difference between the velo machine, and the regular machine? I honestly don't know. Do you? How high does the regular one go? Do you think outdoor BP would make up for the velo machine, or does it have to be both? Who says the manager has no interest in it? Is it possible that Rocco, Byron, and the rest of the Twins staff, knows his swing, his routines, and what he needs a little better than you or me? Your argument has gone from "they don't do enough work" to "they're doing the wrong work." I'm sure one of those is right.

1. Anytime. I aim to please. 2. We'll just never see eye to eye on the fact that "at least they tried" is nothing more than you assuming they aren't trying now. "If they don't tell me they're doing it, they aren't doing it" is an interesting stance. But point 1 means I'm all good with you taking that stance, because that's just how you fan. 3. First, how does he get his timing back against live pitching without playing? Bold strategy, but I'm sure it'd work great. I'd definitely move him down the order, though. Second, you've clearly taken the quote "in a while" to mean more than the IL stint he had that the article immediately talks about. But I admit I have no idea what "a while" really means. Do you know if he's a big velo machine guy normally? This isn't exactly his rookie year. When he's been going well in the past was he doing a lot of velo machine work? How about extra early BP, and extra cage time? Is that what's best for Buck to get on track? I'll admit I don't know. Funny that you take "eschews outdoor batting practice" to mean he doesn't need/take regular BP. Especially funny since, following the comma, it says that he does targeted work in the cage instead. It's almost like they're telling you the type of work he does, but you don't care anyways because it's not the type of work you want him to do based on all your inside knowledge of Buxton, his swing, and his routines.

You're welcome! Wasn't even a reply to you, but I'm glad you enjoyed it. I understand that's your, and others, issue. I don't get that issue. I don't get what you want him to say though. "I'm terrible, I should be fired" or "we suck, and never going to get better" aren't ever going to come out of his mouth. And even if they did I don't expect it'd make you any happier. But to each their own. "We aren't playing well enough, and need to change what we're doing" has come out of his mouth, many times. But that hasn't made anyone I know of feel any better. But maybe there is a magic phrase in there somewhere.

You don't say things differently in public than you do in private? Gray and Rocco were heated in the dugout the other day. Did that make anyone feel better even though the team lost? Rocco is subdued, and doesn't throw guys under the bus, in pressers. Does that make anyone feel better even though they lose? My point is your last paragraph there. We don't know anything. We're not in the clubhouse. We don't know what these guys are like behind closed doors. Fans can absolutely make their displeasure clear, but I don't get why fans care about what these guys say to us. Rocco isn't talking to the players in those pressers, he's talking to us. He talks to the players in the clubhouse. I'm not defending Rocco, the FO, any of their strategies, the players, how they're playing, anything. I'm simply confused as to what people get out of Rocco throwing a tantrum in front of the media, or saying whatever perfect, magic words they want to hear. To me, it's an emotional thing. People are all amped up about their favorite team, and "in their feels" as the kids say. They're mad, and want to see people with the club be mad in "the right way" so they feel like they care, too. I don't have any desire to see any of that. It doesn't change anything. I understand some fans do, and that's fine. I'm just confused on what saying different words in their forced pressers changes. Nothing they say matters to me. Just win more games, or at least play better baseball.

Why? Do you believe they're not doing any work? Here's an article from today about the work Buxton's been doing. He hit off the velo machine the other day before he struck out. You feel better now? What do their words actually matter to you? Fine, Rocco tells you they're doing "situational baseball workouts." Keeps telling you that through July. The aren't playing any better. Your feelings on Rocco changed because he told you what workouts they're doing? You're choosing to assume they're not doing work. You're choosing to assume they have no "strategy." Them telling you different, but the results not changing, isn't going to change your opinion on any of this. So why choose to be upset about the words Rocco says when all any of us really care about is how well they play? You can fan however you want to fan. I don't get it. I don't see how anything they say changes anything. I don't care what they say. Just play better. Coaches, FO, players, everyone. None of their words matter. Coach better. Build a better team. Play better. Their words mean nothing. Doing their jobs better is all I care about.

He has made those statements. I mean, in the 2 minute clip in this post he calls out both the hitting, and pitching. "Not everything is all up to chance, it's up to us, is what it is. We have our work cut out for us. We're gonna have to, WE have to figure it out, is what we have to do because we aren't playing real well." He's then asked if he's trying to find something to spark the team. Explains that they've tried things, and are still working to find the right thing. I don't know what else fans want. He's used the word "unacceptable" in the past. I just don't understand why any of this would make fans feel better. Some fans want/need big emotional outbursts, players being thrown under the bus, whatever. I don't, and I seriously don't understand what it'd help. If that would make the players play better (I don't know cuz I don't know the players) then that's what he should do, but would anyone be less upset with the Twins play if Rocco was in the media blasting Correa and Buxton everyday? I wouldn't be, but maybe some people would. I just don't get that need.

Yeah, I don't expect the Twins to do anything I'm suggesting. But when your team has played like this one has for 2.5 years now I think it's time to quit doing things the way you're doing them. As for that Toronto series, you kind of proved my point about them being able to pitch back to back days. They pitched back to back days that series, and weren't available for the 3rd game. That's different than not being allowed to pitch back to back days. Pitching back to back days doesn't mean they're throwing 2 games in a row all the time, just that they're allowed to do it when the moment calls for it. And, unless you have 6 high leverage arms, you better get them used to throwing back to back games during the regular season, because they're going to need to do it in the playoffs. It's why I never thought Rogers was an elite arm. He was terrible in back to back situations. In the playoffs you have to be able to use your closer in both game 1 and game 2. If you can't he's not good enough. Being willing to use your best relievers in back to back games during the regular season doesn't have to equal taxing them. I don't understand how having an "abundance of stretch relievers" over-taxes both your starters and your short relievers. If you have 4 guys who can all go multiple innings, and a rotation with at least 3 guys who can go 6 or 7 innings pretty regularly, you shouldn't be over-taxing anyone. If you're getting 6 innings out of Lopez, Ryan, and Ober most of the time you should be able to get 5 out of Gray, and 4 out of Maeda without over-taxing anyone, as long as you have multiple guys who can go multiple innings. It takes a change in mindset, though. You don't need 1 inning guys to throw the 7th, 8th, and 9th. You can use a multi-inning arm to pitch any combination of those innings. The Twins not trusting anyone outside of Duran, Jax, and Stewart is a self-made problem that should've been addressed in the offseason, but wasn't. Only trusting 3 guys to get high leverage outs puts you in a tough spot no matter how the rest of your staff looks. Switching out Moran and Pagan types who aren't trusted for high leverage spots for Headrick and Balazovic types who aren't trusted in high leverage spots just reduces the number of relievers you have to use in a game which allows you to save your Duran, Jax, and Stewart types from having to pitch in the 9th inning of a 9-3 game. Having just a 3 man bullpen is a disaster no matter what.

I get the want of fans to feel like the players, coaches, front office personnel, and owners have the same emotional responses as they do, but, honestly, no, it wouldn't be nice to me if Rocco, or anyone, did that every once in a while. Just not something I need, or think is useful. Unless that's what would motivate certain players on the team. And I don't know whether or not it would. I'd get nothing out of it, but it's Rocco's job to know his players, and what they respond to best. I don't think it's bad that other fans want it, but I don't need it, or particularly understand what it'd do for other fans. But we're all fans in our own way. He "called out" Kepler the other week. By Rocco standards at least. I'm sure some fans enjoyed it. It did nothing for me, and clearly nothing for Kepler's play. I'm just of the belief that if you need to blast your players in the media to get them to throw to the right base, take better ABs, or just play better in general, they're probably not the right players. I don't think championship players need that stuff. I don't think they need to be forced to take BP, or fielding practice, when they need it. That's all minor league stuff to me. If you're graduating players to the bigs who don't know what base to throw to, can't take competitive ABs, or just play sound baseball, to me, it's your minor leagues that are failing. I don't generally like to speak to the amount of "heart" guys play with. I will speak on hustle, bad base running, missed cutoffs, Gallo throwing to home instead of keeping the double play intact, terrible approaches at the plate, etc., but I don't think any of us have nearly enough info to know what kind of "heart" guys have. I don't automatically correlate emotional outbursts to heart. That's certainly how some people show their heart, but it's also entirely possible for people to be enraged, and emotional about their play, without having to show it externally. That's all Rocco's, and the FO's, job. Is a guy just a naturally calm person, but putting in tons of "extra" work, busting his butt every play, and putting his all into things? Is a guy emotionally explosive and verbal about his feelings, but not putting in any "extra" work, busting his butt, or putting his all into things? That's what Rocco is paid to know, and inform the FO about. And, as a fan, I'm not going to assume I know the work guys are putting in based on their displays of emotion I happen to get shown on TV here and there. Ober was very calm about being sent down. Gray is not always calm about getting pulled earlier than he likes. Are we sure Gray cares more, or has more "heart" than Ober? I'm not. That's why I just don't care what any of these guys say, and try not to speak too much about their "heart."

Is that not what he has been saying for weeks? Does anything he really says actually matter? Does it make any of us feel better about this team if Rocco says the exact perfect thing in his pressers? It sure doesn't make me feel any different. He can say literally anything he wants about this team, and what they're doing, but all I care about is what actually happens on the field. My point is that what Rocco says doesn't mean a single, gosh darn thing. Who cares? They've said all the things you're asking for at one time or another this season. Popkins went on the record and said he needs to give the hitters better game plans. Do you feel better since he said it? I just don't get why anyone cares what they say. It doesn't change what happened on the field.

That wasn't what I was talking about. I asked what the other poster wanted the manager to say to the media. They complained that he wasn't saying the right thing. I asked what exactly they thought the manager should say in this situation. Didn't say anything about what they're actually doing. I wasn't suggesting anything contrary to your rant. We know we disagree with having to force major league players to take BP or fielding work. Whether or not the players are doing what's needed to improve tells me a lot about whether I want them on the team or not. I shouldn't have to babysit these guys. But I don't disagree that results matter. I'm fine with them firing everyone today. That wasn't what my post was about, though.

I don't disagree with that at all. Not that any of us would ever expect such a thing. The difference in expectations for owners is a huge part of organizations. The Pohlads and Steinbrenners have very different goals with their teams (or so it seems from the outside at least).

What would you like him to say? He's been saying they're playing terribly for weeks. He's been saying the strikeouts are a problem, and if you're going to K a lot you need to hit the ball hard to counterbalance it for weeks. What else is there to say? I couldn't care less if they fire Rocco today, but what exactly is it you think a manager should be saying in pressers besides "we're not playing well, but we're trying to find ways to get better. Everyone in here knows this isn't good enough, and we're all working to improve?"

To be fair, the above tweet shows they're the 3rd worst team in the American league over the past 1.5 months.

I disagree with the premise that they would, or should, be unavailable the next day. If you can't use your best relievers in back to back games they're not good enough to be the best relievers on a team. Do you want to use them back to back days super frequently? No. But it can, and should, be done from time to time. If you want to win in the playoffs you better have some guys who can throw back to back days. Especially your closer, and fireman. I also don't know why you can't use a multi-inning capable pitcher for 1 inning if needed, or, heaven forbid, to pitch both the 8th and the 9th inning after Ober leaves your hypothetical game. Why not use Headrick to finish off that Ober game and not have to throw either Moran or Pagan? If Headrick is better why can't you use him for 2 innings? Would the Twins actually do it? I don't think so at all. But there's no rule that says you have to throw worse pitchers for 1 inning each instead of using a bulk guy for multiple innings, and still have bulk guys left for the next day.

Oh, I don't expect it to happen at all. My pen right now would be Duran, Jax, and Stewart as 1 inning guys. De Leon and Moran as 1 or 2 inning guys. Headrick, Balazovic, and Maeda as 3/4/5 inning "bulk arms."

I want more multi-inning arms. Fewer arms who can throw more innings. I'd rather get through 7 or 8 innings with 2 arms instead of 3 or 4.

Do they have 5 guys in high leverage roles now? Why would having more long relievers mean there's more high leverage roles? Who outside of Duran, Jax, and Stewart are really getting high leverage innings now? I wouldn't be replacing anyone above Moran and Pagan in the pecking order so I'm not sure why they'd be moving up. I'd be replacing the guys at the bottom of the pecking order. The current pen is Duran, Stewart, Jax, De Leon, Moran, Pagan, Headrick, Balazovic. I'd replace Pagan with Maeda. That doesn't move anyone up the ladder into higher leverage roles. Just adds a guy who can go more, hopefully better, innings.

Do I think they'd do that? No. But I wasn't saying what I think they'd do, I was saying what I'd do.