What is the biggest problem with this Twins team?

[Brock Beauchamp]

1 minute ago, mnfireman said:

You, sir, are correct, I should not be accusing. Terms like " I believe", "In my opinion" and "It appears to me" should be used instead. I will be more diligent going forward.

No worries, my point wasn't about the specific sentiment as much about how we form narratives about MLB managers and how much evidence we really don't have about what they do on a daily basis.

[RedBull34]

53 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

No one in this thread has called him stupid but this thread isn't an island. We've all seen the same recurring themes about Baldelli, everyone here knows what I'm talking about and the original post was more of the same, just a tamer dog whistle version of it.

Anyway, we all know where we each stand on that topic. Back to fundamentals, there are a few problems with this "theory" (I'll mostly gloss over the "analytics over..." portion of the statement, though that's my primary problem with it):

1. What about 2019 and 2020? Were the same fundamentals issues plaguing this team? What's different now? If anything, they should be far more fundamentally sound, as they have a rock-solid veteran left side of the infield (and that's actually been a key problem re: defensive blunders), which they essentially did not have either of the past two years (Donaldson's 2020 was basically non-existent).

2. In the modern game, I don't think the manager actually drills much with players anymore, at least I haven't seen any evidence that's the case. The modern manager approaches their job so much differently than they did 30 years ago and teams appear to be moving toward something closer to an NFL model. I've neither seen nor heard of Baldelli spending hours with a bat in his hand, pounding grounders at Sano. Tom Kelly did, Ron Gardenhire did, but I have no evidence Baldelli does. The manager's job appears to have evolved into more game theory and less daily implementation.

3. The core of my point, which is also linked to point #2, is that Baldelli does not drive the analytics of the Twins. He's a communicator and manager of people. He's not the one building, analyzing, or even deciding the importance of data. The Twins have entire teams of people doing that job. And as an ex-player, Baldelli was hired in large part because he understands the daily rigors of the game, the perspective of players, and surely tries to balance that viewpoint with the data he's being provided and is expected to implement.

1.  Mike Bell maybe?

2. I agree that Baldelli doesn't drive the training himself, but he MIGHT be directing the coaches to focus on other skills or not driving them as hard as they need to be/driving them too hard.

3. I don't disagree with that.  But that doesn't change that he might be focusing on the wrong things.  I'm not in there, I can't see.  Maybe Baldelli is doing everything right.  But I doubt it, because the results aren't there.

[Brock Beauchamp]

2 minutes ago, RedBull34 said:

1.  Mike Bell maybe?

While it's hard to know what goes on behind closed doors and why formerly successful groups of people later fail, this sure is low-hanging fruit about why the Twins have fallen on their faces in early 2021.

I don't know if it's actually correct, but it sure feels correct, at least partially.

[Cap'n Piranha]

2 minutes ago, RedBull34 said:

1.  Mike Bell maybe?

2. I agree that Baldelli doesn't drive the training himself, but he MIGHT be directing the coaches to focus on other skills or not driving them as hard as they need to be/driving them too hard.

3. I don't disagree with that.  But that doesn't change that he might be focusing on the wrong things.  I'm not in there, I can't see.  Maybe Baldelli is doing everything right.  But I doubt it, because the results aren't there.

This is the crux of the issue right here--it's not any better for Rocco, in my opinion, to say "sure, the team is struggling, but it's not Rocco's fault, but rather a breakdown somewhere else".  Everything that happens between the two white lines on game day (save the overall quality of the players) ultimately falls on Rocco.  If Rocco is indeed doing things right, but not getting results, then he's not incompetent, just ineffectual.  Is that really preferable?

[Brock Beauchamp]

3 minutes ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

This is the crux of the issue right here--it's not any better for Rocco, in my opinion, to say "sure, the team is struggling, but it's not Rocco's fault, but rather a breakdown somewhere else".  Everything that happens between the two white lines on game day (save the overall quality of the players) ultimately falls on Rocco.  If Rocco is indeed doing things right, but not getting results, then he's not incompetent, just ineffectual.  Is that really preferable?

Ineffectual is definitely preferable, because it may be temporary. Incompetence tends to be... you know... kinda permanent.

Everyone gets blindsided by unexpected things and no one can pivot effectively 100% of the time. That doesn't mean they get a pass for failing to see an oncoming trainwreck but it does mean they perhaps have a chance to recover from said trainwreck. An incompetent person looks at the broken tracks and says "no idea why this train derailed, let's send another, it can't possibly happen twice".

[Mike Sixel]

If the Twins go 10 games over .500 the rest of the year....does that mean he is doing things right? 

[RedBull34]

Just now, Cap'n Piranha said:

This is the crux of the issue right here--it's not any better for Rocco, in my opinion, to say "sure, the team is struggling, but it's not Rocco's fault, but rather a breakdown somewhere else".  Everything that happens between the two white lines on game day (save the overall quality of the players) ultimately falls on Rocco.  If Rocco is indeed doing things right, but not getting results, then he's not incompetent, just ineffectual.  Is that really preferable?

I don't like to see managers or coaches get hired and fired quickly.  I'm a lifelong Steelers fan (the reason I bring this up is they stick with their coaches and have a lot of success doing so) and I DO believe that many teams don't stick with their management teams long enough.  I don't believe Baldelli is incompetent.  I'm more worried he is in a mental funk or some sort of rut.

Whatever is bugging him, I believe he can overcome, but I do believe the Twins really should hire a bench coach.  Hell, it could just be the workload that's dragging him down.  It's awful what happened to Mike Bell, but bench coaches play a vital part in the clubhouse.  And no bench coach HAS to have some sort of impact on the organization.

[Brock Beauchamp]

3 minutes ago, RedBull34 said:

I don't like to see managers or coaches get hired and fired quickly.  I'm a lifelong Steelers fan (the reason I bring this up is they stick with their coaches and have a lot of success doing so) and I DO believe that many teams don't stick with their management teams long enough.  I don't believe Baldelli is incompetent.  I'm more worried he is in a mental funk or some sort of rut.

Whatever is bugging him, I believe he can overcome, but I do believe the Twins really should hire a bench coach.  Hell, it could just be the workload that's dragging him down.  It's awful what happened to Mike Bell, but bench coaches play a vital part in the clubhouse.  And no bench coach HAS to have some sort of impact on the organization.

They have someone performing the bench coach role, though. Can't recall who it is and definitely have no idea how well they're doing the job but a person is holding the role. I heard about it several weeks ago but wasn't paying close attention to who was doing it.

[cHawk]

8 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

If the Twins go 10 games over .500 the rest of the year....does that mean he is doing things right? 

82-80 would be a total disaster of a season for what expectations were going in. If he’s making chicken**** decisions in game throughout those 113 games, then no. That’s really the main indicator of how he’s doing things. If the players still suck at fundamentals, that’s an indictment of a problem with the coaching staff as a whole, not just Rocco.

[RedBull34]

9 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

They have someone performing the bench coach role, though. Can't recall who it is and definitely have no idea how well they're doing the job but a person is holding the role. I heard about it several weeks ago but wasn't paying close attention to who was doing it.

Fair enough, but you hope that you get more out of an employee then just showing up.  My boss tells me that all the time and I tell him you get what you get! ?

[RedBull34]

Just now, RedBull34 said:

Fair enough, but you hope that you get more out of an employee then just showing up.  My boss tells me that all the time and I tell him you get what you get! ?

I'm not saying anything here about the acting bench coach.  I didn't realize they had an acting one.

[Brock Beauchamp]

1 minute ago, RedBull34 said:

Fair enough, but you hope that you get more out of an employee then just showing up.  My boss tells me that all the time and I tell him you get what you get! ?

They don't have the person listed on the coaching section of the official website so god only knows who it is or how well they're performing the role.

[jaimedude]

As week as the defense and offense has been at times to me the number one problem with this team is bullpen and bullpen's usage. We don't have the right combination of relivers and set up guy's for a shutdown bullpen to protect thin leads. I think the offense and the defense will warm up with the weather on this team and get better. Injury's have certainly been an issue to this point and relying on some players to play every day that maybe should not have. Between Robles and Colume, and Duffey issues leading in to Rogers, there clearly have been problems with walks and giving up to many hits. We have one lefty Thielbar to depend on which seems like an issue. It seems like we could use one more rock solid guy like Trevor May was to set everyone else up particularly a left hander. I think Taylor Rogers is a bonafide closer to end games but we are a little lacking in that 7th and 8th inning roles right now.

[Brock Beauchamp]

7 minutes ago, jaimedude said:

As week as the defense and offense has been at times to me the number one problem with this team is bullpen and bullpen's usage. We don't have the right combination of relivers and set up guy's for a shutdown bullpen to protect thin leads. I think the offense and the defense will warm up with the weather on this team and get better. Injury's have certainly been an issue to this point and relying on some players to play every day that maybe should not have. Between Robles and Colume, and Duffey issues leading in to Rogers, there clearly have been problems with walks and giving up to many hits. We have one lefty Thielbar to depend on which seems like an issue. It seems like we could use one more rock solid guy like Trevor May was to set everyone else up particularly a left hander. I think Taylor Rogers is a bonafide closer to end games but we are a little lacking in that 7th and 8th inning roles right now.

You just prompted me to look up something I've been meaning to look at; the ERA by inning. This is interesting:

6th: 5.51 ERA (this makes sense, the starters have caused plenty of messes this inning and the collective bullpen has been eager to light themselves on fire and jump into the fray)
7th: 3.91 ERA (appears to stabilize a bit)
8th: 4.40 ERA (man these guys suck)
9th: 4.41 ERA (yikes)
Extras: 6.75 ERA (horrified face)

Now this is the average between all the relievers. I mean, that's such a colossal trashfire from everybody involved. Can we even blame the manager for most of this? I haven't agreed with plenty of Baldelli's relief decisions this season but when the bullpen combines for a 4.40 ERA in the final two innings of every game, that team is going to lose so many games. So many.

And that's not even bringing up those extra inning performances.

[Mike Sixel]

21 minutes ago, cHawk said:

82-80 would be a total disaster of a season for what expectations were going in. If he’s making chicken**** decisions in game throughout those 113 games, then no. That’s really the main indicator of how he’s doing things. If the players still suck at fundamentals, that’s an indictment of a problem with the coaching staff as a whole, not just Rocco.

Except I'm not talking about the whole season....If he's not good because of the start....is he good because they got better and did what expected the rest of the way? 

I mean, they "clearly" did something to fix the issues if they go 10 games over .500 over 113 games....so he fixed things....but he is still bad because of the start? What, exactly, could he do REALISTICALLY given your success criteria to keep his job? Because it seems people are arguing the outcome is not ok....now we are saying the outcome can be good, but the process can be bad, so he's still canned?

[Dodecahedron]

4 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Now this is the average between all the relievers. I mean, that's such a colossal trashfire from everybody involved. Can we even blame the manager for most of this? I haven't agreed with plenty of Baldelli's relief decisions this season but when the bullpen combines for a 4.40 ERA in the final two innings of every game, that team is going to lose so many games. So many.

I think Baldelli deserves some of the blame.  He does not seem to know who to play or when.  It seems like most of us are able to predict what is going to happen before it happens, so most of us would have put in other relievers.  He says he always goes with "The best option," but we don't know what criteria he is using.  Some of the REALLY bad decisions at the very beginning of the year should start small-sample-sizing their way out, though.

What is the average ERA for other teams in those innings?

[Mike Sixel]

1 minute ago, Dodecahedron said:

I think Baldelli deserves some of the blame.  He does not seem to know who to play or when.  It seems like most of us are able to predict what is going to happen before it happens, so most of us would have put in other relievers.  He says he always goes with "The best option," but we don't know what criteria he is using.  Some of the REALLY bad decisions at the very beginning of the year should start small-sample-sizing their way out, though.

What is the average ERA for other teams in those innings?

I don't know, if EVERY relief pitcher is not good this year....it is pretty easy to predict what will happen. 

[cHawk]

14 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Except I'm not talking about the whole season....If he's not good because of the start....is he good because they got better and did what expected the rest of the way? 

I mean, they "clearly" did something to fix the issues if they go 10 games over .500 over 113 games....so he fixed things....but he is still bad because of the start? What, exactly, could he do REALISTICALLY given your success criteria to keep his job? Because it seems people are arguing the outcome is not ok....now we are saying the outcome can be good, but the process can be bad, so he's still canned?

I never said he IS bad. He’s not bad. *ducks* I’m saying he could’ve been doing something wrong these first seven weeks. Competent managers and coaches can have down years. I believe Doug Pederson is a good coach, who had a bad year in 2020 (Like, seriously, it doesn’t get much worse than being accused of blatant tanking). Likewise, I think Baldelli is a good manager who has had a down start to the season. He also had lost some competent personnel around him (Mike Bell) whose replacement or said replacement’s competence level is unknown.

[Brock Beauchamp]

40 minutes ago, Dodecahedron said:

I think Baldelli deserves some of the blame.  He does not seem to know who to play or when.  It seems like most of us are able to predict what is going to happen before it happens, so most of us would have put in other relievers.

He definitely deserves some of the blame because I've been right there, wondering exactly WTF it is he's doing with a few of his choices... a few. But it's an easy trap to fall into the bolded section of the quote because if everyone sucks, it becomes pretty easy to predict what's going to happen and your "other reliever" would have likely had an equally bad outcome, you just didn't have to witness it happening.

And I can think of many times when Baldelli has gone with the obvious option (say, Rogers versus a L/R/L matchup or Duffey against a R/R/L matchup early in the season before anyone knew he had turned into a bad reliever) and then watching those two guys throw an effing hand grenade on the situation. I've seen relievers blow up good matchups far more often than I've seen Baldelli make a head-scratching move.

The thing about a manager "going with his gut" is that the only way we can evaluate that "gut" is if it works... but what happens if literally everyone in the bullpen is awful and they fail every single time?

[mnfireman]

1 hour ago, Dodecahedron said:

It seems like most of us are able to predict what is going to happen before it happens, so most of us would have put in other relievers.  

As a manager, you have to have confidence in who you put on the mound, you don't expect nuclear bomb to go off, especially when guys have good track records. That being said, you do have figure out how to get them through the rough patches.

[mnfireman]

Speaking of bad fundamentals....

https://www.mlb.com/news/javier-baez-rundown-between-first-and-home

[Brock Beauchamp]

6 minutes ago, mnfireman said:

Speaking of bad fundamentals....

https://www.mlb.com/news/javier-baez-rundown-between-first-and-home

That is just flabbergasting. Why on earth would a first baseman ever chase a runner? Step on the bag.

[KirbyDome89]

22 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

Also, don't they have any responsibility to develop the players that were already in the system? 

"The cupboard was bare," is the response I'd expect to hear, and although there's some merit to it, I don't agree that it fully exonerates the FO. 

They're also responsible for "developing," or "fixing," some of the arms they've brought in. They've gone out and signed Lance Lynn, Martin Perez, Michael Pineda, Rich Hill, J.A. Happ, and Matt Shoemaker in FA. The trades for SP have been better, but that isn't exactly a high bar to clear. Odorizzi was actually worse in '18 with the Twins, he was lights out to start '19, and then reverted back to what we'd seen. We know the 2020 story. As well as Kenta pitched in 11 games last year he's been almost as bad this year. It's hard to look at any SP they've brought in and say that player has markedly improved. 

The bullpen has been a throw it at the wall and see what sticks approach from the get go. We're in year 5 and it isn't like internal options, inherited, or acquired via trade, are banging down the door. There's some success (Clippard, Rodney) but a lot more uninspiring additions. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

34 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Odorizzi was actually worse in '18 with the Twins, he was lights out to start '19, and then reverted back to what we'd seen. We know the 2020 story.

This feels like a really selective way to interpret Odorizzi's time with the Twins. While his top level 2018 numbers were slightly worse (barely) than his 2017 numbers with Tampa, his 2018 FIP was *much* better with the Twins, which indicates there wasn't much difference between his performances and one could easily argue he was better with the Twins.

Year	Age	Tm	Lg	W	L	W-L%	ERA	G	GS	GF	CG	SHO	SV	IP	H	R	ER	HR	BB	IBB	SO	HBP	BK	WP	BF	ERA+	FIP	WHIP	H9	HR9	BB9	SO9	SO/W	Awards
2017	27	TBR	AL	10	8	.556	4.14	28	28	0	0	0	0	143.1	117	80	66	30	61	1	127	2	0	1	604	102	5.43	1.242	7.3	1.9	3.8	8.0	2.08
2018	28	MIN	AL	7	10	.412	4.49	32	32	0	0	0	0	164.1	151	89	82	20	70	3	162	8	0	1	711	95	4.19	1.345	8.3	1.1	3.8	8.9	2.31
2019	29	MIN	AL	15	7	.682	3.51	30	30	0	0	0	0	159.0	139	65	62	16	53	0	178	4	0	4	658	128	3.36	1.208	7.9	0.9	3.0	10.1	3.36	AS

And you're really underselling Odorizzi's 2019 season. He was mostly consistent throughout the season and overall, it was far and away the best pitching season he has had with any team. He was very good all season, except for one month where he flat-out melted down (but then immediately recovered). Outside of July, he had an above average ERA every month of the season. Here are his splits:

Split	W	L	W-L%	ERA	G	GS	GF	CG	SHO	SV	IP	H	R	ER	HR	BB	IBB	SO	HBP	BK	WP	BF	WHIP	SO9	SO/W
April/March	3	2	.600	3.34	6	6	0	0	0	0	29.2	22	12	11	2	11	0	30	1	0	0	120	1.112	9.1	2.73
May	4	0	1.000	0.94	5	5	0	0	0	0	28.2	16	3	3	2	9	0	31	0	0	0	109	0.872	9.7	3.44
June	3	1	.750	3.95	5	5	0	0	0	0	27.1	27	12	12	4	7	0	33	1	0	0	112	1.244	10.9	4.71
July	2	2	.500	7.43	5	5	0	0	0	0	23.0	27	20	19	6	10	0	19	1	0	0	105	1.609	7.4	1.90
August	2	1	.667	2.86	5	5	0	0	0	0	28.1	29	10	9	1	12	0	32	1	0	4	126	1.447	10.2	2.67
Sept/Oct	1	1	.500	3.27	4	4	0	0	0	0	22.0	18	8	8	1	4	0	33	0	0	0	86	1.000	13.5	8.25

[sampleSizeOfOne]

On 5/26/2021 at 12:41 PM, ashbury said:

On 5/26/2021 at 12:29 PM, Craig Arko said:

I'll go with - The Won/Lost record.

For those who dislike analytics, this is about as un-analytic as one can get. Take nothing apart whatsoever. Kudos.

I for one, appreciate the wholistic approach.

 

[KirbyDome89]

41 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

This feels like a really selective way to interpret Odorizzi's time with the Twins. While his top level 2018 numbers were slightly worse (barely) than his 2017 numbers with Tampa, his 2018 FIP was *much* better with the Twins, which indicates there wasn't much difference between his performances and one could easily argue he was better with the Twins.

Year	Age	Tm	Lg	W	L	W-L%	ERA	G	GS	GF	CG	SHO	SV	IP	H	R	ER	HR	BB	IBB	SO	HBP	BK	WP	BF	ERA+	FIP	WHIP	H9	HR9	BB9	SO9	SO/W	Awards
2017	27	TBR	AL	10	8	.556	4.14	28	28	0	0	0	0	143.1	117	80	66	30	61	1	127	2	0	1	604	102	5.43	1.242	7.3	1.9	3.8	8.0	2.08
2018	28	MIN	AL	7	10	.412	4.49	32	32	0	0	0	0	164.1	151	89	82	20	70	3	162	8	0	1	711	95	4.19	1.345	8.3	1.1	3.8	8.9	2.31
2019	29	MIN	AL	15	7	.682	3.51	30	30	0	0	0	0	159.0	139	65	62	16	53	0	178	4	0	4	658	128	3.36	1.208	7.9	0.9	3.0	10.1	3.36	AS

And you're really underselling Odorizzi's 2019 season. He was mostly consistent throughout the season and overall, it was far and away the best pitching season he has had with any team. He was very good all season, except for one month where he flat-out melted down (but then immediately recovered). Outside of July, he had an above average ERA every month of the season. Here are his splits:

Split	W	L	W-L%	ERA	G	GS	GF	CG	SHO	SV	IP	H	R	ER	HR	BB	IBB	SO	HBP	BK	WP	BF	WHIP	SO9	SO/W
April/March	3	2	.600	3.34	6	6	0	0	0	0	29.2	22	12	11	2	11	0	30	1	0	0	120	1.112	9.1	2.73
May	4	0	1.000	0.94	5	5	0	0	0	0	28.2	16	3	3	2	9	0	31	0	0	0	109	0.872	9.7	3.44
June	3	1	.750	3.95	5	5	0	0	0	0	27.1	27	12	12	4	7	0	33	1	0	0	112	1.244	10.9	4.71
July	2	2	.500	7.43	5	5	0	0	0	0	23.0	27	20	19	6	10	0	19	1	0	0	105	1.609	7.4	1.90
August	2	1	.667	2.86	5	5	0	0	0	0	28.1	29	10	9	1	12	0	32	1	0	4	126	1.447	10.2	2.67
Sept/Oct	1	1	.500	3.27	4	4	0	0	0	0	22.0	18	8	8	1	4	0	33	0	0	0	86	1.000	13.5	8.25

If you account for the HR binge in '17 and use xFIP then the difference becomes marginal. His hard hit % bumped up in MN and never really came back down, as did his BABIP. Maybe you can explain some of the latter away with defense. To my original point, if we're arguing whether he was worse or simply the same, then there wasn't improvement, and that was a selling point of the trade. 

That meltdown was half of June and almost all of July. His last 15 starts were roughly average in total, which is why I said he reverted back to what we'd seen. Undoubtedly his best season, but then '20 happened. Do you think he was a better pitcher in MN?

[Brock Beauchamp]

4 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Do you think he was a better pitcher in MN?

He had a pretty typical year in 2018 then the best year of his career in 2019 so yeah, I’d say he was a better pitcher in Minnesota.

2020 can be written off for a myriad of reasons for pretty much any player, even moreso Odorizzi. The dude just had a *really* unfortunate two months, much of which was completely out of his control (like a line drive to the ribs).

[KirbyDome89]

27 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

He had a pretty typical year in 2018 then the best year of his career in 2019 so yeah, I’d say he was a better pitcher in Minnesota.

2020 can be written off for a myriad of reasons for pretty much any player, even moreso Odorizzi. The dude just had a *really* unfortunate two months, much of which was completely out of his control (like a line drive to the ribs).

See, I'd say that's a selective way to view his tenure. 

Maeda was far and away their best success story, are we discounting that now?  

[Brock Beauchamp]

11 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

See, I'd say that's a selective way to view his tenure. 

Maeda was far and away their best success story, are we discounting that now?  

If the new, bad version of Kenta continues, probably. 

[DocBauer]

Addressing the original topic of the OP, I'm going to toss out 3 thoughts that can be debated and #3 will probably get a lot of push back, but I think is worthy of consideration. 

1] I do agree that there is a clear separation of analytics vs fundamentals. Extreme example; bunting is a fundamental and not an analytical piece of the game. Is there too little time spent these days on just pure fundamentals? I think an argument could be made for that. But I also have no clue how the Twins handle daily routines in regard to such, nor any team for that matter. Is it even remotely possible...and more on this in point #3...that the early schedule of only day games robbed the Twins of opportunity for just normal work in the field and batting practice?

2] No matter disappointment and disbelief of the pen thus far, we need to just STOP bashing the FO for the pen. Other than letting May walk...God bless him, I'm not sure anyone other than the Mets would have given him $7M+....where did they go wrong? The Hendricks deal by the Dirty Sox was NUTS! We all know that. The Twins were tied to at least another half dozen bullpen FA options that went elsewhere. And it's been reported and examined right here on TD who those arms were, and they have ALL been injured or have just stunk thus far. So where exactly did the FO "blow it" in regards to the pen? 

While hindsight is 20/20, I see blame given but no examples given of who they "missed" on. 

3] And I know I will get rolling eyes and blowback on this, but is it possible the biggest problem the Twins have faced thus far is "mental lock"?

Bear with me here.

You have a well constructed team expected to contend and be amongst the best in MLB , CERTAINLY in the AL. You're coming off 2 great seasons. You get off to a good start and probably should have won their first 6 or 7. Donaldson gets hurt first game. A couple other injuries happen. 

And then the pen blows a game. Then someone makes a key error. Suddenly you lose a few games and your swag and confidence erodes. Suddenly everyone starts pressing. Things begin to Cascade. And then more injuries happen and everyone presses more and more.  Gold Glove infielders drop balls and solid veterans just screw up unexpectedly. And good hitters press.

Call me crazy if I'm wrong. But I think part of the problem is a lot of guys pressing and wanting to get right and overcome. And my "questionable" point 3 goes back to points 1 and 2.

The sum of parts to equal a whole just doesn't always work. And maybe this team just doesn't mesh right. It happens. But I have come to believe that this team has been fighting themselves as much as their opponents. 

Lately, thankfully, despite injuries, and while facing lesser teams, they have been playing better. They either accept this opportunity and recent success and build confidence and run with it...OR...it may be too little too late.