chpettit19

Bringing in his 2 best relievers is "trying to lose?" If bringing in Jhoan Duran and Griffin Jax to a 2 run game in the 8th or 9th inning is "trying to lose" I'm not sure what any manager could possibly do to show they're trying to win. I didn't like pulling Ober. I would've left him in. But let's have a little perspective here. He didn't put Okert or Richards in there. He went to 2 guys who are supposed to be amongst the very best in all of baseball. He over managed that game, but let's be realistic about what he did. It's pretty easily defensible decision even if it's not the one many of us would've made.

That's a lot of disagreeing with points I don't see anyone making. Nobody, especially not me, has said he isn't responsible for decisions he makes. Nobody, especially not me, has said he isn't making the decisions. Nobody, especially not me, is saying he isn't trusted to do his job. Go read my posts again. My point, from the beginning, has been that firing Rocco doesn't solve the problem because the front office believes in these strategies! They hired someone who agreed with their strategies and they trusted to execute them. If they fired him, they would hire somebody else who agrees with their strategies and they trusted to execute them. Rocco got hired (and extended) because he believes in the same strategies as the front office. This isn't rocket science. Rocco and the front office are on the same page. Firing Rocco doesn't get rid of "quick hooks," platooning, Duran being used in the 8th here and there, pinch hitting, players moving around the field, etc. Because those are front office strategies that Rocco agrees with and the front office would just bring in somebody else who believes in the same things. This isn't a Rocco problem, it's a front office problem. They didn't ask Rocco how he wants to run the team and then went and built a team around that. They found somebody that had the same vision as them and went to work building a team that they trusted Rocco to manage the way they all agreed was the best way. You're disagreeing with points nobody is making. Or do you believe they think he does everything wrong but they're tying their careers to him anyways?

One of the quotes is from last September about a situation 11 years ago, yes. There's not a person who follows major league baseball who would argue that the front offices are LESS involved with the manager and clubhouse. It doesn't work the same, no. The front office and manager/coaches are even MORE intertwined now.

So then you have to beat somebody better than NYY?

No wild card left a lot of teams back in the day not trying at all. Where's the "luster" in that? And a lot of the teams that went into the year trying to win ended up being out of it by August and then they weren't playing with much "luster" either. There's pros and cons to the wild card. More teams trying now (Boston, Seattle, Detroit would be completely out of it without the wild card) than before, but the teams that were trying back then knew they had to build better teams. Double edged sword here, I'd say.

I'll never understand the idea of "we should hope they avoid this good team in the playoffs so they only have to play this good team." The playoffs are hard. Get in and give it your best shot. If the Twins can't beat New York or Baltimore the better option is to go White Sox on things and lose 130 games and get a top pick. There were a couple teams that were "better off playing" the "lowly" Rangers and Diamondbacks last year. Until they weren't. The Twins should be hoping they get into the playoffs and have the chance to show what they can do. You have to beat good teams along the way to a championship. That's the entire point. Hoping good team B beats good team A for you just means that good team B is a good team. Apparently better than your super feared good team A.

So your belief is that the FO brings in platoon only bats and disagree with them being platooned constantly? You think they hate how he manages but extended his contract? You think they secretly want a manager who'd do things differently but just aren't firing him? The Pohlads made a public declaration that this front office had to keep Molitor for at least a year. They fired him as soon as they could and brought in Rocco. Is it your opinion that the Pohlads are now forcing them to keep Rocco? Did they force them to extend Rocco? Or is it more likely that the FO like Rocco and the way he does things and that's why they hired and extended him? If they fired him, is it your opinion they'd hire a manager who doesn't platoon, leaves all his starters in for 7 to 9 innings every night, only uses Duran in the 9th, has 1 dominant catcher and the other who plays 1/4 the time, and never pinch hits? And I've never said "dictate." I said they set the parameters. And I said they set them with him. They all agree on these strategies. That's the point. The front office and Rocco agree on these strategies and it's how the next manager would manage if they fire Rocco. That's why it's not a Rocco problem. It's a front office problem. Either they bring in righties who only hit lefties because Rocco told them that's how he wants to manage even though they disagree or they hired Rocco because he believes in the same platoon strategy as them. Which do you think it is?

Of course Rocco makes the call. I've never claimed otherwise. What I've claimed is that he's not working independent of the front office. What I've claimed is that firing Rocco isn't going to lead to a drastically different approach to managing the team. Do you think the FO hates platooning? They have Margot and Farmer and Garlick and Luplow types on the roster all the time, but it's Rocco doing all the platooning on his own? Do you think they hate how early he pulls his starters? Do you think they hate how he uses his relievers? You think they think his every other day catcher usage is nonsense? Or do you think they agree with all those things and that's why they not only hired him but extended him? My point has been that this isn't a Rocco problem. It's a FO problem. They aren't going to hire someone who is going to manage the team differently than how they built it to be managed. I don't get why this is controversial. Rocco and the FO agree on these strategies. It's why they're followed. It's why he was hired. It's why he's still here. And it's how the next manage would manage if he's fired but Falvey and Levine stay. And, yes, Gardy rejected his lineup because he's the one in charge of the clubhouse and how that's handled and the people side of things. Just like I said Rocco is. My claim has always been that they do things together. That Rocco isn't acting independently of the front office. And your proof that I'm wrong is that Gardy didn't just do exactly what he was told. Which has never been my argument. They work together. Which is what I've said from the beginning and you roundly reject because you think they put together a team that's clearly built for all the strategies Rocco deploys but they'll randomly hire someone who will deploy different strategies. Yeah, I can follow that very clear logic.

Jack Goin. Here's an article where he comments about writing lineups for Gardy in 2013. So before Rocco and this regime even take over the front office is already providing their input on lineups. (He also talks about not wanting too many platoons which I wish this FO agreed with) Here's the forum he talks about Derek and/or Thad talking with the top of the coaching staff "multiple times per day. Is this information going to convince anyone around here they're wrong and Rocco isn't acting independently without input from the front office?

He agrees with their strategies. Not sure why that's a lack of integrity. That's the point. Rocco wasn't hired and extended and forced to manage in a way he disagrees with. He was hired BECAUSE these are the strategies he also believes in. He came from Tampa. Most of their strategies are stolen from Tampa. They wouldn't hire someone who doesn't agree with their philosophies. That's the entire point.

Well we've had a former front office staff member on this very site confirm that Rocco and the front office talk everyday. Is that "strong proof?" The idea that Rocco is doing things independent of the front office makes no sense. They provide him information and strategy everyday. If they didn't like how he does things why did they extend him and not fire him? Do you think firing Rocco would lead to them hiring a manager that does things drastically different?

They don't call down to the dugout and tell him to take players out, but they talk everyday and set the parameters for the decisions he makes in game. Our bosses in the real world don't call us in the middle of every project we're doing and tell us exactly what to do when, but they give us the parameters and expectations for how it should be done. Same thing. If they didn't like how he did things he'd have been fired long ago. Are there individual moves here and there that they wouldn't have done the same or didn't like? Of course. Nobody is on the same page about 100% of things. But they gave him an extension while he managed this way. Doing all those "head scratcher moves." The idea that Rocco is making decisions independent of the front office or the way they want things done is misguided. He isn't. They talk literally everyday during the season. They are very much involved in the way games are managed. Do you think if they fired Rocco they'd hire some fire and brimstone manager who ignored their analytics and managed "by his gut?" Or do you think they'd hire someone who platooned, pulled pitchers after 83 pitches sometimes, didn't have a set closer all the time but instead used matchup based data to make decisions (data that comes from the FO, by the way)?

Lewis is actually the only one I can buy into being tired. He's played so little, and had so few off-seasons where he could work on improving his stamina because of his injuries. And his swing data shows a drastic decline in swing speed over the last month. He's either hurt or out of gas. He's only played 65 games this year, but his 66 last year was the most he'd played since 2019. By a lot. 2021 he played 34 games and that was his previous high since 2019. He actually makes sense to be wearing down. The rest of the team has no excuse.

Agreed on the "they really aren't that young" comment. Sick of that excuse and the "we need to keep Farmer cuz of his clubhouse presence" nonsense. But good vs bad manager stuff in this day and age is difficult. It's simply a different world in much of major league baseball now. Joe Maddon is often viewed as the original "analytics" manager for his time in Tampa. He's out of the game now and is very open about a lot of that being because front offices have reached too far into clubhouses. For many (most? all?) MLB teams the manager's job description is basically to manage the clubhouse and to execute the baseball ops departments visions/plans. Rocco seems to be good at both of those things. By all reports he's great at managing the clubhouse. Not the way everyone on here wants it to be managed, but every veteran not named Shoemaker who leaves this team has great things to say. Even Sonny Gray praised the Twins and the clubhouse atmosphere, etc. and people seem to think he hated Rocco with every fiber of his being. What makes Rocco a "good" manager is that he's on the same page as the FO and executes their strategies. I don't agree with many of their strategies (I've annoyed more than 1 person with my constant complaints about the platooning), but I don't see any evidence that Rocco isn't executing the plans and strategies that this FO seems to very clearly believe in. To me, the question isn't a Rocco question, it's a FO question. I don't care if they fire Rocco today (other than it's never fun when someone loses a job they very clearly put great effort into), but I don't see how anyone thinks it's going to make a major difference. The FO isn't going to go out and hire someone who's not going to platoon, who won't give "scheduled off days," who won't alternate catchers every other day, who won't put non-elite prospect rookies on the bench and only play them when forced to, who won't pull pitchers earlier than some of us want some times, etc. etc. etc. Rocco is executing the front offices plans and strategies. If you dislike his in game management you dislike the front office's strategies. It's very important for managers and baseball ops departments to be on the same page. You don't want a manager who never platoons to be in charge of a team the front office built around platoons. That'd be a disaster. Firing Rocco doesn't solve anything, if your complaints are about the in game management. Because they won't hire someone who's going to do things drastically different. Because this is their vision for the team. The only thing that would change is the behind the scenes clubhouse management that we don't see and can only go on what we hear from reporters and players. And all that seems to be glowing about Rocco.

FYI, Keaschall's 2025 season shouldn't be up in the air at all. This surgery was known to be happening for a long time and they planned it to let him play as deep into this season as possible while still being ready day 1 of spring training 2025.

Trusting your talent vs trusting your numbers/predictions. I'm pretty over this regime. Whoever's in charge of the minor league system can stay and keep running that, but I want new guys in charge of the MLB roster and strategies.

Or, worse yet (in my opinion at least), poor play that you just can't take out of the lineup because YOU THINK the next guy is poorer. They very well may be poorer, but at least give them a real shot to find out. A real shot includes being allowed to fail and still get playing time. Jackson Chourio (super prospect so not the same as most of the Twins guys) and the Brewers are a good example. He struggled a ton through May. Then the switch flipped and now he's playing like a star. Milwaukee didn't pull his playing time and replace him with Margot or Farmer types. They let him play and now they're being rewarded. At the end of May Chourio was hitting .210/.254/327/.582. That's less than stellar. He played in 50 of the teams first 57 games. They let him take his lumps and grow. He hasn't had an OPS under .876 in any month since May. June was .897, July .876, August .926, and September is off to a .935 start. They didn't replace him with Margot, Farmer, Gallo, or some other struggling vet. They're 4 games out of the best record in baseball and lead their division by 9 games. He's played in 129 of 143 games for them. The Brewers are the second youngest position player group in baseball, barely older than Cleveland. It hasn't always been pretty, but the youngsters learned and grew and improved. And now they're running away with their division. And, just because I want to annoy you further, they have 345 PAs of lefty on lefty. The Twins are at 176 PAs.

I'm with others and would love to see him go to the AFL for some extra hacks. If he performs well there start him in AA next year. If he continues to perform have him be your September call-up. Then pen him into the opening day lineup in 2026 and take your extra draft pick in 2027 after he wins the Rookie of the Year.

I was talking to some buddies last night and said the way to (start to) make up for their absolutely horrid 10 months of PR is to give the fans a 5'5" hero to cheer for the rest of September. Giving them a 6'8" one as well would be really fun! But I'll start with them just playing the 2 rookies they've called up in the last week+ at this point and see if Keirsey and Helman can provide any kind of spark.

Where there's a will, there's a way. Jeffers to LF? Farmer has played out there a few times in his career. They have 10 guys who stand in the right handed batters box. They can make the dream come true today against Mr Detmers if they're really dedicated to it. Martin-Castro-Helman OF, Miranda-Lee-Farmer-Santana IF, Jeffers C, Lewis DH. I bet the FO gets a pizza party for making such a thing come to life.

Lewis and Castro can't be offensive replacements for other guys when they have to figure things out and replace their own production. Lewis and Castro were already being counted on to provide top of the lineup offense. The offense has to come from guys who weren't already keys to the offense themselves.

I'll note Dashawn is "only" 27, not 28. I'm very much glad to see Keirsey getting a shot. That said, I don't have super high hopes for him. If he can be an above average defender and wRC+ 90 I'll be very happy. And I think that's a pretty reasonable goal. I thought he looked quite comfortable in his first few plate appearances. The other part about getting a shot is that he actually has to be put on the field. He was called up Thursday. Not super surprising he didn't start game 1, and game 2 was against a lefty so we know he's not allowed in the starting lineup for that one. Started game 3, but didn't play in game 4 despite it being against a righty. Rocco/the Twins chose to DH a slumping Jeffers instead of playing Keirsey. Helman has been up since September 1 and has started 1 game while getting 4 total PAs. Neither of these guys should be looked at as likely saviors or long term core pieces, but for a team in a death spiral with multiple guys many people feel are running out of gas why are you not playing the hungry, hustle heavy rookies? Helman and Keirsey are both known as guys who go all out all the time. Good athletes who hustle. But instead of putting them out there as a possible spark they've been relegated to defense replacements as the team now plays their games with 3 roster spots going to guys they apparently don't want to be more than defensive subs (Farmer being the other). I don't think Keirsey is a stud, but I think he can hold his own and I'd like to see him get a real shot over the next week. Closed door meetings and taking shots at your team through 1 or 2 sentence "press conferences" is all well and good, but how about you try playing the fresh legged rookies and see if they can provide a spark instead of watching your team tank out of the playoffs refusing to get away from who you want to be good?

I think this is one of the most interesting storylines for the Twins moving forward. What are the odds each of these guys can stay healthy in the following years? I'd say Correa has the best chance, followed by Lewis, and then Buxton. But I'd say Correa only has about a 60% chance. If the Twins are going to continue to play in this depth of the payroll pool, or maybe even shallower as some think they may slash payroll more, they can't afford Correa and Buxton plus the raises Lewis will be getting. I disagree the other 2 are "untradeable." Yes, they have no trade clauses, but those are waived all the time. I don't know that any of us can know what the players actually feel about waiving them. It might be entirely possible to trade either of those guys. I have no idea how other teams may value them for the same reasons the Twins should be considering their future with these 3 being their "core." They're in a tough spot. One could argue that some time with Lewis, Correa, and Buxton on the field is better than none. But the costs of their contracts can be limiting. I think, at this point, I'd keep them since I highly doubt they'd replace them with any proven stars. Emma and Jenkins can hopefully provide real Buxton insurance in the next year+. Hopefully Lee, and/or Culpepper eventually, can provide real Correa insurance starting next year. Having your 3 stars all be major health concerns is certainly not an ideal situation, that's for sure.

Castro has been in the bigs since 2019. Fully in the bigs since 2020. Julien is a "kid" with little experience. Larnach has been in the bigs since 2021. Lewis since 2022. Lee is a "kid" with little experience. Wallner debuted in 2022 but is kind of in a middle ground. Miranda has been a big leaguer since 2022 but was injured last year. Martin is a "kid" with limited experience. Jeffers has been in the bigs since 2020. Castro, Larnach, Lewis, Miranda, and Jeffers absolutely can't play the "kid" card anymore. Kyle Farmer is holding people back. You only get 14 roster spots for position players in September. 13 up until then. Rostering a guy like Farmer is holding players, and the team, back. He's not a major league player. You're actively hurting your team by rostering him. Correa and Buxton are in the clubhouse (especially at home, don't always travel). If Farmer's voice is so needed in the clubhouse DFA him and keep him around as a coach. His 10 ABs a week matter. Yes, they are going to win or lose with the personnel they currently have. The only roster change I suggested was dropping Farmer. I didn't suggest changing out 10 guys. What I suggested was giving guys who are young/inexperienced and hungry to make a career a real shot. Castro is bad right now. He's hurting the team. The article suggests he may be tired. I suggested giving him 2 or 3 days off to see what a hungry Keirsey can do. The article suggests Lewis may be tired. I suggested sitting him for 2 or 3 days and seeing if a hungry Helman can spark something. They can't sit them all, but fielding a team with 3 guys you almost completely refuse to use (Farmer, Keirsey, Helman) while you watch the guys you want to be good completely fall apart doesn't make sense. Drop Farmer and get somebody with a chance to be good up here. Play Keirsey and Helman. Don't let the ship sink without trying all your options.

Because your precious vets are leading them there right now? The vets are the ones failing. But I know we'll never agree here so let's just move on.