Nashvilletwin

I see and like the logic, but this roster is essentially rolling out last year’s failed effort with Maeda back, a new backup C and a cheap reliever. Is this the “hey, but we were injured” plan? Or is it the “our manager will be better next year” plan? Should we really expect this team to contend?

Is there any evidence that sticking with this leadership group and their “process” will result in: a) playing with better fundamentals; b) making better in-game managerial/coaching staff decisions; c) maximizing the development of our young players once they make the show; and/or d) creating the confidence to beat better teams? I don’t see any, but maybe some of my fellow TDers do. Regardless, unless this team improves substantively in these areas, there is no reason why these Twins, or any mid-market team for that matter, should be expected to contend (even if a CC type FA is added). Here’s hoping they turn things around.

Could Camargo be our #2 catcher at the moment?

Questions for all of my fellow TDers. Given the available evidence and the announcements re keeping the coaching staff and firing the trainer: 1. Should we expect this team to play better (better than average at least) fundamental baseball? 2. Will our manager, through his lineup and in game decisions, be responsible for more more net wins or losses vis-a-vis other managers next season? 3. Independent of health, are you confident that this coaching staff will be able to develop the young players on the team to the best of the players’ abilities? 4. Will this team develop the mental fortitude to compete against both leagues’ best teams, as well as specific AL teams such as the Yankees, Astros, and, now unfortunately, the Guardians? 5. Is the health of the players solely a function of the trainer and associated staff, completely independent of the manager and his coaching staff? Please answer objectively - free of bias and affections. (Not that anyone cares, but my answers are five no’s. Without significant improvement in each of those areas, expectations should be tempered for next year. I hope I’m wrong and the retained coaching staff plus the new trainer can make big strides. I just don’t see the evidence pointing to that likelihood - I’m sure others must, including the Pohlads).

Very few knowns and lots of unknowns at this point. There are so many ways this club could go. Knowns: Arraez, Miranda, Gordon (btw, it’s unclear what position each of those will play), Jeffers, Gray, Ryan, Ober, Duran, Jax, and Thielbar. That’s pretty much it. Oh, add Rocco too (for better or worse it seems to be the case), Unknowns: Buxton (his true availability). Kepler and Larnach (availability and performance). Celestino and Wallner (true major leaguers?). Kepler and Polanco (keep or trade). Urshela (tender or allow to leave). SS (sign one of the big four or wait for Lewis/Lee). 2nd catcher (internal options don’t seem ready/able). DH/COF RH bat (a need, especially given Buxton’s situation). Mahle, Paddock and Maeda (solid starters or injury write-offs). Other potential starters (SWR, Widner, Dobnak, etc,). Lopez, Alcala, Megill, Fulmer, etc. (basis for a shutdown pen?). Budget (Pohlads’ appetite given economy and attendance trends). Coaching (other than the committed to Rocco) and training staffs. Fearless Forecast: Its a tough series of simultaneous equations to solve. But it probably starts with the SS decision. Assuming (which is likely) we don’t sign one of the big four, I’d expect an approximate $100-110MM budget year with Polanco returning, Kepler leaving, Urshela staying, internal SS (with Urshela, Gordon, Polanco, and Polacios covering the reps until Lewis or Lee show up), taking a risk on the current possible starters with one possible low cost addition (heck, maybe even Bundy) and the rest of the budget to COF/DH RH bat, C, and two/three solid relievers. It’s a strategy that is cost effective with fairly low downside, but with plenty of upside (if the starters pan out, Buxton is healthy, and some of the young core produce).

Given the lack of hubris with this FO, it would certainly not be weird. More like predictable.

Fair enough. Your point is valid - the team met (some - maybe most - people’s) expectations. I was only trying to point out that such an accomplishment was reached with mediocre or worse performance by the manager. Or, perhaps, maybe Rocco met expectations too. Btw, I truly meant what I said when I wrote “Dear, most respected TDer”. Your comments are good and always worth reading.

Fair enough with all your comments. Most importantly, I agree that Rocco does not have ultimate control over all of the staff or the levers he can pull. So any underperformance related to those areas must fall on the FO. Rocco is likely to stay. I hope he gets better as a manager, particularly in a lot of the areas referenced above. I’m only trying to take an objective look at his performance relative to what his job description might call for. I stand by my hypothesis that a mid-market team will struggle to contend with a mediocre or worse manager.

My dear, most respected TDer - do you honestly think Rocco et al got the most of this team this year because they finished about where they were projected by the talking heads? Please point out one area where Rocco as the manager performed at or above expectations/requirements. Here’s a list of criteria (with my POV) for judging the manager’s performance that might help you: 1. Team plays sound fundamental baseball day-in and day-out. (A resounding no on this one). 2. Vis-a-vis his opponent managers, the manager’s in-game decisions result in more wins than losses on average. (He had his moments, but certainly not, and certainly not against the better teams). 3. Players play up to their potential and continued their development/growth through the season. (There are some examples both positive and negative here). 4. The team plays with confidence against stronger, contending type teams. (Nope and we added our division foes the Guardians to the teams with whom we have a mental block). 5. The manager has the trust and respect of his team. (No reason to suspect not, but it’s not clear given how he’s managed the pitching staff; none of us really know this one). 6. The manager has built a quality team of coaches and other staff. (Best coach left mid-season, 3B was a disaster, and the training staff doesn’t appear to be up to snuff). 7. The manager promotes a culture of accountability, starting with himself and his staff. (Given the undisciplined play, hard to see that this is a plus). 8. The manager makes sound decisions in terms of sticking with or pivoting from core strategies as circumstances dictate. (Don’t see much creativity on this front). Honestly, where has he performed, let alone outperformed? This team pretty much ended up not where they were expected to finish, but more in line with the manager’s performance. If a mid-market team wants to contend, they have to outperform in several areas - and the most important one to kick off that success is the manager’ performance. It’s extremely hard, if not impossible, for a mid market team to overcome a mediocre manager.

Get himself traded for Terry Francona. We will throw in Pagan to sweeten the deal.

Another great comment. The answer to your last question is probably not. The balanced schedule on the margin is most likely a negative for us. The conundrum is trying to rationalise pairing what I think you rightly predict to be a youngish, less expensive team (sorry, but CC will not be back after the great last month he’s put together) with a manager who cannot develop them on the field or in their minds. Why have a team filled with essentially 1-3 year players on rookie type deals who never really learn the fundamentals of the game or how to not cower at the Yankees or Guardians (now)? It just doesn’t make sense. If the Twins go the youngish route, at least get a manager who will turn them into complete ballplayers. But, alas, it won’t come to pass….

Very well could be and a reasonable plan. Nice going. I’d love to see Correa back, but I’ve got the under on that. Re Gray, my spidey senses are telling me he’s none to happy about being pulled so early all the time.

I think that’s more or less the plan and the one they will try to sell to the fans. You nailed it. The only part with which I partly disagree is “this group is good enough to be leading the Central by the end of July”. Even if everyone is healthy - which we all dearly hope, but know is not likely - the true goal for this team has to be a realistic contender for the Pennant and this team is not that. It could be if the players were a) much better at the fundamentals (you know, running, hitting, catching, and throwing); b) the manager was capable of winning more games than losing based on his in-game decisions; and c) the team could get over the mental block of competing against the better teams, notably, the Yankees, Astros and now the Guardians. But we will have none of those things in 2023 as the team leadership is currently constructed and avowed by senior management to remain in place.

Last week I posted that maybe a more complete rebuild is the smart way to go. This article truly points out why that probably makes the most sense. But in reality it will not happen. Instead, the internal strategy (btw, never to be publicly announced) will be a “reactive” or “wait and see” rebuild. The FO, seemingly with the Pohlads’ approval, will hope that most, if not all of these players, will return to health and try to convince all of us that this will result in a contending team. After all, attendance is in the tank and there is currently little evidence that a rebound is on the horizon (the economy is getting worse and a lot of fans - individual and corporate - either are or will be cutting back, people still don’t want to go downtown, and this poor fundamentals, antiseptic team is not much fun to watch). They could never announce a rebuild, particularly with the same manager - they’d be looking at a sub 1.5MM ticket year if they did. So they will not spend big in FA, run out the same manager, and pray that everyone gets healthy. Other than the manager part, it’s not a stupid strategy. If it works, then maybe the team can contend for a while in the middling central and on the margin the attendance is ok. If it doesn’t and several or many of these (and other) players don’t return to form, then the rebuild alternative is there and they can switch to the “look at all these exciting young prospects” advertising strategy (i.e. look for several Eddie Bane type promotions starting in early summer once school is out). Again, other than the manager and his staff, it’s probably the right strategic move. If it works, great. If not, then we start the “rebuild” mid year and a lot of those players who are part of the rebuild probably need another 1/2 year in the minors anyway. Expectations for 2023 should be tempered.

1. Gone. Polacios until mid season. Then Lee or Lewis. 2. Mid season. He will be ready. 3. We will add one more starter - #4-5 type. 4. One will be healthy - Maeda. 5. Your rank is currently correct. All four start games next year and maybe a lot of them. 6. No - sadly. Could be pen destined. 7. No way and maybe. Isn’t Lopez signed to one more year? 8. Cash. Cold hard cash. With our current manager’s strategy, this has to be the absolute #1 priority - a deep, shutdown pen. 9. No. But the OF is ok. Kepler is gone. Don’t forget Gordon. 10. No. 11. Yes, but we won’t. Yes, but it’s not great. Don’t forget Gordon. 12. Lol - supposedly it’s still Rocco and staff. Yeah, right. 13. The new Delmon Young. But his arm is unbo. 14. Who wants that job with this FO and manager? 15. The entire staff should be replaced - but only if we want to win. 16. Nothing major - probably acquire another injured pitcher for one or two of our top prospects. 17. Guardians all the way - young, talented, well-managed. They are ascending. We are not. 18. Take the under if the same leadership returns - no reason to expect otherwise. Anyone - please point to any evidence that this FO/Coaching Staff has what it takes to make this attendance challenged, mid-market team that can’t pitch, hit, throw, run, stay on the field, or not melt against stronger teams a true contender. Wake up Pohlads.

Great post. Honestly, I do not understand how the Pohlads put up with this mutual admiration society. First it’s Falvine giving Rocco a pass and now its St. Peter giving the FO/Falvine a pat on the back. The Pohlad family, given all they have accomplished, must see that the day-to-day management of this aspect of their many businesses has significantly underperformed. I mean they’re not blind and they didn’t just fall off a turnip truck - they are savvy, smart business people. Two serious questions: 1, Is the Twins organization better off at the end of this season (i.e. better positioned to compete next year and in the foreseeable future) than they were last year? 2. Even if so, were the opportunities seized to maximise that improvement or were those opportunities squandered? The answer to the first is most certainly no. Sure, Lee fell in their laps (like it took rocket science to draft him at their slot - lol), and Ryan, Miranda, Duran, Arreaz, and Gordon overperformed vis-a-vis expectations. What’s the next big accomplishment? Sano, Kepler, Polanco, Buxton, Kiriloff, Larnach, Jeffers, Archer, Bundy, Pagan, Sanchez, Mahle, Lopez, and even Correa (at $35MM when things mattered) were basically unmitigated disasters. Btw, who among this group can be realistically expected to be back better next year (maybe Jeffers - that’s it). The team’s ability to run, throw and catch worsened. The team’s psyche to compete with the better teams continued its free fall as we added the Guardians to a team that mentally has our number. The minor league system dropped in the rankings. Even if some apologists can in their own minds rationalise a “yes” to the first question, there is no chance for a “yes” to the second. I just can’t believe the Pohlads do not see how poorly this team has performed and how the entire organization has fallen behind under the current management.

No vitriol - just business. His signing with us was actually a shrewd roll of the dice by the FO - maybe we catch fire and wind up competing (which, btw, we did until the other not so shrewd FO’s pitching moves, Rocco’s management, bad fundamentals and injuries caught up with us). The FO deserves a lot of applause on the CC signing for sure. The question (certainly inevitable now given CC’s strong post contention performance) is what does the FO do? I see five possibilities: 1. Sign CC to a minimum 8 year deal @ at least $30MM per year. 2. Sign CC to a 5 year deal at closer to $40MM per year. 3. Sign a different SS to a more “reasonable” short-mid term deal. 4. Use the cash to sign FA pitching and try to compete next year with an in-house SS strategy while waiting for a home grown SS in 2024. 5. Save a lot of cash and basically “rebuild” in 2023 developing Lee or Lewis as your SS of the future. The first three choices are possible if the FO doesn’t see a long term SS in the organization who will be ready by 2024 and a one-year in-house stop gap solution isn’t viable. However, #1 isn’t likely - not the Twins way; #2 is what I’d hope for, but not sure CC goes for it with longer term deals on the table; and #3, to really move the dial, would take another unique situation, but we’ve now seen this film a couple of times and it’s not really worked. The last two make more sense if Lewis or Lee or someone else (Polacios or Miller perhaps) is viewed as the long-term SS. #4 is way more likely than #5 as this FO with the Pohlads support will never be in a publicly announced rebuilding mode (see our attendance numbers) and there will be a lot of cash available with CC and others moving on. And #4 could work with the right FA starter/relief pitching signings, a healthy Buxton, and another veteran FA signing like Cruz was. So we hope for #2, but in reality #3 or #4 are more likely and could be better options anyway. Please note, however, none of these work if the FO and Rocco don’t up their games in a big way, the new young core don’t develop, the team doesn’t somehow play better fundamental baseball, and we can’t significantly cut down on the injuries.

Thank you for the outstanding coverage of our minor league teams throughout the season. I enjoyed reading your summaries every morning. Well done and much appreciated.

Add Mahle too…..lol.

Hate to say it, but could the prudent move in 2023 be to essentially rebuild? I’m not necessarily advocating for it, but there might be some logic to the strategy. Hear me out. 1. Correa is gone - huge hole at SS to be filled by possibly three young players - Polacios, Lewis, and Lee. Let those three play as much as possible and as time is earned. 2. The new “core” all need rehab and/or seasoning to see what we really have. This might take some time. The new core includes Kiriloff, Larnach, Jeffers, Miranda, Gordon, and, yes, Wallner. Maybe Celestino. 3. Mahle and Maeda are big ifs. Several up and comer starters need to time to prove themselves. Don’t want to waste a season of Gray and Ryan, but Gray seems a bit unhappy anyway and will probably be moved by the deadline (could be the same with Mahle and Maeda too once we are not contending). 4. The prior core - Buxton, Kepler, Sano, and Polanco - will likely only contribute 80-100 or so games next year. The transition is past full swing - it’s actually nearing its conclusion. 5. Great time to reset with a new manager and maybe FO too. The Pohlads have to recognise that Rocco is not the guy to lead a young, mid market club - just not enough fundamentals, ongoing player development, confidence against good teams and solid in-game managerial decisions. Bring in a new leader to get a year under his belt and start to put a new stamp on this team. 6. Can we realistically expect to beat an ascending, young, well-managed Guardians team next year? Hate to say it, but we are not one or two players away from achieving competitive advantage vs. Cleveland or several of the big spending teams. Lets see what Correa does, because this may be the fulcrum on which the decision to retool or not in 2023 turns. But it might not be silly to run a much younger team under new management up the flagpole next season. Couldn’t do any worse than this year, And besides, we will have new uniforms and scoreboard to add to the fun…

Yep, that may be possible. Ideally, we put the right staff and processes in place to get more development and longevity out of the next three: Kiriloff, Larnach, and Jeffers. If you’re the Pohlads, aren’t you livid? Someone has to be accountable or is this just another one of those “luck” things. Sorry, this a Kepler thread…..

A lot of decisions may depend on Correa and whether Max stays or goes could be one. If Correa stays, Max may be more likely to be dealt to get back a more valuable pitching asset or just free up capital for a FA reliever or two. If Correa departs, more cash is available already and Max’s veteran presence may be a bit more valuable. If he were dealt, what does our outfield look like next year? The most likely candidates: Buxton, Larnach, Kiriloff, Gordon, Wallner, and Celestino. The first three are made of glass, the fourth is a converted IF who probably deserves to play everyday, the fifth has plate upside and a huge arm but reminds me a bit of Delmon trying to catch the ball, and the sixth is strictly a utility player at this point. Is that “contender” capable? Can we even get by with that? Max is one of my favourite Twins. Regardless of Correa, I’d probably move him though to redeploy the cash into a shutdown pen as well to focus on ascending players (Max, unfortunately, is more likely descending - another example of a good, young Twin whom we couldn’t get to continue his upward trajectory),

The word “starter” was badly chosen as some might think it only applies to pitchers. In my case I was using it more broadly to refer to everyday players - position or on the bump. I disagree that the manager and his staff do not have responsibility for taking players they get and developing them to their full potential. IMHO it’s one of the most important things a coaching staff can do, especially for a mid market team that cannot jus buy proven talent.

Thank you for your response. You are correct - my view on the ongoing development of players is a that it’s been a mixed bag at best - some successes, some failures, and some tbd. But is that really good enough for a team like the Twins? Re the fundamentals, yes, my view is that the Twins have consistently played poor fundamental baseball under Rocco and that goes to the heart of the coaching staff’s responsibilities. That cannot solely be blamed on youth. In fact, since as a mid market team we are much more likely to have a youngish team, it means strong fundamentals are even that much more important. Re the other questions, I just genuinely want to hear how others on this site would review Rocco’s performance re the criteria I listed. I do believe Rocco has underperformed in these areas and would like to hear from his defenders why that isn’t the case. Moreover, perhaps others have different criteria (such as W-L over the past couple of seasons or playoff games won), but the criteria I listed IMHO most certainly should be expected to be highly correlated with the team’s results. Do well in this those and the Ws will follow. There are Rocco defenders and I respect their point of view. But there just isn’t much actual discussion about his performance vis-a-vis specific job responsibilities and objectives. No matter. I can’t wait until next year. Go Twins!

Thank you, you addressed one of the questions. Re that specific question, what about Kepler, Sano, Berrios. Buxton is hardly a a good example. Arraez almost seems like an accident, but ok. Same with Polanco - he’s been a success. But Ryan (just got him) Ober (let’s see) Dobnak (love him, but please) are hardly good examples. Duran has potential, but it’s still early. There are really very few examples of long term ongoing development of true starters under Rocco. Mixed at best. How about the other questions? I’m sincerely interested in an objective review of Rocco’s performance.