Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. Become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

IGNORED

Scioscia bunting Mike Trout over with Erick Aybar


Chuck

Recommended Posts

I feel like the problem is teams know when Aybar is going to bunt and it takes away its effectiveness.

 

I would also say  he lacks the ability to bunt in clutch situations when the team really needs it. Yeah that playoff blunder was quite the scene, and maybe i'm wrong, but I tend to remember his successful bunting being Wellsy-esque.

 

I used to be a bigger fan of Aybar before he started making so many boneheaded mistakes. Now I just wonder how the hell he's gonna find a way to screw things up. However, and most importantly, I hope to see some growth and improvement this season from Aybar playing smarter ball.

He went 15-27 on bunt hit attempts last year -- a .556 success rate which was 8th best in baseball.   He went 14-32 for a .438 success rate in 2011, good for 8th best in baseball.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Granted this is spring training, but something I've feared all along with Erick Aybar in the 2-hole seems to be a thing of reality heading into the season. Since Aybar has returned from the WBC, Scioscia has used Erick Aybar to bunt Mike Trout over THREE TIMES! 

 

You don't throw away outs with the likes of Mike Trout and potentially Peter Bourjos on base (who have speed to steal bags). I would rather roll the dice with a stolen base (Especially with Mike Trout who has a high success rate) and have Aybar in an RBI situation, than see Trout at 2B with one out and Pujols & Hamilton coming up. 

 

Mike, go for the big inning, you have the hitters to do it. Please do not sacrifice outs unless it's Bourjos bunting over Iannetta or Callaspo at the bottom of the lineup to get in scoring position for Mike Trout. 

 

This really concerns me and was one of the main reasons why I wanted Callaspo in the 2-hole (not as accomplished bunting as Aybar). 

 

With the pitching staff a concern going into the regular season, it would behoove Scioscia to manage the team's offense in a way that will maximize its potential for scoring as many runs as possible.

 

EOM, Discuss.....

I agree that Aybar should not sacrifice Trout over.  However, Aybar has led the league in bunt hits, I would think if the defensive alignment is right to try to have Aybar try to bunt for a hit.  Getting the first two men on with Pujols and Hamilton coming up would be very advantageous.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Check back after the 2018 season. We're stuck with him until then.

 

Maybe Dipoto can figure out a way to trade Scioscia for another manager while somehow reducing our future luxury tax liability by tens of millions in the process. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aybar is gonna bunt.  From the two spot, the 6 spot, the nine spot etc.  Generally, it's not a good play and in particular if he hits second.

 

Reason #1:  Trout is fast.  His odds of making an out on a steal are about 10%.  Aybar bunted 40 times last year and made out in 24 of them.  So he had 16 hits in 33ab with 7 sacs.  Pretty good but still worse odds of than letting trout steal. 

 

Reason #2:  Trout gets on.  Aybar bunts him over.  Walk pujols.  Bring in a LHer to face hamilton who has an .808 career ops vs. lefties. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the hit and run is an even worse play than a sac bunt

 

 

Ultimately a team should play to it's strengths.  I hate sac bunts, but don't mind guys that can bunt for hits.  The hit and run can put pressure on a defense; when you're playing Detroit it's a good thing, when you're playing Seattle or Oakland, it likely isn't.  I really don't want to see the Angels become a station to station, wait for the three run bomb sort of team although it's hard to argue the middle of the order isn't capable of just that.

 

My problem with Mike Scioscia isn't that he plays small ball, Gene Mauch played small ball regardless of who was on his team.  My problem with MS at times is that he makes some of it's elements a non issue by over-using them.  Case in point the suicide squeeze.

 

I genuinely believe the Angels would be more successful with the small ball stuff if they did it less often. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think he over uses the suicide squeeze. Seriously, how many times has he really utilized that play over his tenure? Not very often. I'd say the best example of over use and losing effectiveness is the contact play.

 

Small ball requires players who can execute the play. It should be used infrequently and only with the right personnel on the bases and in the box. I don't mind sac bunts in certain situations but those are very limited. I do think that the dynamics of Trout's speed and Aybar's bunt skills and speed would lead to a higher success rate for both advancing the runner and getting on base, but again, it should be overused.

 

The hit and run play needs to have a hitter that can execute. The hit and run is a much more useful aggressive strategy than the sac bunt and isn't really "small ball".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bunting Trout over to 3rd with no outs is a horrible idea. I've never been a fan of sacrificing an out when a runner is already in scoring position. Especially Trout. Take your chances with Aybar, Pujols, and Hamilton. As stated earlier, this team needs to score runs. We aren't going to be battling in tight 3-2, 2-1 games this season. We'll score in bunches and can't afford to give up these outs. I do think its just spring training and Aybar is probably just getting some bunts in to be ready so I'm not going to overreact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aybar had 7 sacrifice bunts last season, the most he ever had was 12. So I think you guys are over reacting to Spring training numbers, they are not translating into the regular season.

Tell you what, I'd be willing to bet that Aybar has 12 or more bunt attempts by the end of April (regular season only).

Wanna take me up on that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The #2 hitter should be Aybar against righties as a left hander, and Bourjos against lefties as a right hander. The other should hit #9 as to not break up the rest of the lineup.

 

Look, we all know Scioscia will use a multitude of lineups. Just in the 10 inter-league games there will be likely 9 or 10 lineups. But those aside, the 1-9 everyday batting order will likely only have one regular who doesn't move positions. That's Trout at the top.

 

After that, Aybar, Bourjos, Callaspo will all get looks at #2. Calhoun also may get a look here when the regulars are getting a day off.

Pujols, Hamilton will probably both bat #3 (when Pujols gets a day off, which is going to happen at least 6-8 times)

Trumbo, Hamilton, Pujols all bat #4 at some point.

Trumbo, Iannetta, Kendrick all bat #5 at some point.

Kendrick, Callaspo, Iannetta, all bat #6.

Callaspo, Conger, Calhoun all will bat #7 if only to break up a bunch of right handers. Aybar may also bat here.

Iannetta, Conger, Calhoun, Bourjos, Jimenez, Rodriguez, and who knows who else will all bat #8.

Aybar, Bourjos, and Iannetta will all bat #9.

 

By using the #2 batter to get Trout into scoring position (or to 3rd) you have one out and Pujols-Hamilton-Trumbo likely coming up. This is even better if Aybar/Bourjos was already on base from the #9 spot.

 

By putting a batter who has a penchant for taking a lot of pitches in Callaspo at the #2 spot, you are inviting a runners on first and second with no outs situation to which you hope will turn into a big inning, but it's just as easy to lead the league in double plays. Callaspo hits a lot of balls to the infield, often for hits, but not the way you are hoping for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think he over uses the suicide squeeze. Seriously, how many times has he really utilized that play over his tenure? Not very often. I'd say the best example of over use and losing effectiveness is the contact play.

 

Small ball requires players who can execute the play. It should be used infrequently and only with the right personnel on the bases and in the box. I don't mind sac bunts in certain situations but those are very limited. I do think that the dynamics of Trout's speed and Aybar's bunt skills and speed would lead to a higher success rate for both advancing the runner and getting on base, but again, it should be overused.

 

The hit and run play needs to have a hitter that can execute. The hit and run is a much more useful aggressive strategy than the sac bunt and isn't really "small ball".

 

 

My bad LT, I was actually referring to the contact play, which in many cases has resulted in squeezes....   The entire league knows the contact play is always on and defends for it.

I don't have any issues with the hit and run, I don't consider it playing small ball, but there are certain teams where it's just not as effective and it should be taken into consideration..  The contact play, sac bunts -- that sort of small ball is much less effective than it's made out to be and typically drives me nuts.   As a whole, I don't have a problem with intentional outs so long as they are used as an almost defensive mechanism -- such as a hitter getting behind and then looking to just drive the runner in.  I hate when a guy goes up thinking sac fly with a 0-0 count.  

Not saying it's wrong, it's just a personal preference.  Like I said, I don't have issues with Mike playing for one run, I don't like how often or how early he goes that route, in the past with our offenses being what they were it may have made a little more sense.  With this team, less so.  

 

I remember Mauch once had Reggie lay down a bunt and the defense completely being taken by surprise.   Nobody had ever had Reggie do that before Mauch, and it was awesome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in 2002, when we had a contact vs power balanced lineup, much like we do now, the small ball tactics were fewer and further between. The shift to more small ball came when that balance went askew.

 

 

Agreed...   Remember that huge inning that was started by back to back bunts?  Was that the Yankees game?  Game Two?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...