Grading Rocco Baldelli’s First Losing Season

47 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

To be fair when the pressure was on Gardy teams in the early 2000s they choked too. This playoff losing streak didn't start under Rocco.

True, but when Rocco's Twins can play a postseason series the way Gardy's Twins did against the A's in 2002, then I'm inclined to give him more slack. And at least Gardy's teams claimed a few postseason victories from the Yankees - and in NYC, no less.

Again, I wanted Gardy gone even a year before he was fired. I'm just saying that Rocco's teams haven't even hit Gardy's low level of postseason success. In fact, they're not even remotely close.

4 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

That's fair. And even more evidence that managing in today's game is different than it was even 10 or 15 years ago. People calling for Rocco to be TK, LaRussa, Bobby Cox, etc. are asking for the wrong thing. It's not how things are done anymore,

The same is true for all professional sports leagues - this generation of players is the kind that isn't motivated by the "old school ass chewing" manager. When there are cases where the ass chewing is deserved, it's not coming from the managers but rather the veteran players. That case of Machado ripping into Tatis Jr. a few weeks ago is a perfect example: 15 - 20 - 30 years ago it would have been the role of the manager to keep an iron fist on their players; today most teams lean on veteran players to be the clubhouse / bench leaders.

46 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

They won 93 games and the division. I don't know how that can be considered anything other than really good.

Agreed. Plus, they had devastating months-long injuries to multiple stars - any one of those injuries could have derailed the season. Have to give credit where credit is due to LaRussa. Now we'll see what impact he may have on their postseason run.

16 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

People calling for Rocco to be TK, LaRussa, Bobby Cox, etc. are asking for the wrong thing. It's not how things are done anymore,

I'm asking this genuinely and not at all combatively: what should fans be asking for from a Twins manager in this era, and how do we know if we're getting it?

I keep hearing the idea that the Twins struggled in the playoffs under Baldelli because their offensive stars "underperformed." I've heard that this year was terrible because young players "underperformed" or "weren't ready." If the issue isn't the players' overall talent or ability, then isn't underperformance a managerial issue?

If that's not the issue, then it's roster construction. And if after 5 years this FO can't construct a roster with the talent to win, why would we want them to stay?

I know I'm cranky, but the buck has to stop somewhere at some point, doesn't it?

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

Many of the complaints about Rocco are really complaints about analytics and where the world of baseball is going. The Twins don't manage their pitching staff much differently than any other club. Jose Berrios wasn't 2nd in the AL in innings because he threw 9 innings every game for the Jays the last 2 months, Rocco let him throw when he was being successful. The Twins clearly had a plan to limit starter innings and rotate pen arms between AAA and the majors early in the season after coming off a 60 game season. These constant complaints about the Twins pulling starters early simply aren't based in reality and are getting really old. The Twins manage their starters the same way as basically everyone else. They just didn't have very good starters so they couldn't let them go as long. And if I'm remembering correctly Colome got 5 save opportunities early before being pulled from that role. Can we quit acting like Rocco had him out there for 15 blown saves or something crazy? Colome had a long track record of major league success coming into the season. 5 early high leverage situation chances is not unreasonable for a guy with his track record.

And it's impossible for us to speak to what kind of leader he is. I haven't heard a single negative thing said about him from any current or former players (that played under him). We have no idea what goes on in the clubhouse. I agree that I prefer managers to have a little more fire than he does (it's uncomfortable watching him argue and try to get kicked out of a game, he can't even get riled up when he's trying to get booted), but to suggest he's failing at leading the clubhouse is 100% speculation with no way for any of us on here to really know.

I think this is quite right.   And anyone who thinks the pitch counts aren't mandated by ownership is kidding her/himself.   Pitch counts amount to insanely big savings for owners, period.    That's why they're enforced by Rocco and literally every single other manager in MLB.

I think the C/C- is justified based on what Baldelli did outside of the player issues he had to deal with by bad FA signings. He seems to have a hard time shifting when things don't go according to plan. This lack of flexibility is the opposite of what a manager should do; the manager needs to adjust to the talent and performance, not the other way around (same problem with Zimmer). Two examples:

(1) Colome showed early that he wasn't ready to be the closer. Baldelli said it was closer by committee and would use matchups and performance. Still, he decided to ride Colome as a closer after he didn't perform and never went to closer by committee. Colome in April and May is one of the main reasons this season went off the rails but Baldelli didn't see it happening and adjust. He also seems to hew to that hackneyed notion that relief pitchers need to "know their roles" and have consistent roles. Horse feathers. Good relief pitchers can adjust to different situations. If ours can't, they aren't good. Bad, very bad at adjusting to the facts on the ground this year.  

(2) The season was over by May 30, really over by June 30. After that, it was time to play the younger guys and see what we had for next year. He did some of that, but.... Why Simmons at SS all season? Why not try Polanco and Gordon on an every day basis? Why Colome as the closer again in August and September? Why not Alcala? Why even play Cave or Astudillo (or for that matter Refsnyder or Kepler even)? At least the first 2 of those 4 will not be with the Twins in 2022. His primary goal post 6/15 or so should have been to evaluate guys for next year. Instead, he seemed fixed in his ways and overly focused on short term wins over longer term development. As a result, we aren't as prepared for the off season as we could be. 

I think Baldelli has the possibility of being a good MLB manager. By that, I mean one who can adjust on the fly and change philosophies to match the talent he's given, all while keeping everyone loose and performing. He did not do the first part of that this year. Still, he seems to have both the ear and respect of the team and he did keep them competing in a lost season. Hopefully he's learned from his mistakes and can be more flexible going forward. If he can't, he needs to be replaced. 

Facts: The team was picked to win the division by most analysts, including those from outside of MN. The team finished last in the division. Baldelli has to take part of the blame for that. 

His team kept fighting and actually wasn't half bad after the deadline. That's a better result than we've seen from *ahem* a few former managers during losing seasons, and I think it generally points to Baldelli's quality as a manager.

I do think that it's kind of hard to grade this season as anything more than incomplete, though. It'll be interesting to see how the manager responds to any further adversity next year.

I’ll give him an A+, just to see how people react. 

To me Baldelli is an avatar for hyper-analytics, and so I tend to take out my general frustration on the decline of baseball on Baldelli himself. I realize this is a bit unfair because he strikes me as a decent human being, and he certainly didn't come up with the hyper-analytics approach himself, but I do think he is a horrible baseball manager.

I might be done with baseball because of Baldelli and this front office. He has zero feel for the human side of management - though I think "Maggi-gate" has been greatly overblown, that's a nice small illustration of this. Data is a good thing, in general, but a dependence on it to the extent that Baldelli has is maddening. There is a way to combine data and a more gut-feel/holistic approach to managing. Baldelli ain't it. 

It's so widespread that my enthusiasm for the game is really waning. I'm really not sure if I'm going to be renewing MLB TV next year. I realized after midnight last night that I missed the BOS-NY wild card game and don't plan on watching much of the playoffs. I'm rooting for the White Sox as I see LaRussa winning a WS as a possible corrective against hyper-analytics (which is wild, considering LaRussa was *the* embodiment of new school not that long ago). But I don't see the Sox making a run, really. 

I don't do letter grades, so let's just call it "Driving Me Away from the Sport."

7 hours ago, D.C Twins said:

Rocco seems like a nice and knowledgeable dude. I think he works hard, prepares, and takes his job seriously. 

BUT, he is not great at making snap decisions in the moment during games and is prone to overthinking things. 

He is also not a great 'leader of men.' There is no fire or passion displayed or nuanced variance in his player approach to adjust to what his team may need at a given time (In response to the inevitable "you are not in the locker room," there has been absolutely no indication from media/players that he is any different behind closed doors)

Unfortunately those are important traits for a successful manager. He was exposed by the tragic loss of Bell and the departure of his initial hitting coach.

I'll give you all a thought experiment... when Rocco is eventually fired (and he will be).... do you think he will ever have another MLB manager job? If the answer is 'no' then he probably isn't the best choice for us now.

What Tony L did with Chicago this year is no accident. A good manager shows up in results.

I think Rocco would be fantastic as a bench coach or leading an analytics department, just not as an MLB manager

I believe most of Baldelli's early success came from his coaching staff Sheldon (later Bell) bench coach; Johnson, pitching coach ; Rowson, hitting coach and catching coach (forgot his name). Their success at their jobs outweighed any Baldelli's short comings. 2021 only Johnson has remained.

Baldelli's stubbornness of insisting that Cave is a capable CF has cost Twins tons of wins. Baldelli not getting Maggi in a game in a lost season, shows me that he doesn't have that sense of importance of building players confidence when needed. Broxton is another case of point. Broxton, a 5 tool potential CF that had a very good spring training. Instead of seeing Broxton potential & need of encouragement he sent him out to cool off & lost that opportunity. He chose an average 4th OF which had a terrible spring training (Cave) instead. That decision proved devastating,  backtracking he threw non-CFs to learn on the fly or prematurely experiment w/ Celestino. Refusing Broxton is the main nail in the coffin of this season.

2nd nail is the failure to see the need of relying on long relief. Coming off a shortened season where some pitchers didn't even pitch. The emphasis should have been on long relief to relieve the load on starters (especially when our starters normally can't pitch over 5) & short relief. Dobnak & Thorpe had successful spring training which would have been beneficial. Baldelli instead went & put his trust solely on our weak starting rotation and failing bull pen (from spring training). He used Dobnak all wrong & tried to transform him on the fly.

I give Baldelli a D grade. Also putting the blame on FO and present coaching staff.  Hind sight I'd rather have promoted Sheldon and Rowson and let Baldelli go than let them go.

I am not going to grade him. But I will make two comments.

1.    This team plays fundamentally poor baseball. Some is mental from a seeming disregard for basics, ie, cutoff men and throwing to the correct base. Some seems a lack of focus, lollygagging throws in the infield.

2.    Analytics? Analytics have their place, and yes everyone uses them. But, and there is always a but, turning the game over to your BP in the  6th is fine, if you have 4 capable RP available and healthy.  Just turning it over on some days when your already suspect pen is deleted by usage or injury isn’t managing, it’s reading a spreadsheet. I did see that later in the year he opened the playbook up and bunted and ran on occasion trying to generate some scoring opportunities. Yes, the book says a 3 run homer or two run double is more productive. But someone better be hitting them in that case.

I thought Rocco got dealt a poor hand this season due to injuries, FO mistakes, and subpar years by some players, possibly due to some of those players being over hyped? So there were limits to what he could do. No matter the cause, he didn’t exceed expectations. 
 

BTW, any conversation that Rocco is a players manager has to take into consideration the Maggi situation. Absolutely bush league!! It would make me hesitant to buy a used car from him! 

The team has done pretty well with Buxton on the field, so I think that makes it harder to evaluate.  The dumb extra inning rule exposed an ice cold closer and poor depth behind him.  A team with some bad pieces can sometimes not gel.  To me its kind of a C grade but maybe he handled things really well behind closed doors with covid, vaccines, etc. 

The Twins were a terrible defensive team and not much better than that fundamentally. You can not be a good team without that. That is on Rocco. We saw many throws from the outfield go to the wrong base or miss cutoff men completely. Runners then advancing extra bases. This gives teams extra outs, make our pitchers face extra hitters and give teams extra runs. That is a major failure by him and his staff. All the rest I can live with because a lot of it is subjective. For that reason I feel the manager failed this season.

41 minutes ago, stringer bell said:

I'll start by pointing out that hindsight is 20-20. Particularly among position players, things usually even out in the course of a full year. Baldelli started the season with Donaldson injured in the first inning and a bunch of experienced position players not hitting including Garver, Sanó, Polanco and Kepler, as well as Cave, who due to injuries got a lot of playing time in the crucial first six weeks. Rocco stuck with all of them, which makes sense. Some guys came out of it, a couple namely Kepler and Cave, did not. Simmons was so anemic on offense, that his very good defense was negated by being a black hole at the bottom of the order. On the pitching side, Columé was dreadful, but guys like Duffey, Alcala and Thielbar weren't getting crucial outs. All four of those guys came out of it to a degree, although Columé was barely passable all season as a bullpen arm. In the rotation, Happ and Shoemaker started April with better than acceptable numbers, but both were beyond bad after their first few starts. The expected starting pitcher depth didn't develop as planned--Dobnak got knocked around and was injured, Duran wasn't great in AAA and got injured, Balazavic was injured immediately and inconsistent at Double A and so starts were given to Ober (success!) Barnes, Jax and Albers, none of whom were expected to contribute this year or maybe ever. Canterino, Winder and Enlow were all injured along with the aforementioned Duran so the high ceiling guys did not move up the ladder as anticipated. I think those things were largely out of Baldelli's control. Add in injuries to Buxton, who missed 100 games, and Garver, who missed more than 50, and it can be understood that maybe they wouldn't win the division or make the playoffs. 

I didn't like some of Rocco's decisions, but he had a roster with no real backup shortstop and bench players who are bat-first and mostly slow. As far as pitching decisions go, I would have liked to see the starters challenged to pitch a sixth or seventh inning more often, but I understand the concern that there isn't much in the tank after facing 18-20 hitters with max-effort fastballs and breaking balls and the possibility of injury does go up at some point. 

If I am grading the manager, I'd give him a C, which is average. I think the front office deserves a worse mark in providing talent for the major league team.

Agreed. This is why it's so hard to evaluate Rocco. 

49 minutes ago, Squirrel said:

This is called trolling. If you have reasons for the A+, then let's hear it, otherwise ... not a good look, detracts from the topic and actually demeans what you might really think

It’s just a joke…

The Bad....how completely lacking the team was in fundamentals - bunting, baserunning, defensive mistakes, etc..  Just a poor fundamental team.  Somewhere Tom Kelly is going crazy watching this team

10 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

Winning 93 games in the worst division in baseball with one of the most talented teams in the league is supposed to be impressive? There were 4 teams under .500 in the central and the great Tony L couldn't manage to win 100 games. I don't think he's a great example.

Umm... We were considered to be equally talented at the beginning of the year...so...yeah...

Tony L and the White Sox had a fantastic season and made more than the expected progression with their youngish team.

Us on the other hand wildly under performed, especially when the games actually mattered.

During that stretch Rocco made obvious mistakes and mismanaged his bullpen, all while not deviating from his robotic demeanor.

Again, Tony L has won with multiple MLB teams over decades. Rocco will never be a MLB manager again. You are right... Tony L is not a great example...he is an AMAZINGLY FANTASTIC example

10 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

It is good. I'd obviously prefer that result to the results we got from the Twins. But the suggestion that his angry old man managing style is the reason they got results seems far fetched to me. Does winning 93 games when playing 76 division games against under .500 teams seem like he was dragging them to greatness with his fire and brimstone? The other poster was suggesting that managers need to be emotional and angry like Tony L to succeed and I'd argue the White Sox underperformed their talent level. Would Rocco have won more than 93 games with them? Who knows. But suggesting that if Rocco was more Tony L this Twins season would've played out better is ridiculous to me.

Um... 'fire and passion' is not the the same as 'fire and brimstone....emotional and angry', but thanks for playing!

Most great leaders have a healthy dose of charisma and are able to adjust their approach and intensity to match what different players (employees, soldiers etc) need (not necessarily think they want at the time) in different situations.

Rocco has not demonstrated this. Again, just curious, would you put any money on Rocco ever having another MLB manager position in the future?

I keep hearing and reading that "today's game" needs a FO like Falvine and managers that look at the analytics before they go to the rest room, much less make out a line up card or make a pitching change.  I would respectfully disagree; the game hasn't changed at all.  Same fields, same mounds, same bases, same distances, etc. etc. etc.  What has changed is we have a generation that thinks the computer knows more about the game than the participants; kind of like playing chess against a computer to see if you can beat it.  So who (what?) am I giving the grade to?  Rocco has been pretty up front about the fact that his analytics show that giving an out for a base (sacrifice) doesn't meet the percentages.  Neither does bunting for hits, stealing bases, or at least attempting to, on a regular basis (did I get bases and basis in the right places?), the hit and run, and other old school offense that keeps the defense on their toes and does not allow it to predict us with certainty.  As such, I have no idea what grade to give the computer, if that is what is managing the team.  I give Rocco a D- for allowing the computer to dictate the game, rather than using his wits and knowledge. ( I shudder to think that maybe he is using his wits and knowledge )  He needs to get back to using the whole field, all offensive tools in the shed, and leaving the computer once in a while and going with players strengths, not grooming half the team to play half the positions on the field and calling it flexibility.  Gauge your BP and slot them into roles, so they know what to prepare for game in and game out, instead of always wondering who is up when the phone rings.  Pick a player you trust the most and make him your lead off man, period.  I could go on but you get the point.

2022 can't come soon enough for me, as I miss baseball when it isn't here.  But I have no idea how much hope to hold out with this trio; they don't seem to care what we think.  At least it is good we care what they think, I guess.  We should know that by April.  Let's hope it is worth the wait.  

Don't like alot of Rocco's decisions.  Hard to evaluate when 2020 was a lost year, and Twins needed their young pitching to develop.  We are now a year or two away from seeing the fruits of the pitching coming.  Hope it is good or it will all be a waste.  

Would give Rocco a D+ and feel the best thing this team can do is show him the door and put Rowson in as manager.  He seems to connect at least with the hitters.  Only defense is the lack of a bench coach exposed issues that had been covered.  

For those of you that thought Rocco deserved a grade better than D-, I don't understand you.  I don't understand why you make excuses for him.  Why settle for the same old failure and disappointment?  How can you watch a game and say he is what they need to be a winner?  Rocco is dreadful and it saddens me that not enough fans see that.  Because until there is consensus on his poor management, we are doomed to more crappy baseball.   

Yes, the front office has been terrible, and share the blame for this season and the next few, (as there are going to be more of the same).  But that is no excuse for being terrible at his job on a nightly basis. The list is long of things he is poor at.  Many were mentioned in previous posts.   I've never seen any Twins manager look so clueless as I do now looking at Rocco. (he is worse than Ray Miller at this point).  BTW, I've been watching since 1972.  The list of things he is actually good at is extremely small.  The only one that I can think of is that he is a good interviewer.  How else could he have convinced anyone to hire him?  

Using injuries as an excuse is tiresome.  Giving him a good grade in the second half when all the games were meaningless, is stupid.  He was one of the primary reasons their season was over after 30-45 days in the first place.  

To say managers are overrated in their significance to success/failure is also off the mark.  If they don't matter, why even have them?  Why not grab someone out of the crowd to manage?  In fact, they do matter.  Many pennant races are determined by a few games.  Certainly you can't suggest that poor game management decisions couldn't cost a team a title. 

Baseball, as in life, you are supposed to learn from your mistakes.  Rocco simply doesn't. 

If you want to blame the players, the front office for picking those players, fine, I would agree.  But the Tigers, Royals and Indians didn't have good players either, and they were better that we were.  Rocco is a difference maker, in that he makes the Twins even worse.  Just think about it, the Twins couldn't be competitive in baseball's worse division, the Comedy Central. 

The Twins, in their current management situation have about as much chance of a title as the Detroit Lions have of winning a Super Bowl.  I want my kids to see competent baseball and a hope of winning a single playoff game.  Every year with Rocco is another year wasted.

Grade: F

If I were in a crowded theatre, I'd still yell "Fire".

5 hours ago, TwinsChupacabra said:

Baseball, as in life, you are supposed to learn from your mistakes.  Rocco simply doesn't. 

Exactly, he has been making the same in game decision mistakes since he got here

He got bailed out by a team that set the homer record in 2019 and a division that had two teams lose 100 games., how hard is it to win a division when you have 5 guys hit over 30 homers, 7 hit over 20, 11 hit over 10. Odo started the way he did,

He again got bailed out in 20202, by a short season and another starting pitcher off to an amazing start.

2021 he didn't have an lineup going crazy or a amazing pitcher, basically everything that could go wrong from the players did, and he still made the same crappy in game decisions.

Not blaming this on Rocco, but it is really hard watching baseball when a left handed batter walks up to the plate and the whole left side of the infield is open and that player doesn't even attempt to go the opposite way,

20 minutes ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

Exactly, he has been making the same in game decision mistakes since he got here

He got bailed out by a team that set the homer record in 2019 and a division that had two teams lose 100 games., how hard is it to win a division when you have 5 guys hit over 30 homers, 7 hit over 20, 11 hit over 10. Odo started the way he did,

He again got bailed out in 20202, by a short season and another starting pitcher off to an amazing start.

2021 he didn't have an lineup going crazy or a amazing pitcher, basically everything that could go wrong from the players did, and he still made the same crappy in game decisions.

Not blaming this on Rocco, but it is really hard watching baseball when a left handed batter walks up to the plate and the whole left side of the infield is open and that player doesn't even attempt to go the opposite way,

Good analysis.  But I will have no problem blaming Rocco for allowing hitters (more than one, but kepler comes to mind) to stubbornly hit right into the shift all season.  That is either an instruction or permission, and I really don't care which; someone has to step up and force the issue or it never gets better and Rocco won't.  

You know, it is fun to read the NY Post and how they critique the Yankees.  They talk about the same shortcomings, and how the general manager and manager may or may not be back and should they or shouldn't they be.  They talk about needing to upgrade SS, the bullpen, etc.  And they won 92 games!!  What do we hear about?  Changing hitting coaches and relegating others to "player development" roles.  One can only guess how many of those there are buried in this organization.  I do not anticipate Mr. P making any major shakeups; he allows himself one a century, and this was it, so I will not hold my breath.  I also am not betting the farm on him laying out enough payroll to meet the immediate needs, hoping his farm can provide the pieces that are missing.  I may be wrong, I have been before.  As a matter of fact, I can still remember the time I was.  But unless I am, we may be waiting a while for better days.