Article: Is Paul Molitor the Right Man to Lead the Twins?

[Mr. Brooks]

Sure. But in both Buxton's and Sano's cases you can make a strong case that injuries have played a role in their struggles.

 

It CLEARLY did in Buxton's case after he came back early from the broken toe. And there are some who believe that Sano's leg injury has hampered his swing this season.

 

In both cases, the players are gone and not playing for the major league team.

 

And Polanco hasn't played at all. Neither has Ervin Santana. You can't forget either of those players. They were vital contributors to the team last year. And Jason Castro has always been a defense-first catcher. So his loss has been important, even if he wasn't hitting before he left (and he was clearly injured, too.)

 

So MY point is this: People are jumping off the Paul Molitor bandwagon awfully fast given the sheer number of losses. Cut him some slack.

 

Today's lineup, for instance, includes Robby Grossman (again) in right field, even though he is a horrid defender.

 

It includes Adrianza at short. I don't even know if he should be on the team.

 

And it includes Bobby Wilson at catcher, who can't hit and isn't a good defender.

 

As for Brian Dozier ... he always has one good half and one bad half. This year is no different.

But most people aren't evaluating him based on solely this year.

[USAFChief]

 

But most people aren't evaluating him based on solely this year.

Or on the struggles of individual players, or solely the W/L record.

 

I don't blame Tom Kelly for having losing seasons when given rosters that couldn't hope to compete. But even those teams played good baseball for the most part. They just weren't talented enough to win.

 

The Twins under Molitor don't play good/smart/fundamental baseball with regularity. 

[mazeville]

 

But most people aren't evaluating him based on solely this year.

 

In which case they're still trying to punish him for two years ago, while purely ignoring the two unexpectedly good years that sandwiched that bad year. 

 

What's driving me absolutely crazy on this thread is that people are blowing off the two good years while providing as much punishment as humanly possible for the really bad year and fully ignoring the clearly obvious factors toward the underperformance this year -- which are a large slate of injuries. 

 

He took over a team, remember, that lost 90+ games for four straight years and had several bad drafts while players expected to take the team to the next level took longer than expected to pan out. And he has had winning seasons more often than not, the current one thus far incomplete. 

 

Frankly, I think it's a wonder this team is even in shouting distance of first place given the injuries they've had. 

 

 

[Mike Sixel]

In which case they're still trying to punish him for two years ago, while purely ignoring the two unexpectedly good years that sandwiched that bad year.

 

What's driving me absolutely crazy on this thread is that people are blowing off the two good years while providing as much punishment as humanly possible for the really bad year and fully ignoring the clearly obvious factors toward the underperformance this year -- which are a large slate of injuries.

 

He took over a team, remember, that lost 90+ games for four straight years and had several bad drafts while players expected to take the team to the next level took longer than expected to pan out. And he has had winning seasons more often than not, the current one thus far incomplete.

 

Frankly, I think it's a wonder this team is even in shouting distance of first place given the injuries they've had.

No one is ignoring anything.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

 I have a boxer. They aren't known for their intelligence. Let's say 4 wins less than Madden and move on. Manager challenges could get dicey though.

 

the dog might pee on the umpires leg though. Might lead to an ejection.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

I agree with earlier poster(s) that insinuate managers impact is overrated in today's game.

 

But that's not to say the impact is non-existent, and I don't think Molly is a good in-game manager.  IMO, this was apparent right from the start, and although he's gotten marginally better, he gets outmaneuvered in leverage situations pretty consistently (including instances where our ridiculous roster isn't hamstring him).  So, I've always though his chance for being a plus manager would rely on softer skills: a 'whisperer' of sorts in terms of offensive and base-running development and approaches, and performance.  I do like his demeanor/professionalism in the dug-out, with umpires, in after-game pressers, etc....and I respect him as a baseball guy.  But, if he's not going to be that 'whisperer'...then, well...

 

I think the problem is that manager's impact is non-quantifiable. I think it's really unfair to say that a manager has little impact in the game. 

[mazeville]

 

No one is ignoring anything.

 

Yeah. They kind of are. Either ignoring it or minimizing it. 

[TheLeviathan]

I personally like manager with bad record - “not enough talent, not his fault”

 

I personally don’t like manager with poor record - “everything is his fault, talent is irrelevant”

 

I hope we give Molitor a lifetime deal or fire him just to save some of you from your own posts.

[launchingthrees]

 

I personally like manager with bad record - “not enough talent, not his fault”

I personally don’t like manager with poor record - “everything is his fault, talent is irrelevant”

I hope we give Molitor a lifetime deal or fire him just to save some of you from your own posts.

 

Do you have any thoughts? What do you think Molitor's strengths are?

Edited June 22, 2018 by launchingthrees

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Sure. But in both Buxton's and Sano's cases you can make a strong case that injuries have played a role in their struggles. 

 

It CLEARLY did in Buxton's case after he came back early from the broken toe. And there are some who believe that Sano's leg injury has hampered his swing this season. 

 

In both cases, the players are gone and not playing for the major league team.  

 

And Polanco hasn't played at all. Neither has Ervin Santana. You can't forget either of those players. They were vital contributors to the team last year. And Jason Castro has always been a defense-first catcher. So his loss has been important, even if he wasn't hitting before he left (and he was clearly injured, too.)

 

So MY point is this: People are jumping off the Paul Molitor bandwagon awfully fast given the sheer number of losses. Cut him some slack. 

 

Today's lineup, for instance, includes Robby Grossman (again) in right field, even though he is a horrid defender.

 

It includes Adrianza at short. I don't even know if he should be on the team.

 

And it includes Bobby Wilson at catcher, who can't hit and isn't a good defender.

 

As for Brian Dozier ... he always has one good half and one bad half. This year is no different.

I can't believe I've never done this before, but I just winced in pain after looking this up.

 

Polanco, Buxton, Sano, Santana, and Castro combined for 17.5 rWAR in 2017.

 

Christ, no wonder this team is kinda bad this season.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Do you have any thoughts? What do you think Molitor's strengths are?

 

He's human, willing to work 162 nights a year (including weekends), knows how to use antiquated phone system, good at slapping people on the back, can copy names accurately.

 

So, like the other 29 guys.

[Champuckett]

I completely agree with the original post as far as Molitor being a decent man, I have talked with him at spring training when he was a spring training aid many years ago and he seemed like a respectable and humble man, considering he was such an incredible talent.  But we aren't in the business here of letting nice guys have jobs so that everyone can feel good.  So that runner ups in the previous nomination process for manager can then be awarded the job as soon as it becomes available.  We are in the business of winning games and competing and I think the rehiring of him should at the very least have made some heads turn, especially as this season plays out.

 

I think we got the gist of his abilities circa 2016 when the team had their worst ever full season in the history of the franchise.  He never did much for Seattle (in fact they got worse once he arrived) when he was the batting coach either so there was nothing in his resume either to suggest he was the obvious pick for the job.  We have seen nothing but underperfoming or at best inconsistent play month to month from most of the young core that were supposed to bring us the second coming of the Puckett years.  We have at no point seen anything different from Gardenhire in terms of lighting a fire under the teams behind when it has been needed.  I see him in the dugout making his decisions, and I feel underwhelmed every time and that natural humility and stoic nature he has does not translate well into getting players going, lighting fires, restoring confidence, etc.

 

I can guarantee at least 50% of the people that follow this franchise very closely face palmed when learning Molitor was rehired last offseason.  Many were hopeful we were going to be moving on from the constant state of mediocrity that existed in the later Gardy years and take a risk, go outside the organization, see what's out there.  It still looks and feels like we are still not ready to take this approach.

 

 

[USAFChief]

I personally like manager with bad record - “not enough talent, not his fault”

 

I personally don’t like manager with poor record - “everything is his fault, talent is irrelevant”

 

I hope we give Molitor a lifetime deal or fire him just to save some of you from your own posts.

Does your opinion that the manager of an organization is irrelevant extend past baseball?

 

Or is it your opinion professional baseball is the only organizational leadership situation where organizational leadership doesn't have any effect on performance?

[ken]

Given the injuries and lack of production from key players, it's hard to blame Molitor for the start. Sano and Burton's problem isn't in how the manager is using them.

 

Pressley is turning into another Michael Tompkin, everyone is thinking he should be a lot better than he actually is. Based on his career, April was the fluke not May and June. Reed's usage is normal for his career. And let's be realistic, he signed with the Twins because there wasn't exactly a bidding war for him this off-season.

[ashbury]

Given the injuries and lack of production from key players, it's hard to blame Molitor for the start. Sano and Burton's problem isn't in how the manager is using them.

 

Pressley is turning into another Michael Tompkin, everyone is thinking he should be a lot better than he actually is. Based on his career, April was the fluke not May and June. Reed's usage is normal for his career. And let's be realistic, he signed with the Twins because there wasn't exactly a bidding war for him this off-season.

Burton. Pressley. Tompkin. I'll go with "who are three players who never suited up for the Minnesota Twins, Alex?"

 

_{^{/ sorry, just a spelling snark. I couldn't help myself - three in rapid succession in one post.}}

[USAFChief]

 

Burton. Pressley. Tompkin. I'll go with "who are three players who never suited up for the Minnesota Twins, Alex?"

 

_{^{/ sorry, just a spelling snark. I couldn't help myself - three in rapid succession in one post.}}

 

 

Jared Burton's mom hates you.

[ashbury]

Jared Burton's mom hates you.

I hate myself.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Does your opinion that the manager of an organization is irrelevant extend past baseball?

Or is it your opinion professional baseball is the only organizational leadership situation where organizational leadership doesn't have any effect on performance?

 

I don't think the manager in baseball is the manager of the organization.  He's more like a "team lead".  If even that.  Probably closer to an office manager who organizes things, sets schedules, answers questions, etc.  Are those people valuable?  Sure, absolutely.  Do I think firing one is going to make Steve in Accounting any better at accounting?  Probably not. 

 

I do put stock into the value of a good clubhouse, but I think the coaching staff as a group can set that tone.  (Which is why I could see an organization switching away from a single manager to a specialized group of guys to manage) Or the owner.  Or the Front Office.  Or all of them together.  And whatever clubhouse culture they set up is completely beyond our ability to judge because we see next to none of it. 

 

I don't see any signs that Twins players are miserable and not having fun and that they hate Molitor.  Do you? 

Edited June 22, 2018 by TheLeviathan

[USAFChief]

 

I don't think the manager in baseball is the manager of the organization.  He's more like a "team lead".  If even that.  Probably closer to an office manager who organizes things, sets schedules, answers questions, etc.  Are those people valuable?  Sure, absolutely.  Do I think firing one is going to make Steve in Accounting any better at accounting?  Probably not. 

 

I do put stock into the value of a good clubhouse, but I think the coaching staff as a group can set that tone.  Or the owner.  Or the Front Office.  Or all of them together.  And whatever clubhouse culture they set up is completely beyond our ability to judge because we see next to none of it. 

 

I don't see any signs that Twins players are miserable and not having fun and that they hate Molitor.  Do you? 

1. Not the CEO, for sure. The "COO?" I don't know how else you describe him.

 

2. No, but I see plenty of signs of poor quality baseball, and illogical pitching moves. 

[TheLeviathan]

 

1. Not the CEO, for sure. The "COO?" I don't know how else you describe him.

 

2. No, but I see plenty of signs of poor quality baseball, and illogical pitching moves. 

 

Parker had a good article on the pitching moves and how Molitor isn't all that out of step as some think.  Poor baseball might just be the result of how many poor baseball players Molitor is forced to march out there right now.

 

And no, I think he's much lower than the COO.  I think a baseball manager is much more like a secretary/office manager.  Or a figurehead.  They simply don't have enough pull in FO decisions and their in-game decisions have been largely neutered as well. 

[nicksaviking]

Would it kill Molitor to show some emotion?

 

He displays the same stereotypical Minnesota stoic and emotionless demeanor that Joe Mauer gets ragged about. If you're going to coach or manage, give me some outward emotion, give me some passion. You're working with a bunch of young non-Minnesotans many of whom speak English as a second language; wearing your emotions on your sleeve should be a requirement in this case. Nobody outside of the upper midwest understands that when he stands on the top step of the dugout with a blank look on is face after the ump made a terrible call, that maybe he actually is upset. 

[ashbury]

1. Not the CEO, for sure. The "COO?" I don't know how else you describe him.

 

2. No, but I see plenty of signs of poor quality baseball, and illogical pitching moves. 

CQO, then.

[USAFChief]

 

Would it kill Molitor to show some emotion?

 

He displays the same stereotypical Minnesota stoic and emotionless demeanor that Joe Mauer gets ragged about. If you're going to coach or manage, give me some outward emotion, give me some passion. You're working with a bunch of young non-Minnesotans many of whom speak English as a second language; wearing your emotions on your sleeve should be a requirement in this case. Nobody outside of the upper midwest understands that when he stands on the top step of the dugout with a blank look on is face after the ump made a terrible call, that maybe he actually is upset. 

It's the grim faced double time march out to the mound to remove his starter immediately after the starter has coughed up yet another late lead that gets me to utter more than a few "golly gee gosh darn it anyway"s.

[USAFChief]

 

CQO, then.

In my experience, if the CQO identifies issues with quality, it's the COO who answers for them.

[ashbury]

In my experience, if the CQO identifies issues with quality, it's the COO who answers for them.

I don't actually think either analogy is perfectly apt. Unanswered is, COO "of what"? A COO usually reports to a CEO, or directly to a board. Dave St Peter is CEO of the Twins and has overall authority over everything related to the team, with underlings to work out the details of how many ushers to hire and how many hot dogs to order and which players to sign and which players to play. The organization doesn't have a COO - they have various C-level people, and Derek Falvey is CBO, probably the closest thing, the B being for Baseball. The manager might be thought of as "COO of the dugout and clubhouse and on-field activities", a more limited duty. Or, since quality of play is how he's measured, I suggested CQO. Maybe "manager" covers it after all.

 

Nomenclature aside, I think we agree the buck for certain things stops at the manager's desk. I would not be sorry to see someone else tried, but the extended contract probably rules that out as a practical expectation.

[jkcarew]

I think the problem is that manager's impact is non-quantifiable. I think it's really unfair to say that a manager has little impact in the game.

 

Where did I use the term ‘little’ impact? I said overrated. And the reason is primarily that the game is played differently than it used to be. Basically sit around and wait for a couple of walks and a blast. Even today’s managers have said as much. Also, said the impact is still there...primarily revolving around bullpen moves...and that I don’t think the trend is Molly’s friend in that regard.

[frightwig]

I just noticed that last year at this same point, the Twins were 39-34, but actually had been outscored by 38 runs.

 

This year, they have had some bad luck with injuries, but on the other hand, the substitutes at 3B and SS have been two of the best players in the lineup. And the -18 RD is an improvement on last season through Game 73, it's just that they're not coming through in the close games. In fact, at 3-13 in one-run games, they've been terrible. Why is that? Maybe that's where the little things like baserunning, executing in the field, and tactical management really make the difference, in this case, between a team bobbing around .500 and an already lost season.

 

And this underperformance has been going on for awhile. Yes, they played above their heads in the early going last year, but then down the stretch they were just 46-43 despite a +65 RD. And in 2016, the year of Total System Failure, I believe their BaseRuns record had them pegged at 72 wins, but of course they were 13 wins below their expected mark (or 7 wins below Pythag).

 

To be fair, he pulled a miracle out of that 2015 team--probably the luckiest bad team I've seen in my life--but in the past few seasons, I'd say that the team has been worse than it should be, more often than not.

[curt1965]

Molly is definitely a HOF player...........As a manager, I think it’s more of a Elizabethton type of situation.

[launchingthrees]

 

 Nobody outside of the upper midwest understands that when he stands on the top step of the dugout with a blank look on is face after the ump made a terrible call, that maybe he actually is upset. 

 

I honestly think his blank look is genuine confusion. 

[old nurse]

 

Or on the struggles of individual players, or solely the W/L record.

 

I don't blame Tom Kelly for having losing seasons when given rosters that couldn't hope to compete. But even those teams played good baseball for the most part. They just weren't talented enough to win.

 

The Twins under Molitor don't play good/smart/fundamental baseball with regularity. 

The cru that the team played better fundametal baseball under a former manager and not now is one of the great I have no statistics to prove it arguments that show up when teams lose that have won in the past.