Squirrel

I'm okay with that. He started in AA and he isn't on the roster, yet. So, I'm okay that he will get his debut sometime next year. I was actually more interested/excited in him in the Berrios trade than Martin. Just hope he keeps progressing.

I hope SWR can make the jump to the majors ... certainly has shown promise

What I expected, followed by some hope, followed by what I expected but only done worse

Did you say something here that didn't show up?

Just thought I’d put this here. Seems like a good thread for it ???

I thought you were referring to Ryan’s comments last night. And I still think you are making a mountain out of a molehill with both of those instances to suit a larger narrative. I could be wrong and there is a lot that hasn’t been said publicly by the starting pitchers, but while both pitchers might have been frustrated in a particular moment, do you have reports of season-long frustration from Ryan and Gray? Could be they’re quiet about it because of team dynamics and whatnot, but I haven’t heard about an upset clubhouse. I don’t think it’s something either is making a lot of noise about over all. And let me repeat, I wanted Ryan to go out for the 8th, too, and I do think there have been a few instances where a pitcher could have gone longer in their starts, but I don’t think those instances are difference makers. I think the issue of pitchers being pulled too soon would be far less noisy if we had a properly constructed BP to begin with. i hope next season we see Ryan go consistently longer into games. He’s still a rookie this year, and had a bout of illness that seemed to pull him out of his groove for a good chunk. Outside of that one instance of being pulled when he had no hits, I think he has been handled well over all.

Joe Ryan’s comments were about his own performance, that he couldn’t last longer than that, that he was losing the feel for pitches, not that he was pulled too soon.

If we have a third year in a row with another BP like this, I’ll be ready to call it hubris and ego.

I agree with most of this. I’ve said before in several threads the need for a deep, durable and reliable BP is the key and what they didn’t do. Yes, other things are certainly at play, but the BP construction was awful. If they aren’t going to pay for premium starting pitching then they have to have that BP that gets it done. If their strategy was to get their SP to keep us in games through 5 innings, on average, then we need that BP. To me that was the biggest failure. Their strategy did not mesh with what they constructed. I’m not ready to call it hubris and ego, yet, because some of it is necessity. It’s not that they don’t have to pay, it’s that they won’t, so now they have to develop. I think it’s a good strategy, but Other teams do this more successfully than we do. If there is hubris and ego, it’s believing in their evaluation process which, imo, is in need of repairs. Hopefully hubris and ego doesn’t get in the way of evaluating how they evaluate acquisitions and roster construction. Thank you for your post.

We will have to part ways on this topic. Edit to add: I guess the batting order tonight couldn't have been too awful ... then again, I'm sure Angel's pitching gave it some boost

I think it's a pendulum swing. It went too far ... now has to come back. It's always about finding the balance. And for you and others, as has been said as many times as has your questioning Rocco's decisions, it's a FO philosophy that needs adjustment, for sure. I have never said otherwise. But, it's not Rocco doing this alone, imo. But he is part of the whole and the whole needs to adjust. As has already been confirmed, Rocco is coming back next season, and likely will as long as Falvey and Levine are employed. If not Rocco, it will still be someone who executes the way the FO office wants. I just hope this off-season, someone can supply the right tweaks. I've never denied that there were times I think the starter could have been left in for longer, but, the fault really lies with the pitchers we had, more than anything else, imo. The number of times a pitcher could have gone longer, I just don't think equates and correlates alone to the number of losses we've had and I don't think it's simply a common sense issue, either. Had we had a reliable and durable BP, some of this may not have been as much of an issue. And none of these decisions I think equates to them not committed to winning, as someone suggested above, just because they don't do as we think they should. We all have our opinions on that, but I don't agree with that conclusion.

Fair enough ... but I don't think it's either/or. Analytics are necessary. I don't think it's as much about common sense, but I get your take on that, as it is about those interpreting the data, perhaps suggesting an incorrect course.

I wouldn’t go so far as the hyperbolic soul selling but I agree, somewhat. Analytics have always been a part of the game and always will. I don’t even think it’s about common sense or not, but maybe better interpreters of what the analytics say, and being able to adjust approach instead instead of adhering too strictly to one path

You should apply for the GM job so we will for sure win it all

Yes, it is. And I said as much in my post. I didn't say it very well, but I think they traded at the right time, and traded off the right players to fill pieces of need, but the actual players they traded for, not sure that's worked out. I've said the BP would be an issue from the beginning, and at the deadline, they traded for relief pitching, which was needed as we still showed 'promise,' and I'm glad they did. It's what they should have done. But given the results of who they traded for, that didn't pan out. Same with the starting pitching ... they traded for two starters. Great, it's what I thought they should have done. But then the results were what they were. Again, this is about evaluation. I think they saw that our team had potential and needed some pieces. They did that. Except for who the pieces were. I would guess that in the history of trades, you aren't going to hit on them all, but it seems like we didn't hit on any of the pitchers, and it makes me wonder. Paddack, Mahle and Lopez are still under our control next year, so maybe we will reap more rewards then? I hope so, or those trades were really a bust. But, I think the strategy over all is the right strategy. When your team is awful at the deadline, you trade off vets that other teams want, and hope for fair pieces back, or perhaps an overpay. When you are in the hunt, you use your prospect to fill in your needs. As I said, I think they had the strategy right, and trades are always going to be a risk, but it's what you have to do. However, they missed on the pitching, all around, imo. And yes, that's a problem. On the other hand, even though I didn't like the Donaldson trade initially, today I'd say we did fine in that one, given the seasons of Garver and Donaldson. I've been pretty happy with Urshela and not completely disappointed in Sanchez, considering what I thought we were going to get. So, on that front, I think it worked. But ... back to pitching ... something just isn't right in how pitcher's are evaluated and what they think they will be able to do with who we get. I'm willing to take the risk, and think we should have, but we just hit too many wrong, imo.

I think this is a really bad take on things. I'm not absolving the FO of anything, and I hope I see better this coming off-season. The one thing they could have (should have) done differently was to build a better BP from the start. And I think their evaluation of injury risk needs better scrutiny. And I'm not sure they will ever sign a contract for the best pitcher in FA, so, I wouldn't expect much ever in that market. I don't know how good they thought we were, but I think the trades did shore up issues, or should have. I'm not sure why you are still so upset with the Berrios trade, other than he was one of your favorite players, but that was exactly the right move at the right time. Having Berrios this season wouldn't have made us better, imo, and time will tell if the players we received in return will, eventually, make a good team better. Over all, I think in a lost season, you trade vets for prospects for the future; in a season where you are competing (at the deadline), you trade prospects for proven players who will help now. I think they did that last year and this. That it hasn't worked out better I don't think is reliant on how good they thought we were, but more in their evaluations.

I have a difficult time saying he’s against evil when he’s been slumping. That said, I hope he does it. But is Judge really getting preferential treatment? Just asking because I don’t know and haven’t been watching. But, yes, the media hype is certainly in his favor, just don’t know if it’s affecting on-field ‘umperical’ decisions

I don’t hate either. But I hate losing to the ChiSox. But I will cheer on whatever AL Central team goes to the playoffs

Which is why I said a pitcher can have an 'ace like' season and then go back to who they are. This idea of needing an ace to be competitive, I don't think is true, but I haven't done the research. And we've had an ace, and still didn't win. To me that says it's something else in how we must construct our starting rotation and our BP.

I guess we are back to what is an ace? A pitcher can have an ace-like season, but isn’t an ace, and there is no way to really predict when and who. We haven’t had an ace since Santana. And we didn’t win with him. I don’t think it guarantees winning to have an ace. Berrios isn’t and never was an ace. Yes, we need more than 4s and 5s, but having an ace is not what we need to win. Good pitching, yes. And a rock solid, dependable, shut ‘em down BP.

I don't think the problem was Archer and Bundy, but that they were in the rotation back to back, and that they didn't have the long-relief needed to compensate. I don't think either is that awful to be a #5 starter. Both did give us some good games. For me, the issue is building a better BP. One that works with the starters and usage plan they have. I hope they rethink and tweak that usage plan, but mostly, I really want them to build THE bp. They aren't going to go out there and buy the best starting pitching and they aren't going to spend their farm on it, either. So, you stock the starting staff with pitchers who aren't going to go long, but will (hopefully) keep us in games. The answer is the BP, not the starters.

I agree that managers are the best scapegoats in these situations. For all the optics in the world, though, a new manager isn't going to change anything except to build our expectations to nothing. What I want to see this off-season, though, is a commitment to a different plan in player/pitcher usage, or at least an admission that they are rethinking, and a real commitment to building a GREAT BP. If that doesn't happen, I think all three need to go. But, I'm not in charge of these things (which is a good thing).

I actually hope they do ... and I hope they win it all! When the Twins are done, I always cheer on the AL Central team

Yes, he’s in St. Paul

Well, Cotton is now a Giant ...