chpettit19

Oh I'm sure it'd be real hard to get to one that is at .7, but the .3s that velo has to ERA, FIP, xFIP leaves a lot to be desired. Velo certainly helps, but I'm not ready to say it's a problem that the Twins don't hunt it. Lots of ways to get guys out, and pure velo doesn't do it. Control and mixing pitches are far more important than just throwing hard.

The biggest r value amongst those variables is WAR compared to 95+% at .535 which is something, but certainly not statistically significant. The rest are in a range from -.278 (vFA to ERA) to -.487 (vFA to xFIP). Most are in the -.36 to -.46 range which shows there's really no strong correlation between 95+% or vFA and the results. I don't think anybody would argue it's not better to have velo if you can, but this data shows there isn't really an overwhelming correlation between velo and ERA, FIP, xFIP, or WAR. You can be successful without having huge velo even if it does give you a slight advantage overall.

Looks like the Twins were dead last in avg fastball velo in 2020 while having a top 5 staff and 24th in avg fastball velo in 2019 while having a top 10 staff. 2019-2020 Twins pitching staffs had more WAR (according to fangraphs) than any other AL team and only behind the Dodgers in all of baseball while being 26th in fastball velo. Not sure that shows a great correlation.

This specific FO doesn't hunt velo. I don't think they're averse to it, but it's not what they're looking for. They're looking for elite pitches. Spin rate and what not. Maeda's splitter. Wisler's slider. Ryan's fastball. Their approach to pitching is that if you already have an elite pitch they can get you to use it more effectively (usage rate, location, etc) and teach you to throw more efficiently, which hopefully helps with location (repeatable delivery) and velo.

I don't trade Garver or Kepler at all this offseason. Catcher isn't the position of depth many people see it as. Garver is above average, and elite offensively. Rortvedt can't hit major league pitching, and Jeffers isn't ready to be the #1 guy. They don't have any catching behind those 3. I think Yan Gomes is the top FA catcher if I'm remembering correctly and that's not who I want to go into 2022 with either if I'm trying to get back into the division race. Kepler had a down year. Doesn't make much sense to me to trade him at a low point. He's still elite in the field, and with a young pitching staff you're going to want his glove in RF instead of a corner OF combination of Rooker, Larnach, Garlick, Arraez type fielders or Gordon and Celestino type hitters. Kepler isn't a star, but he's definitely good enough to hit 7th and play RF on a championship team. Arraez and Sano I'd be fine trading. I don't know why people think the Twins would have to eat a bunch of money for moving Sano. I don't think he's getting a top arm back, but his power is real and teams covet that. I think you can unload his 9M if you really want to. He's much like Kepler in that he isn't a star, but if he's hitting 6-8 in your order you can definitely compete. Arraez is the expendable piece (even though he's my favorite hitter right now and don't want him to leave), but he's also not worth much as a no-power, bat-only player. Nobody is giving up a top arm for him either. I just don't think Twins have ML position player depth like others seem to think. They have a lot of players, but it's not like they're sitting all stars on their bench cuz they just can't get them in the lineup. They have a bunch of guys who are, or should be, solid MLB position players, but most of their positions are corner spots which are much easier to fill defensively and don't bring back the arms the Twins need. Nobody would claim Eddie last year, but we think people are going to give up top 3 rotation arms for these guys? I just don't see it. Development, FA $, and trading prospects are the tickets to improving the team (pitching staff) for 2022.

I don't know how to say this any other way, but, again, you are complaining about how the game is played now, not Rocco specifically. The White Sox weren't sacrifice bunting or stealing bases this year either, even with their "old school" manager. Rocco is an entirely normal 2021 manager. Nobody bunts or steals (unless you can steal at a rate better than like 84% or something like that, I forget the exact number). Outs are your life blood on offense. Giving them up is a bad strategy. It's been shown it costs you runs, not gains them. You don't like that, and that's fine, but that's not just Rocco, it's literally 100% of major league organizations. This is how the game is played now. The Twins bullpen pieces have roles, they're just not the roles that you're used to seeing. The Twins had the 9th best ERA in baseball in 2019 and 4th best in 2020. Was Rocco screwing up those top 10 staffs, too? For 2019 and 2020 combined Twins pitchers accumulated more fangraphs WAR than any other pitching staff in the AL and 2nd most in all of baseball. Was Rocco screwing them up to? After the trade deadline the Twins had a top 3 bullpen in baseball, were they just so uber talented that they overcame your perceived Rocco mismanagement? The team also knows who's starting day to day. They know when their scheduled off days are coming. They know why they hit in certain spots and what their roles on the team are. You not seeing it doesn't mean it isn't happening. I'm not a big fan of what analytics has done to the entertainment value of the game, but the idea that Rocco is making the team worse by using them is simply incorrect. I have no problem with you not liking the use of numbers or what they're doing to todays game, but the Twins are better at winning games using them than not, and Rocco is using best practices whether you like them or not. I wouldn't be sad if he got fired as I don't think he's anything special, but he's certainly not dooming the Twins because you don't understand (not a shot at you, many people don't) or like the strategies that are used now. Honestly, this is more about your lack of understanding of modern baseball strategy than anything. And that's not a bad thing and I don't think you're out of bounds feeling how you do about a number of things, but this is how the game is played now. The game has changed, the athletes and their expectations have changed, and the way FOs and managers run their teams have changed. I'm not a big fan and feel bad that I'm paid to help push these strategies further down the line, but it's just how things are now. I appreciate the wonderful back and forth, though! It's been fun.

They're not trading Meyer. Him and Rogers are their 1-2 punch for the next 5 or 6 years. If Sixto's shoulder won't be the same they'd trade him for Garver, but the Twins don't want him if he's damaged goods. Garver for Sixto would get a conversation going I'd think. I think the Marlins are trying to be the Indians/Brewers, though. I don't think they're all that interested in trading any MLB pitching. I think they want them all and want to build a dominant pitching staff internally and worry about the offense after.

Well then I'm glad you're not running the Twins.

There is a 0% chance the Marlins trade their 2020 #3 overall pick and their 2021 first round, HS SS prospect along with the main return for JT Realmuto for Jeffers, Larnach, and Duran. That's 2 elite arms who are 22 and 23 years old (and they expect to be in their rotation next year) and an 18 year old electric athlete at SS. Duran is the youngest Twin in that deal and he's older than every piece coming back. MLB.com has Watson ranked #27 overall amongst prospects, Max Meyer #30, and Sixto #41. I'd guess all 3 are in more top 50 lists than not. They're not giving up 3 top 50 global prospects for a league average catcher, a corner outfield bat, and a worse pitching prospect than they're giving up. Never happening.

This will be an unproductive conversation if your belief is the game hasn't changed. The rules today are different than the rules 2 years ago, let alone 20 years or 100 years. The game is constantly changing. People cling to the phrase "old school" as if it actually means something specific. It doesn't. It means there was a period in time you preferred better than now, but La Russa's in game strategies changed a dozen times during his career. There's no "old school" way to do things. There's about 1000 "old school" ways to do things. You don't like analytics. That isn't new information around here. And I don't mind that you don't. I work in baseball analytics so I tend to lean that way in my assessments of things. To each their own. But the idea the game hasn't changed is ridiculous. But go research what La Russa started doing with his bullpens in the late 80s before you go too far down the road of the game never changing and being so against analytics as a whole. You just don't like the new analytics. Cuz La Russa changed how the game was played in 88 and used what analytics he had at his disposal then to do it. Define "proven winner year in and year out." Cuz La Russa hasn't been above .500 every year of his entire career or anything. I've already given you Rocco's data. He's won more than he's lost. He has 2 seasons of .600+ winning percentage already. La Russa has 6 for his entire 36 year hall of fame managing career. La Russa finished bellow .500 10 times (almost 1/3 of his managing seasons). You don't like how Rocco does things. That's fine. But beyond that you have no leg to stand on. Rocco has succeeded at winning major league baseball games as a major league manager. If that's the tool you want to use to measure the quality of managing then you should be supporting Rocco.

Agree with first 2 commenters. It's the timing that I don't get at all. Just feels like a completely unnecessary move to make right now. There are a ton of guys on the 40 man who the Twins have to have 0 plans to have there for the long-haul. Why not waive them right now and wait til other teams have their 40 mans more set and have harder decisions to make about if a post-surgery Colina is worth cutting somebody else for? Just seems like an unforced error here.

I don't know that I think trading away current MLB position players for current MLB pitchers gets the Twins any closer to competing in 2022. I don't see the depth others do at positions with players who could bring back the type of pitching people want. Luis Arraez is the only piece I see as being extra, but he's not the type of player who brings back the type of arms people are talking about. I don't see Garver as being expendable. All you're doing is creating another hole in another place. I think Garver is a top 3 bat for catchers in baseball, how do you plan to replace that? Jeffers and Rortvedt don't replace that. They simply don't. Garver is one of the team's 5 best hitters. How are you going to replace that? I think the lineup is thin the way it is. A Polanco injury next year and things get real bad real quick. If you want to talk about shipping out prospects for major league arms I'd listen to that, but I don't see the MLB for MLB trade situation helping the 2022 W/L record. Kepler's no star, but his glove and league average bat are still more than anything that would replace him. Trade him and Garver? They're not good enough to bring back a #1 pitcher, but probably could get a #2 so now you have #1 and #3 rotation spots open and RF and C are significantly worse instead of having #1,2,3 rotation spots open while your lineup is good enough to compete. I don't think filling the #2 spot in the rotation counterbalances having to replace 2 starting positions players. FA $, prospect trades, and prospect development are what I think the road to competition looks like. Unless they're blowing it up and reshuffling everything. In which case it'll be one wild offseason.

I'm actually not a particularly large fan of either of them, really. I think Rocco is servicable, but nothing great. I think La Russa has a job right now cuz he's best friends with an owner. My take is that the manager plays a very small role in the grand picture of season total wins and losses. There are very few organizations that would hire someone like La Russa right now. Maybe just the 1, really. The point isn't whether you or I would prefer old school or new school, the actual players in MLB, and most owners and FOs, prefer new school. Like my first post in this thread said, you aren't complaining about Rocco, you're complaining about the world of major league baseball. 90% of teams are doing things the exact same way as the Twins and Rocco. Gerrit Cole didn't complete 3 innings in Tuesday's game, and both Wainwright and Scherzer were real pissed about how early they were pulled last night. This is how baseball works now. You're more than welcome to not like it (I'm not totally on board with it), but it doesn't make Rocco a bad manager, it makes him a current manager. This is how the game is played now. And the point of the comment you responded to was that if win/loss records determines if a manager is good or not ("He is still managing, and winning") then you actually think Rocco is a good manager. He's won 54.7% of the games he's managed and won over 100 games 2 years ago while winning at a 100 win rate again last year. If you think La Russa having a career win percent of 53.7 automatically makes him good then you have to think Rocco winning at 54.7 makes him good. 54.7 is an 88 win season. That's the rate Rocco wins at. If La Russa winning 93 games this season in the worst division in baseball automatically makes him good then it's really hard to say that Rocco winning 100 games in a division with another playoff team doesn't make him good. All I'm asking for is that people use the same standards for both and quit pretending the last 2 years didn't happen.

If the changeup is for real now is there any chance the Twins kick around the idea of going Freddy Peralta on the bit and trying to move him back to being a starter? Relievers are way easier to find than starters and we know we can use roughly 64 starters for next year. I'd guess there's a roughly .0942348509% chance this happens, but I think it'd be worth a chat amongst the pitching coaches and higher ups. No idea what his stamina is like, but if I remember the reason he moved to the pen was the lack of a 3rd pitch to get lefties out. If he has that why not see if he can't get through the order twice?

If them winning the division this year is proof Tony L is still a great manager then the Twins winning the division the last 2 years is proof Rocco was a great manager. How do you feel about that? Oh, you think those teams won in spite of the horrible manager, but my point that the White Sox underperformed their talent levels this year is a bad one? Glad the rules apply to both Tony L and Rocco. If winning 93 games in a division with 4 teams under .500 is a fantastic season I have no idea what the Twins winning 100 games in 2019 was. What's better than fantastic? Stupendous? So Rocco lead the Twins to a stupendous season 2 years ago and won at the same rate last year. So back to back stupendous seasons for the Twins, but Rocco is trash. I got it. Rocco has a .547 winning percentage as a ML manager (La Russa, with a way bigger sample size, has a career .537 winning percentage for reference). The Socks won 57.4% of their games this year. You're arguing that the difference between 93 wins and 88 wins is 1 manager is AMAZINGLY FANTASTIC and the other will never be a MLB manager again. That's your argument right now. Players currently being managed by Tony La Russa have openly complained about him and how he manages the clubhouse. I am yet to see even 1 player complain about Rocco and how he manages the clubhouse (entirely possible I missed it, but quite positive I didn't miss any public fights between him and players like La Russa). That's why I continue to say it's complete nonsense for people outside the clubhouse to say he's not good at managing the people in the room. It's simply people not liking the way his personality comes across on TV. There are no clubhouse struggles and everyone who leaves praises Rocco and the Twins and how they do things, yet so many people want to stick with "Rocco has no idea how to lead athletes!" Mind blowing to me.

I don't think I'd consider 5 save opportunities before pulling him from closer duty to be outrageous. Colome blew 3 of his first 5 save opportunities and didn't get another one for 3 months. Doesn't seem to me like Rocco rode with Colome as a closer for very long.

I'll start with the fact that I think managers are incredibly overrated at this point in time. Knowing "the numbers," and being able to make sound decisions based on them, and managing egos/individual players are their real main jobs. Fans should not expect managers to make BP and infield practice mandatory for an entire season for an entire team. The manager's job is to know his players individually and adjust his interactions with, and expectations of, them accordingly. The mandatory "practice" thing happened because they were calling up a bunch of kids who didn't know how to be major leaguers yet. But they didn't make guys in their mid 30s who are established big leaguers (like JD) follow their mandatory things because those players already have their routines and habits and it'd be poor management to mess with that. That's why it's so hard to judge managers. Many people see them as being similar to the head coaches on their little league teams when the truth is that they're nothing like that. Team wide mandates for anything (beyond arrival times for flights and stuff) is not how you manage 21st century athletes. They'd rebel and you'd have a disaster. Dictating routines isn't ideal either. And it's much better when vets take the lead on that. Miguel Sano following Cruz around and learning what makes him great is much more productive than Rocco forcing him to take ground balls or BP. What then needs to happen is information on player habits needs to be funneled up to the FO where they can make decisions. Sano is just now talking about losing 30 pounds so he can perform to expectations? That's first and foremost a Sano problem. Then its manager and FO. Manager hasn't been able to find a way to get him that motivated yet and FO extended a guy who wasn't willing to do the work. Both failures. The truth is a season like this is a failure of the players, the FO, the manager, the scouts, the number crunchers, the owners, the coaches, and just about everybody else in the org. The FO missed on evaluations (scouts and number crunchers included), the manager and coaches didn't have them ready, the Pohlads are the Pohlads so they're always to blame, and the players didn't take it upon themselves to be prepared to do their jobs this year. From everything I hear players are more than happy with the Twins and how they do things. I've never heard anybody complain about Rocco. At the end of the day the players are the ones throwing, catching, hitting, and running. But you can't fire the whole roster (I think you can, but that's how the saying goes) so the manager takes heat. I'm not a huge Rocco guy, but I don't think he's as bad as people say. He manages the way the FO wants, and the way most managers do. AJ Hinch is a recent WS champ and won 47.5% of his games with the Tigers this year. How much do managers really matter? They're not like head coaches in the NBA and NFL in that they're designing plays and have a huge effect on the field. Most MLB strategy is decided with the FO well before the game ever starts.

That's fair. And even more evidence that managing in today's game is different than it was even 10 or 15 years ago. People calling for Rocco to be TK, LaRussa, Bobby Cox, etc. are asking for the wrong thing. It's not how things are done anymore,

It is good. I'd obviously prefer that result to the results we got from the Twins. But the suggestion that his angry old man managing style is the reason they got results seems far fetched to me. Does winning 93 games when playing 76 division games against under .500 teams seem like he was dragging them to greatness with his fire and brimstone? The other poster was suggesting that managers need to be emotional and angry like Tony L to succeed and I'd argue the White Sox underperformed their talent level. Would Rocco have won more than 93 games with them? Who knows. But suggesting that if Rocco was more Tony L this Twins season would've played out better is ridiculous to me.

Winning 93 games in the worst division in baseball with one of the most talented teams in the league is supposed to be impressive? There were 4 teams under .500 in the central and the great Tony L couldn't manage to win 100 games. I don't think he's a great example.

To be fair when the pressure was on Gardy teams in the early 2000s they choked too. This playoff losing streak didn't start under Rocco.

Many of the complaints about Rocco are really complaints about analytics and where the world of baseball is going. The Twins don't manage their pitching staff much differently than any other club. Jose Berrios wasn't 2nd in the AL in innings because he threw 9 innings every game for the Jays the last 2 months, Rocco let him throw when he was being successful. The Twins clearly had a plan to limit starter innings and rotate pen arms between AAA and the majors early in the season after coming off a 60 game season. These constant complaints about the Twins pulling starters early simply aren't based in reality and are getting really old. The Twins manage their starters the same way as basically everyone else. They just didn't have very good starters so they couldn't let them go as long. And if I'm remembering correctly Colome got 5 save opportunities early before being pulled from that role. Can we quit acting like Rocco had him out there for 15 blown saves or something crazy? Colome had a long track record of major league success coming into the season. 5 early high leverage situation chances is not unreasonable for a guy with his track record. And it's impossible for us to speak to what kind of leader he is. I haven't heard a single negative thing said about him from any current or former players (that played under him). We have no idea what goes on in the clubhouse. I agree that I prefer managers to have a little more fire than he does (it's uncomfortable watching him argue and try to get kicked out of a game, he can't even get riled up when he's trying to get booted), but to suggest he's failing at leading the clubhouse is 100% speculation with no way for any of us on here to really know.

I didn't mean be an above average hitter for the league as a whole, I meant hit well enough to play as a glove only SS in the majors. Take Simmons for example. He can still field the position, but he can't even hit well enough to even be a glove first major league SS anymore. He barely hit enough when he was an all world glove at the position. The hitting standards for a glove first SS aren't terribly high, and I don't think the Twins have anyone who can even meet those standards while also fielding as well as you need to at that position to warrant a major league spot. The Miller kid they just drafted may fit the bill, but he's a fresh out of high school signing so he's not an answer anytime soon.

But Cruz, Happ, and Robles were on expiring deals so what does that have to do with them rebuilding in 2022? Those guys weren't going to be here in 2022 anyways. Your original comment stated that the team is clearly rebuilding in 2022 or they wouldn't have traded Berrios. Trading the other 3 has nothing to do with them rebuilding in 2022. Even trading Pineda wouldn't have had anything to do with 2022 as he's on an expiring deal as well.

Michael Brantley is under contract with the Houston Astros in 2022. Are the Astros cutting him and eating $16M or are the Twins trading for him and taking on $16M while also trying to sign Ray or Syndergaard, Duffy, and Grienke and, presumably, extending Buxton (don't think they'd like to start 2022 with him if he isn't under long-term control)?