Article: Twins Daily Roundtable: Grading Molitor

[BJames]

Really? They're playing close games and have won more games than they've lost since the trade deadline. I'd say they're pretty motivated. Last year too. They could simply give up and lose every game after the deadline.

 

Admittedly, it seems to be much moreso in the second half of the season after the front office lights a fire under them. That could be on Molitor.

 

 

I think the Playing better as of late is two things. The first is that that new guys and guys up from AAA are playing to stay on the 20 man roster and for starting possitions. Self preservation! The second is Sano and Polanco are back. Your 3 and 4 Hitter in the lineup. That's kind of important. If we had a team full of Vets, I think they would be giving up to a degree, but we have a young team Now!

[DocBauer]

I am NOT going to grade Molitor. That's not a cop out. It's just being realistic at this point because his actual resume is somewhat incomplete as this season is not done yet, and he has managed 2 largely successful years where the Twins weren't really expected to compete. And we simply don't know how the clubhouse works, or if the FO and Molitor are on the same page, or if there is a disconnect anywhere.

 

NOT BLAMING MOLITOR:

 

I am NOT putting blame for Sano or Buxton or Polanco or Santana. There are so many overriding factors involved here, how is he responsible?

 

I am NOT putting blame on him for Lynn's bad start or Morrison's hip and far below any career numbers.

 

I get arguments about other teams having issues and injuries. But to me, it's a bit of a straw-man argument because not every team is built the same, or has a AAA brimming with a couple prospects ready to step up and fill in. It's very hard to compare situations. Further, on paper, the moves the FO made were largely lauded, even if an almost comedic amount of issues and poor performance ensued. (Nor am I blaming the FO for those).

 

WHAT I DO BLAME MOLITOR FOR:

 

He flatly has over-used various relievers. Maybe some of this rests on the FO. Personally, I thought the Rochester shuttle system worked better last season. Is the pkayers or moves made? But in a long season, you have to trust what you have and look for matchup and opportunities. Once in a while, you may have just let a game go so you can win the next 2. Additionally, I'm not sure he has a natural "feel" for when to pull or insert or stick with a pitcher. I have lauded him at times for sending the SP back out for the next inning. But at times if felt obvious, IMHO, that he shouldn't or should have been pulled more quickly. I also feel he's a bit stubborn about relievers pitching to anyone vs matchups.

 

I also blame Molitor for lineup construction. To be fair, guys have to produce. And guys can't play ever day, and guys get hit and cold. But why did it take so long for Mauer to supplant Dozier in the #1 spot? If the ONE THING Grossman could do was work a count and get OB, then why wasn't he used at the top of the lineup more often to at least help set the table?

 

Kelly's teams, and I feel most of Gardenhire's teams, were more fundamentally sound on some of the basics. Even in losing season's. Though, to be honest, I felt this much better in 2017 than 2018. What changed? Most of the same guys were back.

 

Overall? I don't think Molitor has done that bad of a job. With no previous managing experience, he has lead a rebuilding team to a couple competitive seasons. We've seen some good and entertaining baseball. And yes, his 5th team could even crack .500.

 

But sometimes, a fit just isn't right. Sometimes, you honestly need change for change sake. You need that so the entire organization, from the FO on down, and the talented guys on the current roster, and those coming up, are hearing a more collective voice and seeing a collective vision.

 

I won't be angry or upset if Molitor is back. Health, some smart moves, a ton of talent knocking at or approaching the door, and a couple smart moves could have this team well above .500 next season. I just think it might be time for a different voice and approach.

[Riverbrian]

I'm lumping Molitor in with the old school managers.

 

He goes in the same bucket as Mattingly, Baker, Hurdle, Bochy, Showalter, Gibbons, Gardenhire, Renteria and Scioscia. 

 

That may be an impressive group of managers with a lot of major league experience but, those guys aren't the ones I would choose to lead my team. 

 

Give me a Maddon, Roberts, Counsell, Martinez, Cash, Hinch, Bannister or Kapler new school type. 

 

 

 

 

[The Wise One]

 

I'm lumping Molitor in with the old school managers.

 

He goes in the same bucket as Mattingly, Baker, Hurdle, Bochy, Showalter, Gibbons, Gardenhire, Renteria and Scioscia. 

 

That may be an impressive group of managers with a lot of major league experience but, those guys aren't the ones I would choose to lead my team. 

 

Give me a Maddon, Roberts, Counsell, Martinez, Cash, Hinch, Bannister or Kapler new school type. 

Martinez has the same team old school Dusty Baker had, the difference he has made is not a good one    Maddon managed a 100 loss team. Additions of talent make you look so much smarter.  Just ask Craig Counsel

Edited August 23, 2018 by The Wise One

[David HK]

I've been on record too many times on these boards railing on the guy. I give him at best a D. Loved Molly as a player, former Gopher, and well-deserved Hall Of Famer. But as a manager of my home team, nope. While it's true, issues like Morrison, Sano, Buxton, Dozier and others woefully under-performing are beyond his purview, the measure of a mgr is putting his team in the best position to compete, despite these challenges. That means not putting slumping players in the middle or top of the order and just leaving them there. 

 

Bullpen, lineups, in-game decisions, lack of fundamentals, all of those issues and more have been debated to death here, and all of them show the mgr lacking. My latest case in point-  a conversation related on-air by Dick recently, in which he queried Molly about which players on the roster he trusted to get a bunt down. His answer: Two. My question: WHY ONLY TWO?!? My God, if you have a fundamental problem on your team, get those coaches and players moving in the direction to fix it! The baserunning lately? The brain-farts in the field? Why is this stuff not being addressed?!?

 

And here's the kicker-- it's not a season in which we're going to be catching Cleveland. That has been apparent for weeks now, if not months. Molly's complete lack of faith in younger players, and unwillingness to give them a decent shot when called up is not the way to move forward. I'm sick of seeing quick hooks, sick of seeing young guys called up and then sitting on their butts for days on end, sick of seeing guys, when they do get a chance to play, wildly out of position! (Astudillo, anyone?)

 

Lastly, where is the fire? No, not everybody needs to be a rah-rah cheerleader, but during a game, that dugout looks like a morgue, and Molly looks like a disinterested spectator. I want to see someone in that dugout next season, encouraging some emotion and passion in there. Heck, even if you have to fake it, at least the team can LOOK like they care.

 

I wanna see someone like Ozzie in there next year. 

[wsnydes]

 

It shouldn't be the goal, but it's realistic. Do you honestly think Molitor is getting fired this season if the team finishes around .500?

The 'hands-off' owner will most likely view that as a success after years of terrible baseball.

Regardless how we personally feel about this team's performance, Molitor could finish with a .500 or better record 3 out of 4 seasons.

That's just it. He perhaps should be fired, but I don't see it happening either. The worst part of that is that it wasted 4+ years of what was supposed to be the young, up and coming core of the future of this franchise.

[wsnydes]

 

Two things about his bullpen management.

First, fans from every team rag on how thier managers utilize the pen. Just need to spend some time on other boards to see that.

Second, we shouldn't pretend he was given a lot of talent in the bullpen to begin with.

I agree with both of these things. My issue with the usage revolves more around how often guys are used (and not used) than which pitcher he uses in a given situation. He tends to run his best pieces into the ground to the point where they're no longer effective. At that point, I don't really care what other managers do, it's on him to figure out a way to keep his players effective.

Edited August 23, 2018 by wsnydes

[Riverbrian]

 

Martinez has the same team old school Dusty Baker had, the difference he has made is not a good one    Maddon managed a 100 loss team. Additions of talent make you look so much smarter.  Just ask Craig Counsel

 

I like to think of myself as somewhat reasonable and I really try not to talk in absolutes when I'm standing hip deep in nuance, so I'm hoping that I'm not giving the impression that I think new school managers are guaranteed playoff teams every year.

 

Maddon's 100 loss year aside... I prefer the new school manager over the old school manager every day of the week and twice on Sunday. 

 

There is no doubt that Baker had a much better year in 2017 than Martinez had this year. I still prefer the Martinez style or what I assume is the Martinez style because of his place in the Maddon tree. 

 

I did ask Counsell... BTW... He told me to let you know that you spelled his name wrong. 

 

He also said that you are right, Managers are always happy with talent infusions but he also thinks it is important to not go down with the ship when the talent isn't performing, he says it is ok to play Ryan Braun less when players pulled off the waiver wire like Jesus Aguilar are playing better. He says it is OK to play Jonathan Schoop less, if it isn't working out. 

 

I was also amazed that my call went straight through to him at 5 in the morning. 

 

 

[KGB]

 

Shouldn’t Molitor shoulder some of the responsibility for that total system failure?

Were it not for Jim Pohlad publicly saying Molitor was safe, he probably would have been fired two years ago.

More to the point, if it had been Derek Falvey’s decision, he probably would have been fired two years ago.

It was Falvey's decision last off season and he gave him a 3 year extension.  If the Pohlad's made him give him the extension, then it's shows he not a strong GM.

 

Molitor is an okay manager, but he doesn't pick the players on the roster or is in charge of player development.

[Doctor Wu]

Rating managers is such an inexact science. As others have noted, it's nearly impossible to measure with any sort of accuracy. I was also a huge Atlanta Braves fan a few decades back and watching Bobby Cox manage games used to drive me nuts. Most people thought he was some sort of genius, but I always thought his decisions were very puzzling if not maddening. If he hadn't have had so many teams loaded with talent I don't think he would be the great manager that people seem to think he was.

 

I'm sort of in the middle of the pack regarding Molitor's managing ability. Don't hate, don't love him. I think  he does a good enough job but has a few weak points too. That said, I don't think any manager could have done much better with this year's raggedy team and the variety of injuries and woeful performances that have occurred.

[gunnarthor]

I don't see how anyone can describe Molitor as anything but a disaster and if he's back next year I'll start calling for Levine and Falvey's heads. 

 

Molitor has been given strong talent and in two of the last three years, his teams have been dumpster fires. If you don't think a manager should be blamed for that, then there's nothing a manager can be blamed for. His players - rookies, vets, starters, relievers, position players - have all looked lost or unprepared. He has not demonstrated any ability to manage and develop young players and likely slowed their development. He's thrown young guys under the bus, overused bullpen arms, refuses to defend his players. I have no idea why anyone would think he should still be managing this team. 

[Number3]

"I don't see how anyone can describe Molitor as anything but a disaster and if he's back next year I'll start calling for Levine and Falvey's heads.I don't see how anyone can describe Molitor as anything but a disaster and if he's back next year I'll start calling for Levine and Falvey's heads."

 

I would go one notch higher than "disaster" but I totally agree, and always have, that Molitor is not a good manager, especially for a perpetual work in progress like the Twins.

Hall of Fame players don't make good managers for multiple reasons.

Managers of marginal teams especially need to project a winning mind set from the dugout and be the face of the team's spirit. They need to be animated and demonstrate that they are in every game and in it to win. Molitor could be a mannequin in the dugout and no one would notice the difference.

Twins under current regime seem to want managers who simply don't make waves. Just be quiet, take your $2mil salary, and go home at the end of the season.

[jtkoupal]

I like the "special sauce" comment. It's not the most analytical of terms, but I get what it means. Think of a coach like Bill Belichick. Like him or hate him, there is no denying that he is a very effective coach. After all, he was able to get Randy Moss to behave. Coaches like that can get consistently high-level production from less-talented players (and of course, having Tom Brady running the show makes a difference too!)

 

Paul Molitor's career as a manager has been saved by two really good months, May 2015 and August 2017. May 2015 was the only springboard back to "perceived" relevance that year, while August 2017 was really what propelled the team back to the postseason (albeit for just one day.)

 

I have long felt, though I know my opinion means nothing, that Molitor has never really been Falvine's "guy." I believe they would like to be a more analytically-driven organization, yet Paul Molitor is still has some roots in old-school thinking. Molitor has shown the ability to overcome some of that, but it is difficult to ask a Hall-of-Famer in his sixties to change his ways.

[Tom Froemming]

 

I would be surprised, no stunned, if 90% of pro team owners didn’t have final say over head coach/manager. That’s literally the public face of the team. He’s the guy in front of the camera before and after almost every game. He is on the sidelines for every game.

I think this point is something that gets overlooked a lot from a fan's perspective, but I'm sure this is a huge factor in who an organization chooses to manage. And to that point, I think Paul Molitor is very good. Also, if anything, the Twins' "brand" is elevated by being connected to a Hall of Fame player from Minnesota. I don't think you could say the same kind of thing about, say, Derek Shelton or a lot of other potential replacements.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

I think this point is something that gets overlooked a lot from a fan's perspective, but I'm sure this is a huge factor in who an organization chooses to manage. And to that point, I think Paul Molitor is very good. Also, if anything, the Twins' "brand" is elevated by being connected to a Hall of Fame player from Minnesota. I don't think you could say the same kind of thing about, say, Derek Shelton or a lot of other potential replacements.

I don't think it's Paul's job to increase the brand, and I'd argue that managing well will do more the Twins brand than a great interview. I don't doubt his baseball savvy, so to speak. He's forgotten more about the sport than most of us will ever learn.

 

That said, I don't think he's above criticism. Yeah, every manager probably gets criticized to some extent by their team's local TwinsDaily, but I do think his criticism is warranted right now. He isn't consistently putting his team in the best place to win, and he poorly manages his pen. Hildy and Reed were being overused in the spring and are paying for it right now.... and I don't think his impact in terms of wins/losses is overrated. 

[Thrylos]

 

I think this point is something that gets overlooked a lot from a fan's perspective, but I'm sure this is a huge factor in who an organization chooses to manage. And to that point, I think Paul Molitor is very good. Also, if anything, the Twins' "brand" is elevated by being connected to a Hall of Fame player from Minnesota. I don't think you could say the same kind of thing about, say, Derek Shelton or a lot of other potential replacements.

 

If Derek Shelton helps the Twins win a World Series or two, that will elevate the Twins' brand much more than having a Minnesotan Hall of Famer as their manager

[wsnydes]

 

I think this point is something that gets overlooked a lot from a fan's perspective, but I'm sure this is a huge factor in who an organization chooses to manage. And to that point, I think Paul Molitor is very good. Also, if anything, the Twins' "brand" is elevated by being connected to a Hall of Fame player from Minnesota. I don't think you could say the same kind of thing about, say, Derek Shelton or a lot of other potential replacements.

 

 

I don't think it's Paul's job to increase the brand, and I'd argue that managing well will do more the Twins brand than a great interview. I don't doubt his baseball savvy, so to speak. He's forgotten more about the sport than most of us will ever learn.

 

That said, I don't think he's above criticism. Yeah, every manager probably gets criticized to some extent by their team's local TwinsDaily, but I do think his criticism is warranted right now. He isn't consistently putting his team in the best place to win, and he poorly manages his pen. Hildy and Reed were being overused in the spring and are paying for it right now.... and I don't think his impact in terms of wins/losses is overrated. 

This is an interesting aspect of the managers job. While I do think a manager will do more for the brand by winning, I don't think that HoF credentials are meaningless in this conversation. The fact that he's from MN only makes it a bigger impact. People like and want to be associated with successful people in hopes that some of that rubs off on them. I don't see that this case is all that different. The casual fan will be more likely to latch on to that when things are tougher. Winning however, takes care of all of that.

 

While I've never liked the Molitor hiring, I have always thought it to be a pretty good marketing move. However, I don't want a marketing prop to be the manager. I have always hoped that I would be proven wrong, but I don't feel that way at all four years in.

[Don Walcott]

Has Molitor had a say in his coaching staff? It seems like the FO has been choosing his staff for him. In which case, the FO should probably bear more responsibility for some of the sloppy play we've seen and some of the failure to develop players.

 

I'd also defend Molitor's lineup decisions and bullpen usage by pointing out that he is using what the FO makes available to him. I'm not sure how much input he has into who is on the 25-man, but for position players, the options have been severely limited this year. The bullpen talent has also been limited, and he no longer has Pressly, Duke and Rodney. I doubt he's responsible for Belisle being on the team, and he tried his best to not use him in high leverage situations. However, in Boston when we traded Pressly right before the game, it gave Molitor very little to work with, and Belisle was needed. I blame that one on the FO.

 

I do think that managers can have a big impact on the success of the club. I would point to Bud Black taking over in Colorado as a great example of this. I also agree that it's hard to quantify the manager's impact without a lot more access than any of us has to the team and the decision-making processes.

 

I wouldn't be upset with Molitor coming back next year. Continuity could be a good thing. He knows this team, and they know him. He knows our division rivals very well by now. He's implemented shifting, and appears to have an open mind to doing things differently. So if he works well with the FO, they might be better off keeping him than upsetting the apple cart before next season.

 

However, it could be that the FO thinks that change is what is best and what is needed. If they make that change, there will be a lot of pressure on the new manager to produce better results. The new manager may want his own coaching staff as well. The pressure to succeed could be a good thing, especially because there will be even more pressure on the FO to set up the team for success.

 

I'm fine with either option, and trust that the FO is in a better position to make this call than any of us. However, my patience with the FO will wear thin if we don't make some major signings this off-season, with a ton of room in the budget. Whoever we have as a manager next year will perform much better with better players at their disposal. And if the FAs don't work, we can dump salaries before the trade deadline and bolster the farm system, like we did this year.

 

Ultimately, given the unexpected crap he's had to deal with this year, and how the team seems to be playing better after the trade deadline, I'd give Molitor a B.

 

 

[yarnivek1972]

Has Molitor had a say in his coaching staff? It seems like the FO has been choosing his staff for him. In which case, the FO should probably bear more responsibility for some of the sloppy play we've seen and some of the failure to develop players.

 

I'd also defend Molitor's lineup decisions and bullpen usage by pointing out that he is using what the FO makes available to him. I'm not sure how much input he has into who is on the 25-man, but for position players, the options have been severely limited this year. The bullpen talent has also been limited, and he no longer has Pressly, Duke and Rodney. I doubt he's responsible for Belisle being on the team, and he tried his best to not use him in high leverage situations. However, in Boston when we traded Pressly right before the game, it gave Molitor very little to work with, and Belisle was needed. I blame that one on the FO.

 

I do think that managers can have a big impact on the success of the club. I would point to Bud Black taking over in Colorado as a great example of this. I also agree that it's hard to quantify the manager's impact without a lot more access than any of us has to the team and the decision-making processes.

 

I wouldn't be upset with Molitor coming back next year. Continuity could be a good thing. He knows this team, and they know him. He knows our division rivals very well by now. He's implemented shifting, and appears to have an open mind to doing things differently. So if he works well with the FO, they might be better off keeping him than upsetting the apple cart before next season.

 

However, it could be that the FO thinks that change is what is best and what is needed. If they make that change, there will be a lot of pressure on the new manager to produce better results. The new manager may want his own coaching staff as well. The pressure to succeed could be a good thing, especially because there will be even more pressure on the FO to set up the team for success.

 

I'm fine with either option, and trust that the FO is in a better position to make this call than any of us. However, my patience with the FO will wear thin if we don't make some major signings this off-season, with a ton of room in the budget. Whoever we have as a manager next year will perform much better with better players at their disposal. And if the FAs don't work, we can dump salaries before the trade deadline and bolster the farm system, like we did this year.

 

Ultimately, given the unexpected crap he's had to deal with this year, and how the team seems to be playing better after the trade deadline, I'd give Molitor a B.

 

Not even close to accurate. Check out Matt Magill’s pitching log and ask yourself if Molitor was using him. There are plenty of examples of guys going days or a week without pitching while guys like Hildenberger, Reed and Pressly were being used 3-4 times a week. Are those pitchers inferior? Perhaps. But you still can’t overuse guys like Molitor has and expect them to hold up. I stopped tracking Pressly’s usage in early July, but at the time he ranked #1 or 2 in appearances despite the team still having played 3-4 fewer games than any other team.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Not even close to accurate. Check out Matt Magill’s pitching log and ask yourself if Molitor was using him. There are plenty of examples of guys going days or a week without pitching while guys like Hildenberger, Reed and Pressly were being used 3-4 times a week. Are those pitchers inferior? Perhaps. But you still can’t overuse guys like Molitor has and expect them to hold up. I stopped tracking Pressly’s usage in early July, but at the time he ranked #1 or 2 in appearances despite the team still having played 3-4 fewer games than any other team.

 

That's my biggest beef as well. Granted, it would be nice to have better relievers, but you have to a have a system in place to prevent overuse. I'm firmly believing that is why Hildy is struggling right now... Reed too for that matter. And honestly, Magill is pitching well enough to deserve some looks, and guys like Busenitz and Moya need that development as well. When we're winning, I can see it to a point (not to the point of overuse), but this team stopped being a contender a while ago, and when arms started to drop, Molly didn't try at all to find someone to fit in the role. He simply used his firemen even more. 

[Vanimal46]

That's my biggest beef as well. Granted, it would be nice to have better relievers, but you have to a have a system in place to prevent overuse. I'm firmly believing that is why Hildy is struggling right now... Reed too for that matter. And honestly, Magill is pitching well enough to deserve some looks, and guys like Busenitz and Moya need that development as well. When we're winning, I can see it to a point (not to the point of overuse), but this team stopped being a contender a while ago, and when arms started to drop, Molly didn't try at all to find someone to fit in the role. He simply used his firemen even more.

Fans all across the land complain about bullpen management. Did Molitor abuse his pitchers worse than other managers?

 

I would think every manager has 3 go-tos in high leverage situations, and the rest fill in the cracks.

[Shaitan]

 

Fans all across the land complain about bullpen management. Did Molitor abuse his pitchers worse than other managers?

I would think every manager has 3 go-tos in high leverage situations, and the rest fill in the cracks.

 

That's the difference right there. Molitor often goes to his Big 3 when it's not a high leverage situation, keeping the go-tos tired and the "fill in the cracks" unused. 

[Thebigalguy]

I respect all I’ve read but give Molitor more credit. A B+, in fact, and in decades of teaching I’ve not been an easy grader. Trading Pressley was a Falvine rookie mistake. The bullpen now is a hot mess. Molitor has taken lemons and made lemonade, which is a .500 team this year. They started 9-15 and are still six or so games under .500. Few timely hits. Inconsistent starters. A terrible record in one-run and walkoff games. That’s not on Molitor. I certainly expect him to have two more years. Time will tell.

[USAFChief]

 

I respect all I’ve read but give Molitor more credit. A B+, in fact, and in decades of teaching I’ve not been an easy grader. Trading Pressley was a Falvine rookie mistake. The bullpen now is a hot mess. Molitor has taken lemons and made lemonade, which is a .500 team this year. They started 9-15 and are still six or so games under .500. Few timely hits. Inconsistent starters. A terrible record in one-run and walkoff games. That’s not on Molitor. I certainly expect him to have two more years. Time will tell.

Not entirely, no.

 

But a tendency to leave his starter in until after the damage is done, coupled with questionable bullpen management surely have at least some impact on this, no?

[Don Walcott]

 

Not even close to accurate. Check out Matt Magill’s pitching log and ask yourself if Molitor was using him. There are plenty of examples of guys going days or a week without pitching while guys like Hildenberger, Reed and Pressly were being used 3-4 times a week. Are those pitchers inferior? Perhaps. But you still can’t overuse guys like Molitor has and expect them to hold up. I stopped tracking Pressly’s usage in early July, but at the time he ranked #1 or 2 in appearances despite the team still having played 3-4 fewer games than any other team.

 

I think the one phrase you critiqued is at least close to accurate, if not accurate.

 

I wasn't attempting to defend Molitor's use of the bullpen completely. I have been and continue to be critical of his use of the bullpen. However, I do believe the FO also has some responsibility for giving Molitor the players he needs to have a good bullpen.

 

You point out how much Magill was used. That's one guy, and you have no idea whether he would have gotten the job done whenever you wanted him to pitch. You also don't know to what extent our relievers pitched poorly or got hurt as a result of being overused. What we do know is that the talent in the bullpen was never very good, and that's not Molitor's fault. We also know that we did not have someone like Big Erv to eat up innings as a starter, and our starters have not been going very deep into games, which has required a lot more innings from the bullpen. That also is not Molitor's fault. And at least one post here opines that Molitor hasn't pulled starters quickly enough, which would have required even more innings from the bullpen.

 

And to the extent he had people to consult about it, they were the FO's guys. If neither the pitching coach nor the bullpen coach ever voiced an opinion about the overuse of relievers (assuming that was actually the case), that's a coaching staff problem as well.

 

There is blame to spread around, and Molitor isn't the only person to blame for the use of the bullpen.

[Danchat]

I respect all I’ve read but give Molitor more credit. A B+, in fact, and in decades of teaching I’ve not been an easy grader. Trading Pressley was a Falvine rookie mistake. The bullpen now is a hot mess. Molitor has taken lemons and made lemonade, which is a .500 team this year. They started 9-15 and are still six or so games under .500. Few timely hits. Inconsistent starters. A terrible record in one-run and walkoff games. That’s not on Molitor. I certainly expect him to have two more years. Time will tell.

The bullpen may be a hot mess now but we can’t say that for sure about 2019, so I can’t see how the trade was a ‘rookie mistake’.

[yarnivek1972]

Fans all across the land complain about bullpen management. Did Molitor abuse his pitchers worse than other managers?

 

I would think every manager has 3 go-tos in high leverage situations, and the rest fill in the cracks.

Like I said, been awhile since I checked but once upon a time Pressly, Hildenberger and Reed were all top 15 in the AL for appearances and relief IP. Again, keeping in mind the Twins lagged behind in team games played by 3-4 until July. 3 guys in the top 15 is pretty clear evidence of overuse. No other team had more than two.

[yarnivek1972]

 

You point out how much Magill was used. That's one guy, and you have no idea whether he would have gotten the job done whenever you wanted him to pitch.

 

 

There is blame to spread around, and Molitor isn't the only person to blame for the use of the bullpen.

 

1) Isn’t that the point? No one knows how well or how poorly he would have pitched because he almost never did. Even in blowouts he was rarely used in the beginning.

 

2) At the end of the day, it’s his decision. He’s the one taking the ball from pitcher A and giving it to pitcher B. If he isn’t prepared to own his decisions, he needs the responsibility of making them removed.

[TheLeviathan]

If Molitor has pitched Magill more and he blew games the same people calling for that would've hung him out to dry with the reasoning of "Well of course we lost....why did he put Magill in that high leverage situation!"

 

There is seriously no winning that debate for a manager.  As fans we are irrational, hind-sight driven monsters.

[Mike Sixel]

 

If Molitor has pitched Magill more and he blew games the same people calling for that would've hung him out to dry with the reasoning of "Well of course we lost....why did he put Magill in that high leverage situation!"

 

There is seriously no winning that debate for a manager.  As fans we are irrational, hind-sight driven monsters.

 

Wow....people have been posting about his bullpen use for 3+ years now, so I don't agree that it is hindsight this year. Also, people pointed out in May that he was over using RPs.....and nothing really changed after that. He had 3 RPs in the top 15 in appearances, when the Twins had played less games than all of the majors, and many of those were in appearances that were not high leverage. I don't think it is fair at all to say this is all hindsight.