Rocco Baldelli's future

[Cap'n Piranha]

25 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Percent chance they're willing to hire somebody who thinks outside their box? I'd put it at near zero based on the unwavering application of their philosophy across then entire roster + its usage. 

Like CHPettit, I am inclined to agree here as well (much as it pains me to say it).  Were Rocco to be fired, it's likely they would hire some other individual who speaks SABRmetrics, and will rely on them as the main source of data for decision making.  As such, it's very likely any Rocco replacement will be Rocco 2.0.

The only thing that gives me some pause is the hope that two supposedly smart guys in Falvey and Levine will realize that things aren't working right now, and will decide to change their modus operandi rather than continuing to pound their collective heads against the wall.  If they do, they'll still hire an analytics guy, but maybe an analytics guy that's going to be able to actually inspire and teach his players fundamentals at the same time, a couple things that I feel are just lacking on the current team.

[terrydactyls]

1 hour ago, Mortimerkenny21 said:

I now baseball is super statistics driven now, but I wish he would go with what we feel is playing with your gut & heart instead of looking at the numbers. 

I think this is a very revealing comment.  Rocco isn't doing what "we feel is playing with your gut & heart instead of looking at the numbers."  I read this as saying he should be fired because he doesn't do what the readers of an internet web site want him to do.  Is it possible that he might know more about baseball than the readers?  I guess not.

[bean5302]

The season's not nearly over. There's still 25% of the season left to play, minimum, with 123 of 162 games played right now. Technically, the Twins could play another 60 games this year if the won the World Series.

Would anybody be calling for Baldelli's job if
the Twins win the World Series? No.
they lose the World Series? No.
they lose the AL Championship Series? No.
they lose the AL Division Series? No.
they lose the Wildcard round, but at least win a game? No.
the lose the Wildcard round and are swept? Yes, some. 
they miss the playoffs entirely? Yes, many.
they finish under .500? Absolutely.

The way I see it, it's way too early to call the season a bust even though it's trending that way. Leaving a game in the 7th inning when your team is down 2 runs will miss out on a lot of fun and exciting come backs.
 

[Mortimerkenny21]

3 minutes ago, terrydactyls said:

Is it possible that he might know more about baseball than the readers?

Of course he knows more than fans and internet posters, It would be silly to imply otherwise. And I stated right after that I'm sure that's not the right answer anyways. Just we all have our thoughts and opinions and think they should do this or that, but yes the professional baseball manager is going to have far more knowledge. I'm not that dense. And I don't think he should be fired either. Not yet anyways.

[KirbyDome89]

6 minutes ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

Like CHPettit, I am inclined to agree here as well (much as it pains me to say it).  Were Rocco to be fired, it's likely they would hire some other individual who speaks SABRmetrics, and will rely on them as the main source of data for decision making.  As such, it's very likely any Rocco replacement will be Rocco 2.0.

The only thing that gives me some pause is the hope that two supposedly smart guys in Falvey and Levine will realize that things aren't working right now, and will decide to change their modus operandi rather than continuing to pound their collective heads against the wall.  If they do, they'll still hire an analytics guy, but maybe an analytics guy that's going to be able to actually inspire and teach his players fundamentals at the same time, a couple things that I feel are just lacking on the current team.

Data acquisition, analysis, and implementation all have to work in harmony. I think the Twins issue lies further down that chain. 

You're right, it falls to the FO and whether they're willing to admit some defeat and reassess. I don't see ownership being antsy and getting involved anytime soon a la 2016. 

Issues with fundamentals, approach, ect should be worked out in the minors. That, again, falls into FO territory. They're drafting players with particular skill sets and hiring the coaches who emphasize what they've deemed important. As for the inspirational ra ra stuff, eh, I've never subscribed to much of it. YMMV but that stuff only seems to come up when teams are performing very poorly, or very well. 

[Craig Arko]

I think all the managers should be replaced by robots. Robots having the likeness of Casey Stengel. 

[Linus]

Rocco won’t be fired as he is doing exactly what the FO wants him to do. I do not go for the idea that somehow the reason this horse crap pitching staff is lousy is due to how Rocco is handling them.  The one area I would criticize him is that the Twins are a fundamentally poor team. I think that probably falls on the manager. The rest of it is on Falvine. 

[Cap'n Piranha]

10 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Data acquisition, analysis, and implementation all have to work in harmony. I think the Twins issue lies further down that chain. 

You're right, it falls to the FO and whether they're willing to admit some defeat and reassess. I don't see ownership being antsy and getting involved anytime soon a la 2016. 

Issues with fundamentals, approach, ect should be worked out in the minors. That, again, falls into FO territory. They're drafting players with particular skill sets and hiring the coaches who emphasize what they've deemed important. As for the inspirational ra ra stuff, eh, I've never subscribed to much of it. YMMV but that stuff only seems to come up when teams are performing very poorly, or very well. 

I disagree on the fundamentals part--fundamentals need to be constantly worked on to remain at the highest level.  It's why every single professional sports team, even those at the highest levels, employ coaches whose job is to coach fundamentals.  Certainly players should arrive in the majors with a solid grasp of the fundamentals, but those need to be continually monitored, and corrected when they start to slide.

[RJA]

Three thoughts.  First, I suspect the FO is more involved in the actual management of the team than they should be.  So, as others have suggested, if you replace Rocco with another manager who toes the line, nothing is gained.  Second, Rocco has had a lot of injuries in the last few weeks which makes his lineup less than sparkling.  But, I think he also needs to be accountable for running Pagan out there time after time and mismanaging the pitching staff earlier in the year which, IMHO, cost them 3 or 4 games in the standings which sure hurts them right now.  Third, I can't see this FO replacing him.  I think they will give him one more year.  It had better be an active off season!

[Number3]

Rocco is no better or worse than most of the managers and the question is always who would you replace him with? Since TK ( and some found fault with him) the Twins managers have all been average or less than (See "I hate second place" Gardenhire). The biggest mistakes they make are when they "manage" too much. Failvey (and I mean Failvey and Levine have totally botched their responsibilities from a "framing" catcher to a $35mil per year SS not worth a third of that amount to a number 1 overall pick in the MLB draft who has barely and I mean barely seen the Target field several years down the road  to playing musical pitchers with the pitching staff to  Sano- Buxton being the core of the lineup to being the corpse of the lineup.

[lecroy24fan]

If Rocco gets fired it will mean that Falvine are also gone.

[KirbyDome89]

33 minutes ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

I disagree on the fundamentals part--fundamentals need to be constantly worked on to remain at the highest level.  It's why every single professional sports team, even those at the highest levels, employ coaches whose job is to coach fundamentals.  Certainly players should arrive in the majors with a solid grasp of the fundamentals, but those need to be continually monitored, and corrected when they start to slide.

Sure, I'm not saying players shouldn't continue to hone their craft. What I am saying is I'm not sure it's fair or realistic to expect players who've worked their way up through the minors without certain aspects of the game being emphasized, to suddenly start executing said aspects at a big league level. IMO that falls on the developmental staff, which I put squarely in the corner of the FO. 

[Mark G]

3 hours ago, terrydactyls said:

I think this is a very revealing comment.  Rocco isn't doing what "we feel is playing with your gut & heart instead of looking at the numbers."  I read this as saying he should be fired because he doesn't do what the readers of an internet web site want him to do.  Is it possible that he might know more about baseball than the readers?  I guess not.

Depends on the readers.    

I don't think anyone is arguing about his knowledge of the game, but that simply isn't enough.  Molitor knows a crap ton more about the game than all of us combined, and he got fired a year after being named MOY.  The manager's job is to get the most out of the talent he is given to work with.  That's it.  So the question boils down to: has Rocco gotten the most out of the players he has been given to work with?  It's easy to say yes when they are hitting 307 home runs, but the last two seasons a good argument can be made he has not.  That falls on him; it is part of the job, and every manager knows it.  If the pattern continues, he has to go, but I don't think that will be this year.  

[LastOnePicked]

4 hours ago, Squirrel said:

Replace him with whom? The FO will look for the same type of manager.

Maybe. Or maybe they now understand that Rocco lacks certain skills that another manager might have. But Rocco's work with the team is clearly not acceptable and not working, so there should be no fear in moving on. He's had four full years to grow into the position, and his teams have only gotten worse along the way.

[Cap'n Piranha]

2 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Sure, I'm not saying players shouldn't continue to hone their craft. What I am saying is I'm not sure it's fair or realistic to expect players who've worked their way up through the minors without certain aspects of the game being emphasized, to suddenly start executing said aspects at a big league level. IMO that falls on the developmental staff, which I put squarely in the corner of the FO. 

Ah, I see the distinction you're making here.  Yes, I agree.  You can't expect someone who's been coached to zig their whole career to suddenly be a proficient zagger.  Further agree that a focus on fundamentals at the MLB level alone is insufficient, and an organization-wide overhaul is necessary.

[FlyingFinn]

5 hours ago, roger said:

Jeffers was kept over Garver and Rortvedt because of his bat.  Well that didn’t work out.  

?? Garver, as with many older catchers, has injuries catching up to him. He has not caught much at all this year and will be a free agent after next year. Rortvedt is hitting .180 at AAA ball. I will take Jeffers in this scenario.

As for Rocco, I'm keeping him for another year, for now. My biggest problems with him are the incredible lack of fundamentals like base running and bunting plus not being prepared by having at least one coach in charge of the field and knowing that was going to be the 2nd visit to the mound the other night. Those are things not connected to the FO.

[Brandon]

Rocco is this generation's version of Gardenhire. too nice sometimes.  instead of leaving pitchers in too long he takes them out too early,  Something does need to click for this team and soon if they are going to compete this year.  They are still in it.

[ashbury]

I agree with others that you can hardly discuss Rocco without considering the FO, yet conversely I'm not going down that rabbit hole in a thread asking strictly about Rocco.

So if I were in Falvey or Levine's shoes I would be thinking seriously about changing managers.  I don't think Rocco's getting the most out of the roster anymore.  I don't expect I'd promote heir-apparent Jayce Tingler or anyone else currently in the organization - new brooms sweeping clean and all that. 

All but the most outstanding managers have a short shelf life, and replacing one with someone of a different personality and style can pay short term dividends.  I don't necessarily want a Billy Martin clone, but someone with more fire might impart renewed urgency to players such as Kepler. 

I would offer Rocco a front office role that doesn't oversee in any way the new manager, because I think he's a capable guy and can contribute in various ways and knows the team culture by now.  But maybe Rocco wants to remain on the field, and takes a bench coach job somewhere else that leads eventually to a new manager role.  And maybe he replaces some other team's Billy Martin clone who has worn out his welcome, and achieves success for a season or two by making the players there comfortable.  If he succeeds elsewhere it doesn't mean it was a mistake to part ways.  It all goes in cycles.

Managers are hired to be fired.

[RpR]

9 minutes ago, Brandon said:

Rocco is this generation's version of Gardenhire. too nice sometimes.  instead of leaving pitchers in too long he takes them out too early,  Something does need to click for this team and soon if they are going to compete this year.  They are still in it.

He was cursed with an influx of good veterans in 2019 which despite quite sub-par fielding , in places, gave him the Bomba Squad which covered up his deficiency as manager and other club short-comings, although the one loss to the Yankees by their supposed ace closer, fore shadowed the future.

[Nashvilletwin]

7 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

Tough crowd. Won the division in 19 and 20. Were terrible last year, and competitive this year.

I'm not sure what people expect, especially given the team they inherited.

And what did we do with those division wins……

[jkcarew]

The FO has whiffed quit a bit. Still, IMO, it’s much better to have continuity in the FO, than at manager…and I don’t see incompetence in the FO. Sometimes in the dugout all it takes is a change in tone/style…small stuff to click. Bottom line, I’d take about 75% of the managers in the league right now over Rocco. He has an excuse this year with the injuries, so I doubt anything happens.

[Minderbinder]

9 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

Rocco likely remains with the team for the 2023 season. I just don’t think there’s any urgency to make a change from ownership. It doesn’t look like he’s going to be the type of manager to set players up in situations where they over perform. 

Falvey and Levine’s seat should be hotter than Baldelli. 

Agreed.  The FO's moves have been head-scratchers.  But, I can't see chucking Rocco when the injury list (another entire subject altogether) is longer than the St. Paul whitepages.

[h2oface]

Joe Maddon!!

[rwilfong86]

1 hour ago, RpR said:

He was cursed with an influx of good veterans in 2019 which despite quite sub-par fielding , in places, gave him the Bomba Squad which covered up his deficiency as manager and other club short-comings, although the one loss to the Yankees by their supposed ace closer, fore shadowed the future.

2019 was several guys overperfoming and having career years, e.g. Garver, Rosario, Kepler with the home run numbers. 2020 was covid shortened and the Twins wouldn't have won the division had it been a 66 game season. 2021 was more indicative of Rocco’s management style and this season is starting to look like a 2021 repeat where the Twins finish 3rd somewhere around .500. All that to say Rocco doesn't have what it takes to be a manager with postseason success. He makes the same stupid decisions repeatedly and never learns from it.

[ICTwin25]

I don't know who would be a better replacement but that doesn't mean an alternative shouldn't be considered. Is Rocco a good manager? Honestly, I don't know. How much say does he really have and how much of it is controlled by the Front Office. The Front Office made good moves at the deadline by getting the pitchers needed. Since then, the offense has been horrific. 

The Twins can't hit lefties, can't beat good teams outside of the division, are dead last in steals, and the starters can't get through the batting lineup a 3rd time without giving up multiple runs. The players play, but I just don't feel confident in Rocco knowing we haven't improved in any of the above mentioned categories.

I would be ok with moving on from Rocco, unless Jim Pohlad thinks the issue is the Front Office. Things looked so bright at the end of May and then Royce Lewis got hurt and Wes Johnson left. I am still concerned they finish below .500

[wsnydes]

I don't see Rocco going anywhere unless the FO does...and I don't see that happening.  Ownership is and always has been patient, to a fault at times, and I don't see anyone getting fired at this point.  The FO was tasked with rebuilding the entire organization from the ground up.  That doesn't happen overnight.  That said, we're starting to see the fruits, and the lack thereof in instances, where that judgement time is coming.  But until that point is reached, I don't see anyone going anywhere.

[DocBauer]

Going to try and say all of my thoughts clearly and succinctly, even though they might not be popular. And for MY thoughts, I have to at least touch on the FO because I think they are tied to Rocco.

I largely love and support most everything the FO has done since day one in regard to drafts and the entire revamp of the milb system. I think they've mostly made very smart trades. But I've been critical when they've made mistakes, IMO. And without re-visiting this past offseason, I didn't hate the Bundy signing, but really didn't like the Archer signing. I really liked the idea of Cueto. That's been proven to be an error. I love the Gray trade, and the trade acquisitions. I hated not brining in a RH bat and trusting in Celestino. And I really like the potential of Celestino, but I wanted someone more experienced/proven. And I absolutely hated NOT adding a proven pen arm! All of this to say....

...Rocco has had to deal with the roster presented to him and do the best he can. So, bullet points:

1] Injuries have been extremely detrimental to the club. I just don't see how that can be argued. We can forever discuss Paddack...who might turn out great in the long run...but Winder, AK, Larnach, etc, the injuries have just compiled. Ever think, for a moment, that losing Garlick would be major? He filled a certain role. Depth became obliterated in late June, early July. I mean, Sands of all people was actually looking like a potential middle inning arm and gets hit on the arm by a hard liner. What happens next? When Cave is your 7th or 8th OF, how do you even construct a viable lineup?

2] The idea of just trusting in the pen on the cheap is smart if you can do it right. But ONE addition just wasn't smart! Now, it's nobody's fault that Alcala was injured. But it IS someone's fault that Pagan was allowed to turn a potential 8-10 game lead was turned in to a 2-3 game lead. Is that on Rocco or stubbornness from the FO? And while I have disagreed at times with Rocco's choices, he can only deal with what he has on hand.

3] Managing the TEAM on a daily basis is where I have issues with Rocco. I can question a few pen moves here and there, but he might be way more right than I am. But some silly base running and defensive miscues here and there make me wonder about concentrating on the basics. It's one thing to be a player's manager, but it's another thing....especially being a former player...to NOT work on the basics and drill things in to your players to do just do things right! Is that so much to ask?

4] We can talk all day about stretching SP out. The game has changed. Late in the season, Rocco has been clear about allowing opportunity to do so. But the pitchers have to respond! Is "saving" arms worthwhile? Is that on Rocco or the FO? I understand Archer being limited and Ryan as a rookie, but is there a point earlier in the season to bridge the gap? I suppose it goes back to the pen again.

5] Rocco is a former player, and young enough to remember what it's like to play the game. And he's actually done a few more bunts and such to try and make things happen. But when you are the worst team in baseball at advancing runners from 2B with less than 2 outs, why don't you try something different? Is Leon the ONLY bunter on the team? 

6] HATE my opinion or not, I think the FO and Rocco are still "learning on the job". The FO has rebuilt the system the system, but are still in the "oh crap, we we need to look at THIS as a mistake. And Rocco needs to trust in himself more as a former player to just trust his gut as that former player to stick with a pitcher earlier in the year, or bunt to move a runner when the offense is struggling, or hit and run, etc. 

I think the best thing Rocco can do is quit being a "manager" every once in a while and just remember what it's like to be a "ballplayer". DRILL your team once in a while. You often win due to the small things. If you don't like the team you've been given, then have the guts to tell the FO what you need! It took until late July  before he stated he wanted some long relief options. Duh! Is that on Rocco or the FO?

Rocco is going nowhere for 2023. Again, as much as nobody wants to hear it, I think Rocco and the FO are learning and growing together. And if they can take everything they've seen in 2022, they have  an opportunity to build a great 2023. The FO has an opportunity to add. Rocco has the opportunity to grow from everything from pitching handling to lineups and approach. That doesn't happen? Changes will have to be made.

 

[Mike Sixel]

5 hours ago, Nashvilletwin said:

And what did we do with those division wins……

Would you fire a manager that won the division?

[Richie the Rally Goat]

10 hours ago, DocBauer said:

Going to try and say all of my thoughts clearly and succinctly, even though they might not be popular. And for MY thoughts, I have to at least touch on the FO because I think they are tied to Rocco.

I largely love and support most everything the FO has done since day one in regard to drafts and the entire revamp of the milb system. I think they've mostly made very smart trades. But I've been critical when they've made mistakes, IMO. And without re-visiting this past offseason, I didn't hate the Bundy signing, but really didn't like the Archer signing. I really liked the idea of Cueto. That's been proven to be an error. I love the Gray trade, and the trade acquisitions. I hated not brining in a RH bat and trusting in Celestino. And I really like the potential of Celestino, but I wanted someone more experienced/proven. And I absolutely hated NOT adding a proven pen arm! All of this to say....

...Rocco has had to deal with the roster presented to him and do the best he can. So, bullet points:

1] Injuries have been extremely detrimental to the club. I just don't see how that can be argued. We can forever discuss Paddack...who might turn out great in the long run...but Winder, AK, Larnach, etc, the injuries have just compiled. Ever think, for a moment, that losing Garlick would be major? He filled a certain role. Depth became obliterated in late June, early July. I mean, Sands of all people was actually looking like a potential middle inning arm and gets hit on the arm by a hard liner. What happens next? When Cave is your 7th or 8th OF, how do you even construct a viable lineup?

2] The idea of just trusting in the pen on the cheap is smart if you can do it right. But ONE addition just wasn't smart! Now, it's nobody's fault that Alcala was injured. But it IS someone's fault that Pagan was allowed to turn a potential 8-10 game lead was turned in to a 2-3 game lead. Is that on Rocco or stubbornness from the FO? And while I have disagreed at times with Rocco's choices, he can only deal with what he has on hand.

3] Managing the TEAM on a daily basis is where I have issues with Rocco. I can question a few pen moves here and there, but he might be way more right than I am. But some silly base running and defensive miscues here and there make me wonder about concentrating on the basics. It's one thing to be a player's manager, but it's another thing....especially being a former player...to NOT work on the basics and drill things in to your players to do just do things right! Is that so much to ask?

4] We can talk all day about stretching SP out. The game has changed. Late in the season, Rocco has been clear about allowing opportunity to do so. But the pitchers have to respond! Is "saving" arms worthwhile? Is that on Rocco or the FO? I understand Archer being limited and Ryan as a rookie, but is there a point earlier in the season to bridge the gap? I suppose it goes back to the pen again.

5] Rocco is a former player, and young enough to remember what it's like to play the game. And he's actually done a few more bunts and such to try and make things happen. But when you are the worst team in baseball at advancing runners from 2B with less than 2 outs, why don't you try something different? Is Leon the ONLY bunter on the team? 

6] HATE my opinion or not, I think the FO and Rocco are still "learning on the job". The FO has rebuilt the system the system, but are still in the "oh crap, we we need to look at THIS as a mistake. And Rocco needs to trust in himself more as a former player to just trust his gut as that former player to stick with a pitcher earlier in the year, or bunt to move a runner when the offense is struggling, or hit and run, etc. 

I think the best thing Rocco can do is quit being a "manager" every once in a while and just remember what it's like to be a "ballplayer". DRILL your team once in a while. You often win due to the small things. If you don't like the team you've been given, then have the guts to tell the FO what you need! It took until late July  before he stated he wanted some long relief options. Duh! Is that on Rocco or the FO?

Rocco is going nowhere for 2023. Again, as much as nobody wants to hear it, I think Rocco and the FO are learning and growing together. And if they can take everything they've seen in 2022, they have  an opportunity to build a great 2023. The FO has an opportunity to add. Rocco has the opportunity to grow from everything from pitching handling to lineups and approach. That doesn't happen? Changes will have to be made.

 

I agree with your post almost entirely, but I have some perspective differences.

it’s clear Rocco has to manage pitching differently than I want him to. The starters were a triage due to the FO’s mismanagement in the off-season (and prior off-seasons). It seems that many of us at TD agree on this point, and would like the starters to go deeper, the bullpen to be less taxed, but they just don’t have the horses. Seems like we agree on this point.

The Selig ball, designed to increase scoring by increasing home runs had been in place for 15 years or more. The specter of Bonds, McGuire and Sosa loomed over baseball until the Manfred ball. Player coaching had been centered around fly balls and pull-centric hitting. That includes fielding, and situational hitting.

Rocco can’t just drill MLB players in 2 off seasons enough to undo 10 years of coaching from High school through several years of minor league ball and other organizations coaching too.

Rocco doesn’t call for small ball situational plays because they haven’t been coached heavily like they were when I was in highschool.

Rocco has to work with the roster he has. As we saw in news articles, Rocco and the FO are stressing baserunning and steals in the minors this year. They’re adjusting to the Manfred ball becoming permanent. That takes a few years.

I like Rocco as a manager, but unlike last year, this team seems to have gotten flat during the August doldrums. If he can’t get this team to snap out of it quick, the FO needs to look at options. I doubt they find better ones, but they need to look.

[Nine of twelve]

21 hours ago, Squirrel said:

Replace him with whom? 

This is the true crux of the matter. It's easy to fire a manager. It's far more difficult to hire one. If a current employee in a high-level position is going to be let go it's crucial that management has identified qualities that are mandatory for a replacement and, further, has identified an available person to step into that role. Otherwise there is a good chance that the organization will be no better off afterward. So if you think Baldelli should be fired, that's fine. But it's an empty opinion unless you have a specific replacement in mind.