TheBoofIsLoose

Agreed, his walk rate in particular worries me since he only has 13 walks this season in nearly 300 PAs. The league is going to adjust to him so when teams figure out what and where to throw to him he'll need to control the zone much better.

I think you hit the nail on the head with this analysis. Maybe it's rose-tinted glasses, but it didn't feel quite so negative on here even during the 2016 season. The success of the 2019 season definitely brought a large influx of new users to the site and I genuinely believe that the creators/writers/contributors deserve the level of success this site has achieved, but it's a bit of a double-edged sword as discussions have gotten considerably worse in my observation. Repetitiveness might be the most glaring issue, it would be one thing if we had these same arguments even once a week rather than seemingly every other day. I'm starting to feel like McConaughey in True Detective ranting about time as a flat circle, maybe I should just be crushing Lone Star like he does instead.

Math was never my strong suit, but a 43 game win swing for Rocco's managerial career would put his record at 295-164 or a 64% winning percentage, which over the course of a 162 game season averages to around 105-106 wins a year. But this is irrelevant because we can't be making up statistics and pretending that they have a basis in reality; Manager WAR simply doesn't exist.

Where are you getting that stat from? I'm actually curious because Manager WAR seems to be nonsense; how would you even determine what a replacement level manager is? How would you quantify both the on and off-field decisions that every manager makes? Also, you're telling me that a replacement level manager would be worth 43 more wins since 2019? That essentially equates to mean the Twins should have averaged winning 106 games a year, which seems an extraordinarily generous interpretation of the facts.

Jennifer Frey was her name, and if anyone is interested there is a well written article about that incident, her career as a woman in sportswriting, and her tragic life that if you have the time is an engaging read. https://deadspin.com/the-writer-who-was-too-strong-to-live-1785661187

That seems hyperbolic. It was a, "total system failure" in 2016 because not only was the team's record abysmal, but the drafting and development process had produced virtually nothing tangible from a vaunted core of players and draft picks. Plus, the team was at least a decade behind every other organization in the league analytically. 2018 was a disappointment, no doubt about that, but it wasn't as if the 2017 team cruised to a division title. They squeaked into the second wild card spot with 85 wins, in what was a very weak division.

Never, the 2001 Mariners hold the 162 game win record with 116.

The team scoring 14 runs after falling behind 10-0 shows that the team hasn't quit, at least from an offensive perspective. This is an abysmal pitching staff. At this point it seems like pick your poison and the question becomes less, "which guy gets us out of this jam" and more "which guy would you like to give up three runs in an inning today?"

I don't think any of us non-professional athlete keyboard warriors should be taunting players going through heat exhaustion. Something about glass houses...

Also, I think it needs to be considered how much time are you willing to give a new manager. If you're dead set on firing Rocco after two division titles in three years, then how long are you willing to stick with a new manager if they struggle? Do they only get a season because the expectations for the playoffs are set, or if they're not knocking on the door to the World Series after two years are they gone? Or does removing Baldelli mean it's rebuild time, in which case why not keep him if the team isn't going to be that good?

You can make the argument that Pohlad is more concerned with the bottom line than winning games, but not the FO or Rocco. You can't fire an owner, but those three don't have the luxury of indefinite job security; they are absolutely playing to win every day. I'd guarantee they're not champing at the bit to be fired, especially since there is always the chance they won't coach or run a front office again. Tampa is the exception to the rule, if every team could be as savvy and ahead of the curve as the Rays seem to be they would do it in a heartbeat, it's not an easy task.

I get it, I think we just have different definitions of what constitutes, "wit." Personally, I prefer a level-head for a manager, let the players get fired up and emotional, but the manager needs to make the cool, rational choices. I don't know what to say about down and dirty, because I'm not sure what you're implying.

Definitely a mountain out of a molehill situation. This wasn't Bryce Harper and Jonathan Papelbon going after each other in the dugout. When you foster an environment that encourages a player's competitive drive this is going to happen, but all parties involved handled it well. Donaldson and Arraez got their say, Cruz mediated it, and Rocco focused on the game at large. Had this escalated to anything notable then coaches get involved. Can we just stop with this critique? Criticize Rocco for his lineups, or his defensive placements, or pitching management, but this is such a lazy take that it's all but worthless.

All these, "boring" stats have existed for decades and teams have been using them for years. Now they have names, so a guy doesn't have "warning track power" we might instead look at ISO or a different statistic. If anything this can make it easier to understand the game for newcomers as it doesn't read like insider baseball information. Look at Earl Weaver being arguably the most famous example of a manager altering his lineup based on favorable matchups using slugging or on-base percentages. If you watch the game you should notice there are plenty of managers, Rocco included, who ignore what the "computer" says they should do quite often. I really don't understand this argument, if you don't like statistics just ignore them, RBI, batting average, and runs still exist in the stat line. It's not information that's making the game, "unwatchable" there are many other factors that have led to baseball's viewing decline.

It's making it harder to actually have a discussion about Baldelli too with people throwing in hot takes without any real evidence behind them as some alleged smoking gun. I think his faults have been more apparent this year and he should be open to criticism, as should the entire team. I'm not a die hard Baldelli fan, but I feel like I come across as one because people on here resort to saying inane things like, "he's a computer" or "only manages with a spreadsheet that's why he lost the clubhouse." Those aren't complaints based in reality and you can't argue with fiction. Case in point, a hot take with no evidence.