Players like Baldelli as a person but....

[Bigfork Twins Guy]

On 8/21/2022 at 1:04 PM, sfe306 said:

...... there is too much analytics, and no competition between players.  They are confused about his decisions nearly every game, as am I.  Automatically pulling pitchers for no reason.  Arraez not leading off every game is another one.  He's earned leadoff, and should be there 100% of the time. He'd be batting .375 if Baldelli would get out of his way.  Arraez is the team leader and the only one with swagger.  I could go on and on, but as a fan, I follow the games now as background noise.  The Twins have great players that are not allowed to excel. I like Baldelli as a person, but World Series winners do not manage like this. 

Baldelli has Arraez lead off almost 100% off against right handers.  I think if you check Arraez's BA off left handers vs right handers you may decide that Baldelli is helping his batting average by sitting him or playing him lower in the order against left handers.  I love Luis but do not agree with your take here.

[howeda7]

It's true that MLB managers have the least impact on wins/losses of any major sport. But you only need to look at the Twins division to see that it matters on the margins. Terry Francona is terrific and his teams always win more games than they should. If him and Rocco switch jobs, the Twins are 5 games up on Cleveland, IMO. If he and La Russa switch jobs, they White Sox might be 8-10 games up on both.

[Parfigliano]

20 minutes ago, Bigfork Twins Guy said:

Good point.  If everybody else is in on metrics maybe we should go opposite to foil them.  Like bunting to the open side of the infield once in awhile.

You would think some of them would bunt like that just to up there average-OPS as opposed to futily grounding into a shift.  Bonus it helps the team.

[LA VIkes Fan]

4 hours ago, rv78 said:

This = "I'd be surprised to find out the players don't understand the philosophy or the decisions Baldelli is making. They may not like it or agree with it, but that doesn't mean they don't comprehend the concept."

So if we take this a step further, if they don't like it or agree with it, then maybe that's why they are playing like they don't care. Last time I checked they get paid the same whether they win or lose. I think the players realize after getting their butts handed to them by the Dodgers and some of the other better teams that they are probably just playing for a paycheck and if they ground out, fly out or strike out verses getting a hit, oh well, I'm still getting paid. Who have been the best hitters this year? Arraez, who is playing for a batting title, and Miranda who is playing for a future. Both have something to play for besides a paycheck, the rest, not so much, especially if they don't like or agree with the philosophy. Watching them play it looks like they are just going through the motions. If they get a hit ok, if not, no big deal. Maybe they have gotten so use to grounding out into the shift or hitting lazy fly balls or striking out on pitches out of the zone that it doesn't bother them, that they expect it or have come to the conclusion that this is as good as they are. 

I've actually defended Baldelli but I end to agree here. Whatever is happening now simply isn't working. This team has the talent if healthy to win 90+ games, Even with all of the injuries the Twins are good enough to finish with around 85-88 wins, especially after the trade season. Injuries have hurt a lot but the team just isn't clicking. As we all know, you can fire all of the players so sometimes it's the manager that has to go.  I'm not sure if you do the deed now after we get hammered by Houston or wait until the end of the season. My thinking is that September is the acid test. If the Twins perform and either sneak into the playoffs or win the division Baldelli gets one more year. If not, he is thanked for his contributions, offered another good position in the organization, and a different analytically oriented manager with more on field managerial experience replaces him. On balance that's what I would do but I have to say the option of firing him now in the hope that a new manager shakes things up is tempting. I just don't know who that new guy would be. 

[Battle ur tail off]

I don't think they fire him no matter what happens down the stretch here. He is their hand picked yes man. They would have to be let go to get rid of Rocco and that also won't happen. I just don't see any scenario he isn't back here next year.

 

[bean5302]

16 hours ago, CRF said:

I'm no Rocco fan, and I don't agree with a lot of what he does, or his decision making, but if I was going to say anything in his defense, it would be that I believe he's a "manager in training". He had zero managing experience before he became the Twins manager. He went from being a player, to three years as a roving minor league instructor and special assistant, to being a 1st base coach, and finally a major league field coordinator. Yes, sure he had to have picked up some knowledge about how to manage a ball club, but the point is...I think he was pretty green when he got here. Now, I don't remember who else Falvine considered for the job, but I think they basically rolled the dice on Baldelli, and hoped they would discover a diamond in the rough. I'm sure he came relatively cheap, as managers go too. Have we had some regular season success under Baldelli? Yep...but I don't really think he's learned all the skills and nuances that are needed to be a successful major league manager. A lot of big league managers bomb out in their first gig, then hit it big at the next stop, or even the stop after that. I really don't expect him to get canned, but for me personally, I'm ready for the next guy. Just my two cents.

If he hasn't learned his job after 4 years, he's not going to learn here.

[bean5302]

8 hours ago, Mark G said:

Now, I say this mostly tongue in cheek, but the idea is that a team will use the analytics to gain the competitive advantage.  But if all teams are using it now, then the team you are trying to gain the advantage on is, at the same time, getting the advantage on you.  So how can it be considered an advantage?     

 

4 hours ago, tfbw said:

Using analytics to remain competitive.

 

1 hour ago, Bigfork Twins Guy said:

Good point.  If everybody else is in on metrics maybe we should go opposite to foil them.  Like bunting to the open side of the infield once in awhile.

No. There's actually a potential competitive advantage in analytics. MLB teams don't use Fangraphs and Baseball Reference as their source for all data. Each MLB team has it's own proprietary metrics they've created.
Kevin Gausman has 4.8 fWAR this year, but only 2.3 bWAR.

Both metrics are "WAR" or Wins Above Replacement. They're designed to provide identical estimates of value; however, the actual figures are dramatically different. The Twins can have their own proprietary metrics which reflect something they thing is missing or being overcounted in existing published stats. If the Twins are smarter about this than other teams, their own WAR formula could allow them to find players who will excel in a Twins uniform without costing as much.

[CarpetGuy]

Agreed!  and learning to push an outside pitch to the opposite field, a la Arraez, Miranda, Gordon and Urshela.

[TwinsDr2021]

3 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

Most times when a team scores 3+ runs in an inning they win the game. What's the easiest way to score 3+ runs in an inning? It's not with hit and runs and stolen bases, it's with big flies. And that's why teams pay for power and not stolen bases.

In the last 13 games, the Twins are 5 - 8, and have scored 1, 0, 3, 2, 4, 9, 4, 2, 3, 4, 5 , 3  2 how are those 3 run homers working out for them?

 

[chpettit19]

3 minutes ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

In the last 13 games, the Twins are 5 - 8, and have scored 1, 0, 3, 2, 4, 9, 4, 2, 3, 4, 5 , 3  2 how are those 3 run homers working out for them?

 

Really poorly, obviously. What's your point? They're not hitting with runners in scoring position either so how is the "manufacturing runs" working out for them? When you're simply bad at hitting you're simply bad at hitting. And right now they're simply bad at hitting.

[Original_JB]

7 hours ago, rv78 said:

This = "I'd be surprised to find out the players don't understand the philosophy or the decisions Baldelli is making. They may not like it or agree with it, but that doesn't mean they don't comprehend the concept."

So if we take this a step further, if they don't like it or agree with it, then maybe that's why they are playing like they don't care. Last time I checked they get paid the same whether they win or lose. I think the players realize after getting their butts handed to them by the Dodgers and some of the other better teams that they are probably just playing for a paycheck and if they ground out, fly out or strike out verses getting a hit, oh well, I'm still getting paid. Who have been the best hitters this year? Arraez, who is playing for a batting title, and Miranda who is playing for a future. Both have something to play for besides a paycheck, the rest, not so much, especially if they don't like or agree with the philosophy. Watching them play it looks like they are just going through the motions. If they get a hit ok, if not, no big deal. Maybe they have gotten so use to grounding out into the shift or hitting lazy fly balls or striking out on pitches out of the zone that it doesn't bother them, that they expect it or have come to the conclusion that this is as good as they are. 

Thanks for saving me from essentially typing this very statement. Only thing I'll add is that I believe the "OK-edness" goes all the way up to the ownership.

[Boom Boom]

On 8/22/2022 at 12:38 PM, IndianaTwin said:

We'll also never know, but would yesterday's game have played out differently if Ryan isn't asked to start the seventh after a sixth inning with two walks, plus two hard-hit balls wrapped around a single that turned into a force out at second. 

I know it comes with the territory of being an MLB manager, but it feels like Rocco is damned if he does, damned if he doesn't when it comes to making pitching changes. 

Obviously there will be fans moaning about in-game decisions that don't work out, whether the starter was left in too long or pulled too early.

Every time a manager makes a pitching change he opens himself up for criticism.  And more + earlier pitching changes means a higher likelihood that one of those pitching changes will be a mistake.

[h2oface]

On 8/21/2022 at 11:04 AM, sfe306 said:

...... there is too much analytics, and no competition between players.  They are confused about his decisions nearly every game, as am I.  Automatically pulling pitchers for no reason.  Arraez not leading off every game is another one.  He's earned leadoff, and should be there 100% of the time. He'd be batting .375 if Baldelli would get out of his way.  Arraez is the team leader and the only one with swagger.  I could go on and on, but as a fan, I follow the games now as background noise.  The Twins have great players that are not allowed to excel. I like Baldelli as a person, but World Series winners do not manage like this. 

You may be on to something. And you may not. Either way, I like your take. I think they team isn't that confused. I think they all know that he is a puppet manager, in general, and the FO is the defacto manager. What they do baffles me more than what Baldelli does. Their disregard for quality pitching and the necessity of it, is the biggest disconnect. I certainly don't think Baldelli has lost the team. I think they are all, players and staff and FO, a bit arrogant and over confident to keep saying, time afer time, "we are better than this". Talk is cheap. And doesn't score runs or get the opponents batters out. Time to **** or get off the pot. Prove it. Time is running out.

[Otaknam]

Done with Rocco. Starters who pitch five strong innings, one run and 70 pitches and are removed in favor of a disastrous  bullpen. How does that make sense? The team has trouble scoring but on the rare occasion they get a base runner with speed they seldom hit and run or try to steal a base to try to make something happen. I cannot understand his slavish  dedication to analytics when it isn’t working. 

[Otaknam]

22 hours ago, Bigfork Twins Guy said:

Baldelli has Arraez lead off almost 100% off against right handers.  I think if you check Arraez's BA off left handers vs right handers you may decide that Baldelli is helping his batting average by sitting him or playing him lower in the order against left handers.  I love Luis but do not agree with your take here.

So if Rocco bats Arraez sixth against lefties it’s the same issue, only now he has the meat of the lineup possibly on base. Arraez is an on base machine who best fits in lead off IMO regardless of who is pitching. He will make the starter work to get him out and run the pitch count up early in the game. 

[Bigfork Twins Guy]

1 hour ago, Otaknam said:

So if Rocco bats Arraez sixth against lefties it’s the same issue, only now he has the meat of the lineup possibly on base. Arraez is an on base machine who best fits in lead off IMO regardless of who is pitching. He will make the starter work to get him out and run the pitch count up early in the game. 

I agree with you.  I was only making the point that he would not be hitting .375 as sfe306 said he would be if Baldelli let him hit leadoff against righties and lefties.

[SanoMustGo]

Bottom line, like Rocco or not, they don't have a playoff caliber lineup right now.  Probably won't until the start of next season(or a bit later in the season) His handling of the pitching staff however, is abysmal(might just be an organization decision)

[jmlease1]

I'm amused at this idea of Rocco Baldelli as some kind of professorial math nerd who only does what the spreadsheets tell him. Y'all do understand that he's been an uber-jock basically his entire life, right? Just because he's comfortable with analytics side of baseball doesn't mean he's not still in touch with what it means to be a generational athletic talent, because that's exactly who he was. 

He seems to do pretty well with the players, but we also know less than we have in a generation or more about what goes on in the locker room. Players are more careful about what they say, media has less access, and staff (especially the senior ones) say less and less as well. There hasn't been much to suggest that the team isn't playing hard for him, or that guys are unhappy with how they do things. They've been pretty open about process, so nothing should come as a surprise, and they've been pretty open to listening to the players as well.

[SanoMustGo]

4 minutes ago, jmlease1 said:

I'm amused at this idea of Rocco Baldelli as some kind of professorial math nerd who only does what the spreadsheets tell him. Y'all do understand that he's been an uber-jock basically his entire life, right? Just because he's comfortable with analytics side of baseball doesn't mean he's not still in touch with what it means to be a generational athletic talent, because that's exactly who he was. 

He seems to do pretty well with the players, but we also know less than we have in a generation or more about what goes on in the locker room. Players are more careful about what they say, media has less access, and staff (especially the senior ones) say less and less as well. There hasn't been much to suggest that the team isn't playing hard for him, or that guys are unhappy with how they do things. They've been pretty open about process, so nothing should come as a surprise, and they've been pretty open to listening to the players as well.

Some mangers have a better "feel"  for the game, and in general make better decisions.  Guys like Francona, a younger Larussa, Joe Madden, and a few others.  Rocco falls into the catagory of an average manager in my book, where most of the managers fall.  He is OK, but roster management is always going to be a challenge for a mid-market team like the Twins.  Unless they strike at rich with prospect development, mix in the right trades and FA signings, and above all have a moderate level of injuries(not the crap we've seen this season) this organization has very little chance of sustained success.  Unless you have a manger like Francona who is good enough to overcome SOME of the shortcomings.

[jmlease1]

1 minute ago, SanoMustGo said:

Some mangers have a better "feel"  for the game, and in general make better decisions.  Guys like Francona, a younger Larussa, Joe Madden, and a few others.  Rocco falls into the catagory of an average manager in my book, where most of the managers fall.  He is OK, but roster management is always going to be a challenge for a mid-market team like the Twins.  Unless they strike at rich with prospect development, mix in the right trades and FA signings, and above all have a moderate level of injuries(not the crap we've seen this season) this organization has very little chance of sustained success.  Unless you have a manger like Francona who is good enough to overcome SOME of the shortcomings.

I generally agree. I think there are only a handful of managers that are truly superior (and usually only a handful that are really bad) and most fall in the middle, especially when it comes to in-game decisions. A lot of what modern managing is relates to handling a clubhouse and the public usually doesn't have enough info to really see how well they handle that.

[RJA]

I don't think anyone posting on this site has the "inside scoop" on whether the Twins players like Rocco and respect Rocco, or dislike him and think he is not up to the job.  You certainly are not going to hear players like Buxton and Correa criticize him publicly.  It is not in the team's interest or their interest to do so.  We really have no way of knowing what is on their mind absent a huge blowup, and that doesn't happen very often.  So, we are all speculating here.  Having said that, I would say Baldelli is a new generation manager, who knows analytics, uses them and makes them available to the players.  On the other hand, he will never be Tom Kelly when it comes to managing a game.  Kelly was a master tactician even without analytics, and Rocco struggles with that IMHO.  If he made the decision to keep putting Pagan out there to lose games, he really screwed up.  What I don't know is to what extent he is "guided" by the front office in their daily meetings.  Quite frankly, as presently constituted, due to FO mistakes, lackluster performances, and injuries, this roster cannot compete effectively.  Baldelli may have issues, but right now he doesn't have the roster necessary to compete. 

[h2oface]

Joe Maddon is available, now.

[rwilfong86]

On 8/21/2022 at 1:04 PM, sfe306 said:

...... there is too much analytics, and no competition between players.  They are confused about his decisions nearly every game, as am I.  Automatically pulling pitchers for no reason.  Arraez not leading off every game is another one.  He's earned leadoff, and should be there 100% of the time. He'd be batting .375 if Baldelli would get out of his way.  Arraez is the team leader and the only one with swagger.  I could go on and on, but as a fan, I follow the games now as background noise.  The Twins have great players that are not allowed to excel. I like Baldelli as a person, but World Series winners do not manage like this. 

You're absolutely correct. I've heard multiple times on the broadcast from different ex-players that the inconsistency in the lineup really kills the players ability to find a rhythm.

[Whitey333]

Rocco has cost this team many wins this year with his poor lineup decisions, resting star players on the same day with next day being an off day, poor fundamentals, poor baserunning and lack of any sense of urgency.  My biggest beef with him is sticking to his game plan even if it means costing a game.  I'm still trying to learn the analytical game.  I think it's fine but to be used as a tool to help the team win.  Not a complete take it analytically approach or leave it.  I doubt that the players dislike him.  He is not a demanding manager at all. His laid back player friendly style and lifeless approach shows on the field.  Why wouldn't the players like him?  They obviously aren't held accountable for their listless play.

[Seth Stohs]

On 8/22/2022 at 4:13 PM, bean5302 said:

It's a pretty big leap to say the players are confused about Baldelli's decisions in game.

While Gray is obviously not happy with being pulled early, I don't see him acting pissed when Baldelli walks out to change pitchers as if he was totally blindsided. I'd be surprised to find out the players don't understand the philosophy or the decisions Baldelli is making. They may not like it or agree with it, but that doesn't mean they don't comprehend the concept.

Correct... 

Because this is an organizational philosophy, not a Baldelli philosophy. When they were recruiting Archer and Bundy and others, do we think they didn't understand the plan, the philosophies?

[Seth Stohs]

35 minutes ago, Whitey333 said:

 I doubt that the players dislike him.  He is not a demanding manager at all. His laid back player friendly style and lifeless approach shows on the field.  Why wouldn't the players like him?  They obviously aren't held accountable for their listless play.

Always curious what this "accountability" looks like... Is it getting benched? Is it getting screamed at publicly in the dugout? Is it bashing players through the media? Is it getting optioned or released? 

Is it bashing guys like Beckham for losing a ball in the lights? Is it bashing Jake Cave who is like option 8 in the outfield this year? 

I'm honestly just curious what this accountability thing looks like to us. What would be the 'right' approach? Tom Kelly barely moved or smiled on the bench? Ron Gardenhire yelled often. Both were successful. 

[GeorgiaBaller]

Gosh this is a pointless discussion.  The Twins deserve to be where they are right now.  Can you show me a pennant winning team that has no #1 pitcher, no left fielder, marginal catching talent and a bullpen dominated by minor league prospects?  And, an inconsistent lineup because of continuous injuries---to even your best 2 players.   Maybe as these prospects develop that we have see this year, in the bullpen and including Miranda, they develop into something more---but they deserve to be a 2nd or 3rd place team right now.  Cleveland is a better club.  Houston is far better.  Tampa Bay is much better when series count. LA, Mets, Atlanta and San Diego---much better.

The Rocco discussion boils down to one thing.   Like every other position, does he add value?  Is he a ++?  Does he motivate and challenge the team with the culture he puts in place and risks/challenges he takes them in the course of a game and over the entire season?  Winning managers push and take chances---they make a difference.  Does Rocco?  Jimmy Carter was a nice guy, too, but as POTUS?  

 If everything is built on Analytics, do you need a manager and what purpose is he serving?  The Analytics dept could just call down and tell the bench coach what moves to make every inning.   Its all laid out on a computer, right?  No, that's too extreme.  Analytics are valuable and are the base to be built on.  I love Billy Bean's story, but how many Pennants has Oakland won lately.  Coaches/Managers are in place to take the data and apply it situationally based on personnel, environment and function of the players on the field that night. This is still a people game.  For all of you that grew up with a joystick playing computer games with your remote friends--that may be hard to relate to.  Its not an old guy thing.  A good plant manager can come in and improve efficiency and output at a plant with the same facility and tools, when the guy before him led a floundering crew that didn't get orders out on time.  In the real world, differences are made when decisions are enacted situationally --considering soft and hard factors.  That goes for Sports, too.

Has Rocco done as well as anyone could with this roster and the ridiculously constant level of injuries?  Maybe so.   Could you plug Rocco into Atlanta or LA's roster and he be just as successful as Dave Roberts or Brian Snitker? I'm not as confident about that......

What Player does Rocco peg to for you?  Is he Mike Troutt or Jake Cave?  Max Scherzer or Dylan Bundy?

[Seth Stohs]

23 hours ago, RJA said:

On the other hand, he will never be Tom Kelly when it comes to managing a game.  Kelly was a master tactician even without analytics, and Rocco struggles with that IMHO.  If he made the decision to keep putting Pagan out there to lose games, he really screwed up.  What I don't know is to what extent he is "guided" by the front office in their daily meetings.  Quite frankly, as presently constituted, due to FO mistakes, lackluster performances, and injuries, this roster cannot compete effectively.  Baldelli may have issues, but right now he doesn't have the roster necessary to compete. 

Again, I appreciate all that Tom Kelly did. I certainly enjoyed those World Series championships. 

But, what made him a master tactician? I'm curious because he platooned (something Baldelli does). Kelly switched up the lineup (Kent Hrbek batted 4th against RHP, and 7th against LHP, just like Arraez bats leadoff against RHP and usually 6th against LHP). Pitching-wise, he did what other managers did at that time. He used the starter as long as possible and then pieced together the game to the closer. Nothing creative about that at the time. And when the Twins had a great roster, they won (87, 88, 91, 92), and when he didn't have a great roster, they were really, really bad. Right now, Baldelli's managing a roster that isn't very good because of a ton of injuries. 

The Kelly Way was credited for a lot of things, including the successful years in the '00s under Gardenhire when the team was blessed with talent again. But if that was the way to do it, why are NO teams doing some of what he did anymore. 

Again, just trying to understand the distinctions. Would we say that in some cases, Joe Torre didn't get the most out of his teams, even if they won 100 games? Maybe they should have won 120 games a year... Torre was considered a poor manager with the Mets, Meh with Atlanta and St. Louis. 

I would also add that the front offices likely stayed out of things much more then than now.  

[Seth Stohs]

2 minutes ago, GeorgiaBaller said:

Has Rocco done as well as anyone could with this roster and the ridiculously constant level of injuries?  Maybe so.   Could you plug Rocco into Atlanta or LA's roster and he be just as successful as Dave Roberts or Brian Snitker? I'm not as confident about that......

What Player does Rocco peg to for you?  Is he Mike Trout or Jake Cave?  Max Scherzer or Dylan Bundy?

@GeorgiaBaller, I think you and I could manage the Dodgers and get them to the playoffs. I honestly believe that. The only thing we're missing - or at least I am - is any sort of clout or track record in the game. Baldelli has that. So yes, talent matters. 

To the second paragraph... it takes more than a great, great player. Mike Trout has hardly even been to the playoffs in his career. Jake Cave has the same number of postseason hits as Trout. 

And pitching is even a bigger animal because having a couple of Max Scherzer's on your roster sure can make a manager look great. Let's be honest, if Scherzer (or Verlander) were on the Twins, it's not like Baldelli would feel any need to take him out after twice through the rotation. 

[Mike Sixel]

Before the year started, almost no one thought this team was a contender, even when healthy..... Now it's the manager that is the problem, not the talent or the injuries? At one point right before the trade deadline, someone here posted the twins would have the best record in the game with another manager. 

Rocco's teams have won the division twice, and are competitive this year. Last year they were bad. If I had to guess, those results are largely about talent, health, and luck, and partly about the manager.