Squirrel

Moderator note: Political talk has a place and that’s not on TD. while things do come up that are adjacent, please don’t take it there.

I don’t think anyone on these boards said managers never loses games. If Baldelli lost 4 games, how many did the players themselves cost us? It is never one answer, not in a team sport. I don’t think the manager is going to be a huge difference maker and he alone is not the reason we won’t be going to the playoffs. When you check what our numbers are with RISP, that is truly bad and I don’t lay that at the feet of the manager. If we made the playoffs, there’s always that possibility that the cards fall right and we win the World Series. Do you really think this team could win it all? With the players they have playing as they do? There is way more wrong here than Baldelli and I wouldn’t even say he’s reason one or two or even three on the list, imo. As long as our owners employ who they do, spend what they do, this is what we have. I said in another thread I wouldn’t be surprised if Baldelli is fired, and I wouldn’t expend tears over that, but I also wouldn’t be surprised if he remains, and I wouldn’t be all angsty about it, either. Maybe a new manager would provide a new spark. How long before that would wear off and we’d be right back here? For those of you with the extreme dislike of Baldelli, what manager would you like to see get the job? My guess is that anyone you’d name wouldn’t even be on the list. Obviously I don’t know for certain any of this would be the case, but I have little faith that it wouldn’t given what else ails the organization.

Nope, no nerve was hit. I’m saying that you and others question, disrespectfully, others who don’t agree with you hook, line and sinker. You said … if we don’t agree with you we are defending Rocco. Just pointing out how these threads go.

I think ash was saying that I had to treat him to a DQ, so you can treat me and he can treat you.

I spend time on the backfields checking out minor leaguers … that has a modest price tag of free. I also spend time watching the activity before actual games start and that also has a free price tag. And the DQ is nearby. (But so is Sun Harvest for most excellent soft serve.)

If you are angry about it, I would surmise then it’s you taking it just as personally. I think what Brock is trying to say that anytime anyone brings up the manager for discussion, those that want him gone belittle and shout down anyone’s opinions on the matter that don’t match those who are angry and want him gone. We have five Rocco threads on this one page alone … and of those, there were more that were merged into those to try and create a more central discussion. But it never is a discussion when one side thinks the other is wrong and how dare they. And you just stated this is how it is … if we don’t agree with you exactly we are now defending that which you abho, so it’s you, Hosken, Chief and others who simply cannot have a nuanced discussion with varying levels of disagreement unless it’s all or nothing. Right. And that statement encapsulates why we can never have a discussion on the manager because you and others think anything but good riddance is defending him. Yet Brock is taking this personally and you aren’t? Got it. I’ve stated many time I don’t think the manager is the main problem, and if not Rocco, it would be someone else just like him, carrying forth what the FO wants. In today’s game, I really don’t believe the manager has that much effect on the outcome. Sure, a few games here or there, but enough the make a huge difference? No, I don’t think so. I’ve also said I don’t really know the answer either. I’ve also said I wouldn’t be surprised either way if he stayed or was let go, and I won’t shed a tear or gnash my teeth either way, either. It’s a game. Just a game. One I hope they win, one I’m disappointed they lose, but it’s still just a game and life is out there yet to live. Yet I’m mocked for having such an opinion and my baseball acumen questioned as others are as well. Others who bring a lot of nuance to the conversation, nope,you tune it out, don’t listen, shout it down as defending. And you do so to those who are really quite studied and on their game about things. This one aspect of it, that gets brought up over and over, and shouted about in every game thread we have, is tired and old and one I just don’t think makes one bit of difference.

This has been my stance since forever. Since the beginning of the 2000s, through the end of the Ryan years. We changed Ryan, and here we are again. For me, the root isn’t even in the FO.

As will I. Probably my favorite time in baseball season. A new beginning. However, I do hope for other things, too. I am only human, after all.

I mean, yeah, I sort of get this, but then what does any complaint on a website accomplish? Nothing, really. I doubt what is said here about any ‘focus’ is having any affect on needed change. I guess then there is nothing left to discuss.

My comment about being too young, as back in the 90s and early aughts is that this was pretty common knowledge in baseball discussion groups. Didn’t think I needed to provide much more because of that.

Google is your friend. Perhaps you are just too young to remember. There are plenty of articles out there about how the Braves didn’t sell out their games in the post season because winning in the season wasn’t enough to convince people to sell out the house in the post season. Winning wasn’t enough. This is just one of many. “Braves fans have a reputation for being apathetic, at least as far as NLDS attendance goes, given their “ho-hum” run of 14 consecutive division titles that ended in 2005. The Braves have sold out only five of their past 13 NLDS games at Turner Field.” https://www.ajc.com/sports/baseball/will-braves-fans-have-urgency-about-this-postseason/hQb49Sr0VEtGwizqpAbKNP/

🙄

Yes. The Braves fans in the 90s did.

I thought you were going to say, "After all the head scratching ... I'm now bald." But the other is good, too. No two people think alike, though. We agree on some things, think alike on some things, but not other things.

But were they a mirage for those of us who expected what we got? Of course I always hope for better, we should hope for better. But many of us still predicted average or just above. That's where they are right now.

Can statistics measure luck, good and bad? :)

I’ve said it often … you never know what the day will bring. On any given day the best can be the worst and the worst can be the best. Everyone and every team has moments. It’s why we tune in every night, because we really don’t know. As for the Twins, this is just about where I thought they’d be. Not that I’m a good predictor of anything, the off season just couldn’t inspire me that they would be anything more. I wasn’t deluded by anything and I don’t think most people on these boards were. But hope springs eternal. And when spring and spring training comes around, we are all at 0-0 and anything is possible. (Probable is a different discussion.) I may not like what all transpires throughout the year, my hopes for better get dashed and dashed again, but deluded? Nope. I think people on these boards confuse hoping and wishing vs those who just want to grumble. I’m not sure who are the deluded ones in this scenario.

Reminds me of the time I added an iffy weather report to one of your openers when we were played in a roofed stadium … 🙂

Amen.

Yep. And this is problem number one. And why I don’t believe much will change. Maybe we’ll get a new manager, maybe Falvey will go, maybe the entire coaching squad, but the culture will stay the same and the Twins will continue to field the teams they do.

Sure. And if we had won the games the players lost, we’d be leading the division. Team sport, it’s not on one alone.

Again, how many games really is that? As I’ve said, I don’t think it’s a many as you do, because much of the criticisms are in hindsight with lots of bias and emotions and not actual objective critique and analysis. Managers have always been scapegoats and will always be scapegoats. But I will concede on the Guardians. No one thought they would sustain that but good for them. Still,is the difference solely because of the manager? Managers are easy targets. The players play the game … how many missed opportunities with RISP? How many errors that led to winning runs? How many blown outings for a pitcher? While you lay fault on Baldelli for most of that saying it’s his decision making that cause most of that, I don’t. Some, yes, probably, but most? no. The players need to take the field and play the game, win or lose. A lot of that, even most of it, is on them. That’s my take on the game. What a manager has to work with is a big part of winning and losing. If we had won a small handful of games we lost due to managerial decisions, yes, we’d be in a better spot. But we’d be in a much better spot if players could/would actually hit the ball. But we’d be in a much better spot if we had better players. Would we be better with a better manager? No way to know. You are convinced yes, I’m not because we would still have this roster. A better manager might have eked out a few more wins, but enough of them? Better players probably would have eked out more. Even with the manager of your dreams leading this team, with the same injuries and same players, this team is not a WS team. That all said, still doesn’t answer the question about the clubhouse. Not for me. You and I are at an impasse, so let’s just agree to disagree.

Maybe they just weren’t that good.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!! Sure, if honest conversation = an echo chamber. 🙄

That could be very much so. As I said, I just don’t know if he’s lost the clubhouse or not. If Rocco is dismissed after the season, I think we’ll have an answer. If he isn’t, I still don’t know. But as I just said above, managers are the scapegoats. It’s just too bad that the Pohlads can’t ever ante up when they should.