Bench Players

[Eicemann]

I was dumbfounded that Baldelli chose to let Celestino bat in the bottom of the 9th inning with RISP rather than PH with Correa.  That was an unconscionable choice - sending a career .130 hitter to the plate instead of Correa.  IF resting a starter means not bringing him into the game under ANY circumstances, then the Twins had better carry at least one more bench player and one fewer RP.  

[chpettit19]

I mean Celestino hit a 106.9 MPH missile to center in that AB. And Correa is hitting a whopping .192 this year and a dazzling .154 with runners in scoring position. I think "unconscionable" is a bit of an extreme description of that decision. Bringing in a guy who's been sitting on the bench for 4 hours in 40 degree weather and hasn't been hitting at all to this point in the season and asking him to step in against one of the game's best closers isn't exactly a no doubt move. If you did a blind look at his numbers and ignored that he's Carlos Correa I don't think you'd be so animated in your calls for him to hit in that situation.

[Eicemann]

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

I mean Celestino hit a 106.9 MPH missile to center in that AB. And Correa is hitting a whopping .192 this year and a dazzling .154 with runners in scoring position. I think "unconscionable" is a bit of an extreme description of that decision. Bringing in a guy who's been sitting on the bench for 4 hours in 40 degree weather and hasn't been hitting at all to this point in the season and asking him to step in against one of the game's best closers isn't exactly a no doubt move. If you did a blind look at his numbers and ignored that he's Carlos Correa I don't think you'd be so animated in your calls for him to hit in that situation.

Point taken about Correa's slow start and coming in cold.  But I stand by my reaction to Baldelli's thought process.  And I don't care that Celestino made good contact in his at bat.  He simply should not have been put in that position when there are viable alternatives available.  And Hendricks proved to be quite hittable in that game. 

This would be a major talking point had Buxton not saved the day in the bottom of the 10th.  But that doesn't mean that a better effort to end the game in the 9th should not have been made.

[Rosterman]

Bench = Reserve catcher, reserve infielder, reserve outfielder. Hopefully one has some speed. Another is probably around just for defense. If you have the luxury of carrying another bat who is something other than a DH, go for it. Third catcher screws this up a bit. But in the good old "National league days" you would have better bats on the bench because of NO designated hitter.

And then nursing injuries you were forced to have Godoy overmatched against suepr closer, although he did wrangle a walk (good for him). 

[RpR]

2 hours ago, Eicemann said:

I was dumbfounded that Baldelli chose to let Celestino bat in the bottom of the 9th inning with RISP rather than PH with Correa.  That was an unconscionable choice - sending a career .130 hitter to the plate instead of Correa.  IF resting a starter means not bringing him into the game under ANY circumstances, then the Twins had better carry at least one more bench player and one fewer RP.  

That is how you build a rookies faith in himself, not by taking him out .

[chpettit19]

1 hour ago, Eicemann said:

Point taken about Correa's slow start and coming in cold.  But I stand by my reaction to Baldelli's thought process.  And I don't care that Celestino made good contact in his at bat.  He simply should not have been put in that position when there are viable alternatives available.  And Hendricks proved to be quite hittable in that game. 

This would be a major talking point had Buxton not saved the day in the bottom of the 10th.  But that doesn't mean that a better effort to end the game in the 9th should not have been made.

And if Celestino's ball was hit 5 feet further to the right it wouldn't be a talking point at all as he would've won the game. Why didn't Rocco pinch hit for Sano ever? He's hitting .083 right now. Or Gordon who is at .214 and hit right after Celestino in the 9th and struck out. Shoot, Polanco is only hitting .200 so why didn't he pinch hit for him? And, yes, Henricks proved to be quite hittable. As shown by Celestino hitting a ball 106.9 MPH off him. Not sure you could've asked for Correa to do anymore than that.

It's interesting that you accept the points about Correa not being good right now and coming in cold yet still call for a "better effort" in the 9th. Again, this seems to be far more about the names on the backs of jerseys than a real question about the thought process. And @RpR makes a very good point about it being a nice way to boost a young player's confidence during 1 game in April so when you need him to step up in a game in September he's feeling good about himself. It was the 16th game of the season. If they couldn't rebound from losing game 16 because Correa didn't pinch hit for Celestino I'm not sure the next 146 would've been worth following anyways.

[TwinsDr2021]

35 minutes ago, RpR said:

That is how you build a rookies faith in himself, not by taking him out .

I am not saying what Rocco should have done, just asking the question is it Rocco's MO to give rookies a chance in late in a tight game? Or is it his MO to not play a guy he is resting unless it is absolutely the last choice?

 

[Azviking101]

Correa should have pinch hit for Gordon, Celestino or Godoy. I cannot imagine Jeffers was in such awful shape that he couldn't come in for 1 inning but regardless Correa needed to pinch hit for Gordon or Celestino.

Buxton saved Rocco again

[RpR]

3 minutes ago, Azviking101 said:

Correa should have pinch hit for Gordon, Celestino or Godoy. I cannot imagine Jeffers was in such awful shape that he couldn't come in for 1 inning but regardless Correa needed to pinch hit for Gordon or Celestino.

Buxton saved Rocco again

With his batting average , why?

[RpR]

2 hours ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

I am not saying what Rocco should have done, just asking the question is it Rocco's MO to give rookies a chance in late in a tight game? Or is it his MO to not play a guy he is resting unless it is absolutely the last choice?

 

Baldelli throws the bones.

[chpettit19]

16 hours ago, RpR said:

With his batting average , why?

Because it says Correa on the back of his jersey.

[USAFChief]

21 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

I mean Celestino hit a 106.9 MPH missile to center in that AB. And Correa is hitting a whopping .192 this year and a dazzling .154 with runners in scoring position. I think "unconscionable" is a bit of an extreme description of that decision. Bringing in a guy who's been sitting on the bench for 4 hours in 40 degree weather and hasn't been hitting at all to this point in the season and asking him to step in against one of the game's best closers isn't exactly a no doubt move. If you did a blind look at his numbers and ignored that he's Carlos Correa I don't think you'd be so animated in your calls for him to hit in that situation.

Ignoring using BA two weeks into a season in the first place, why would you cite Correa's BA but not Celestino's?

 

Why would you object to bringing in Correa in "40 degree weather" but not object to bringing in Celestino? He was brought into the game late too.

 

"Why not Correa" is a very valid question. There are arguments to be made both ways, but yours aren’t very good ones, are they?

 

[USAFChief]

31 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Because it says Correa on the back of his jersey.

Is it your contention Baldelli shouldn't use past performance to inform playing time decisions?

[chpettit19]

Just now, USAFChief said:

Ignoring using BA two weeks into a season in the first place, why would you cite Correa's BA but not Celestino's?

 

Why would you object to bringing in Correa in "40 degree weather" but not object to bringing in Celestino? He was brought into the game late too.

 

"Why not Correa" is a very valid question. There are arguments to be made both ways, but yours are t very valid, are they?

 

Celestino's batting prowess was already presented in the original argument so I was providing the counterpoint. 

Celestino was brought into run and played the field before his AB which allowed him to warm up more than sitting on the bench in his coat the entire time then taking it off just to go hit as Correa would've done.

It's a valid question and I provided valid counterpoints to point out that "unconscionable" was an extreme word choice. There's a difference between you not agreeing with my arguments and them not being valid, isn't there? 

[chpettit19]

1 minute ago, USAFChief said:

Is it your contention Baldelli shouldn't use past performance to inform playing time decisions?

It's my contention that if it didn't say Correa on the back of his jersey nobody, including you, would have been calling for a guy struggling so mightily at the plate in the early going to be pinch hitting for anyone. I don't care what Correa did while he was in Houston. This season he's been terrible at the plate. There's a sizeable anti-Kepler crowd around here. Is it your contention Baldelli shouldn't use past performance to inform his playing time decisions? Because he's been good in the past so that means he should play everyday now, right? Or does that only apply to Correa?

[USAFChief]

14 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Celestino's batting prowess was already presented in the original argument so I was providing the counterpoint. 

Celestino was brought into run and played the field before his AB which allowed him to warm up more than sitting on the bench in his coat the entire time then taking it off just to go hit as Correa would've done.

It's a valid question and I provided valid counterpoints to point out that "unconscionable" was an extreme word choice. There's a difference between you not agreeing with my arguments and them not being valid, isn't there? 

Celestino's batting prowess?

 

There is no argument to be made that Celestino is a better hitter than Correa.

 

Look, you made a terrible argument using Correa's BA. Made even worse by NOT using Celestino's. We all make bad arguments some times. 

 

 

 

[chpettit19]

3 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Celestino's batting prowess?

 

There is no argument to be made that Celestino is a better hitter than Correa.

 

Look, you made a terrible argument using Correa's BA. Made even worse by NOT using Celestino's. We all make bad arguments some times. 

 

 

 

Celestino's BA was presented in the original argument. I combatted it by using Correa's BA. You're smart enough to follow that logic, Chief.

The argument is that the original post called it, literally, "unconscionable" to not hit Correa there as if Correa is some sort of world beater and would've done more than hit a 106.9 MPH liner to center. Correa hasn't been good this year. There's no argument to be made that he has been. The point is that if it didn't say Correa on the back of his jersey and people didn't dislike Rocco this argument wouldn't be happening at all. And you're more than smart enough to follow all that. So you can take your condescending "you made a terrible argument" trash and go pick a fight somewhere else.

[umterp23]

While it was 40 degrees and guys have been sitting on the bench in jackets/beanies/gloves etc., they are still professional athletes in a professional stadium.  It's not college where a guy sits on bench and then tries a couple practice swings in the on deck circle to get warm.  If the communication from staff is there vs looking at an excel spreadsheet, Correa or someone would be inside the stadium in a warm batting cage swinging away to get warm for a potential pinch hit at bat.  Take cold weather out of it, Rocco managing by numbers vs managing by instinct(s) hurts more times than not.  Managing by gut/instincts was Dusty Baker and Astros taking Rocco behind the wood shed in the playoffs couple years ago.  Rocco has much to learn as a experienced manager

[Eicemann]

20 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

And if Celestino's ball was hit 5 feet further to the right it wouldn't be a talking point at all as he would've won the game. Why didn't Rocco pinch hit for Sano ever? He's hitting .083 right now. Or Gordon who is at .214 and hit right after Celestino in the 9th and struck out. Shoot, Polanco is only hitting .200 so why didn't he pinch hit for him? And, yes, Henricks proved to be quite hittable. As shown by Celestino hitting a ball 106.9 MPH off him. Not sure you could've asked for Correa to do anymore than that.

It's interesting that you accept the points about Correa not being good right now and coming in cold yet still call for a "better effort" in the 9th. Again, this seems to be far more about the names on the backs of jerseys than a real question about the thought process. And @RpR makes a very good point about it being a nice way to boost a young player's confidence during 1 game in April so when you need him to step up in a game in September he's feeling good about himself. It was the 16th game of the season. If they couldn't rebound from losing game 16 because Correa didn't pinch hit for Celestino I'm not sure the next 146 would've been worth following anyways.

My main point of contention is that the broadcast announcers characterized Rocco's choice to not use Correa to PH as a rigid policy of defining days off as those players being "unavailable." I have less of a problem with Celestino hitting than designating Correa as "unavailable" for that game - even to PH with the game outcome on the line.  To adhere to a "day off = unavailable" policy while equipping your team to win close games seemingly requires more bench depth than what the Twins have in place right now. 

I understand giving young players opportunity to succeed to build their confidence.  But I don't believe that was what drove the choice to stick with Celestino in a late game RISP opportunity; nor that it should necessarily drive that same choice when that situation presents itself again.    

[chpettit19]

10 minutes ago, Eicemann said:

My main point of contention is that the broadcast announcers characterized Rocco's choice to not use Correa to PH as a rigid policy of defining days off as those players being "unavailable." I have less of a problem with Celestino hitting than designating Correa as "unavailable" for that game - even to PH with the game outcome on the line.  To adhere to a "day off = unavailable" policy while equipping your team to win close games seemingly requires more bench depth than what the Twins have in place right now. 

I understand giving young players opportunity to succeed to build their confidence.  But I don't believe that was what drove the choice to stick with Celestino in a late game RISP opportunity; nor that it should necessarily drive that same choice when that situation presents itself again.    

That I agree with. I don't like the frequency of days off in general. It's been 16 games and Correa has already had 2 games off before off days. I don't like that. If you're paying someone over 35M he should be able to play the first 16 games with just natural off days in the schedule providing enough rest. They have very smart medical people advising them so I'm sure there's something they believe in about those extra rest days saving significant wear and tear on the body, but pinch hitting and playing an inning or 2 in the field shouldn't destroy those benefits. But I'm certainly no Dr so what do I know?

[chpettit19]

1 hour ago, umterp23 said:

While it was 40 degrees and guys have been sitting on the bench in jackets/beanies/gloves etc., they are still professional athletes in a professional stadium.  It's not college where a guy sits on bench and then tries a couple practice swings in the on deck circle to get warm.  If the communication from staff is there vs looking at an excel spreadsheet, Correa or someone would be inside the stadium in a warm batting cage swinging away to get warm for a potential pinch hit at bat.  Take cold weather out of it, Rocco managing by numbers vs managing by instinct(s) hurts more times than not.  Managing by gut/instincts was Dusty Baker and Astros taking Rocco behind the wood shed in the playoffs couple years ago.  Rocco has much to learn as a experienced manager

You think the most analytically driven organization in baseball has a manager not using spreadsheets? Dusty Baker managed a world series team last year that averaged less than 4 innings per start throughout the playoffs and you think that's him managing by gut/instincts and not a spreadsheet?

[goulik]

Ok, Ok, A little balance is good here. I agree that unconscionable is a strong word but I also agree that Correa on the back of the Jersey does matter because he has MANY seasons of proving that name to mean something. Streaks, slumps and SSS of the season up to this point are meaningless. Streaks end, Slumps are broken and Correa is a proven commodity. ($35.1 Million worth)

Yes, Celestino struggled as a rookie and isn't a world beater but we are still dealing with a SSS on him and what he has done so far does not 100% represent what he will be. Is it possible he turns out to be an All Star someday? Yes, that is possible. Is it possible that his numbers never improve at the MLB level. That is also possible. We just don't know.

Both (All?) arguments presented on this topic so far are valid to me so let us agree to allow others to have their opinions even if we are sure they are wrong.