Angels Official Website: With series of tweaks, Halos look to surpass '14 success

[AngelsWin.com]

This offseason, Jerry Dipoto focused on extending the Angels' window of contention and creating more payroll flexibility. Did he do so at the expense of the 2015 club, or are the Angels primed for a second straight AL West title and, well, a longer October?

View the full article

[Angelsjunky]

The tweaks simply maintain the high level of the team, keeping them in the 90+ win range. But really the problem last year was two-fold:

 

1) Questionable manageable on Scioscia's part - namely, letting the team coast for the last few weeks when they went 5-9, or 3-7 after they clinched. That left them rusty and a bit complacent going into the post-season.

 

2) Meeting the immovable force that was the Royals. Chances are that even they weren't rusty, they still would have lost. But at least it would have been interesting.

 

People make a lot about the playoffs being a crapshoot, which I agree with if we take the literal definition of the word: "a risky or uncertain matter." But I think sometimes people mean that it is just luck, and I don't think that's true. The teams that go far are not only the most talented, not only the luckiest, but the hungriest - and the Angels just didn't have that feeling last year against the Royals. It was almost as if they felt on some level that they had already won it all by taking the AL West, and while certainly it is a good start and overall 2014 exceeded anyone's expectations, but I'd like to see a bit more fire in 2015.

 

Oh yeah, and another World Series trophy while we're at it.

[Docwaukee]

Any of the teams in the playoffs are good enough to beat each other on any given day.  

 

the big difference is that small sample size performances make a huge difference whereas in the regular season those even out.  

 

Josh Hamilton had a 1.433 ops for the first 7 games of the season.  yet he went 0-13 in the playoffs.  

Mike Trout had a stretch of 22 games where he had a 1.250 ops and he was 1-15 in the playoffs.  

 

The luck part, good or bad, is getting out of character performances in one direction or the other.  

 

Maybe the giants have figured something out.  They have been all over the map in terms of how they got to the playoffs yet won regardless.  

I am not overly convinced that there is anything in particular to be done that would make you a better playoff team.  

[Angel Oracle]

It is a concern that Scioscia managed teams are just 10-22 in the post-season after 2002.

[ten ocho recon scout]

It is a concern that Scioscia managed teams are just 10-22 in the post-season after 2002.

10-22 = 9/11 but one worse to each number, in a way

Think about that...its a conspiracy

[Docwaukee]

I'm not sure why the w/l record in playoff games really even matters.  It's pretty much a binary situation.  

 

I don't look back on any of the seasons where we lost in the playoffs much differently.  

 

MS has 1 WS title in 7 playoff appearances.  

 

There are 70 managers who have won a WS of the almost 700 all time.  5 are active

23 have won it more than once.  2 are active.

 

1 of 8 teams win the WS each year if you don't count the play in game.  

[arch stanton]

Why must we exclude 2002 when talking about Sosh's playoff record? Seems kinda nitpicky to me.

[Angel Oracle]

Yes and no, Arch

2002 was Scioscia's first post-season as a manager. He did seem to push all of the right buttons that post-season, and the team also had that never worry and never be scared attitude.

It's just hard to ignore the post-season record since then, although the regular season record since then is rock solid. Granted that in 2004, 2005, 2007, and 2009 they lost to the WS champs. It's just the record in those 4 series that stands out (3-14).

Edited January 3, 2015 by Angel Oracle

[Stradling]

I don't agree, especially after a four year hiatus from the playoffs. This year there were no right buttons to hit, the hitters stopped hitting. So he tried to bunt, nope that didn't work either. Also coming down the stretch you play one of two ways, either you keep pushing and risk injury or you rest guys so they are fresh and healthy. Sosh did a hybrid and it didn't work. This year it was on the players.

[Angel Oracle]

No disagreement on this post-season at least, as too many things conspired against them in October and the ones who were healthy mostly didn't show up, plus the Royals were not to be denied until reaching the WS.

I have to admit that there is some crap shoot to the post-season. How else do the Giants win 3 WS in 5 years despite being in the inferior league?

It would be nice to return to the WS at least once before the remaining 4 years on Scioscia's contract are up.

Edited January 3, 2015 by Angel Oracle

[ettin]

I'm not sure why the w/l record in playoff games really even matters.  It's pretty much a binary situation.  

 

I don't look back on any of the seasons where we lost in the playoffs much differently.  

 

MS has 1 WS title in 7 playoff appearances.  

 

There are 70 managers who have won a WS of the almost 700 all time.  5 are active

23 have won it more than once.  2 are active.

 

1 of 8 teams win the WS each year if you don't count the play in game.  

 

Are you advocating using more advanced metrics such as RC+, OPS+ or ERA- to determine an in-season winner, Doc?

 

That's very roto-esque of you!

[Redondo]

No disagreement on this post-season at least, as too many things conspired against them in October and the ones who were healthy mostly didn't show up, plus the Royals were not to be denied until reaching the WS.

I have to admit that there is some crap shoot to the post-season. How else do the Giants win 3 WS in 5 years despite being in the inferior league?

It would be nice to return to the WS at least once before the remaining 4 years on Scioscia's contract are up.

 

It was really hard to watch us struggle in the playoffs for whatever reason.

 

Giants just seem to find a way to put it all together at the right time.

[disarcina]

Team did fine in '14 -- the real issue came down to preparing and playing a post-season playoff roster and line-up geared to the opponent rather than some sort of formula baseball.

 

Putting a not-ready-for-prime-time Hamilton on the playoff roster and in the starting line up was a decision I will NEVER understand. It placed a huge hole in the middle of the line-up against a team that plays tough D, has speed and a quality pen.........so you take what's been working for August-September that led you to the best record in baseball (despite starting pitching/ rotation injuries/ challenges) and make a change for the playoffs that is 1.) bad in the first place and 2.) not geared to the other team's strengths.

 

For 2015 -- I remain concerned about the starting rotation and feel we are a quality starter (not an ace, we don't need to spend a pant load of money for Scherzer or someone like that) short.

 

I also think we need that quality MIF utility guy who can play 150 games if called upon -- that might be Beckham who is not the best, but probably the best we can do.

 

Meanwhile monitor Hamilton - IMO he either comes out of ST with a scorching first half (before tailing off) OR picks right up where he left off in the playoffs being Mr. K and GIDP.

 

One of the more interesting issues for ST is the battle for back up catcher to Iannetta.

[Redondo]

 

Putting a not-ready-for-prime-time Hamilton on the playoff roster and in the starting line up was a decision I will NEVER understand. It placed a huge hole in the middle of the line-up against a team that plays tough D, has speed and a quality pen.........so you take what's been working for August-September that led you to the best record in baseball (despite starting pitching/ rotation injuries/ challenges) and make a change for the playoffs that is 1.) bad in the first place and 2.) not geared to the other team's strengths.

 

Meanwhile monitor Hamilton - IMO he either comes out of ST with a scorching first half (before tailing off) OR picks right up where he left off in the playoffs being Mr. K and GIDP.

 

 

Agree. Hamilton was a major disappointment last year. He looked so lost and like you said inserting him into a lineup that was gelling really disrupted what they were doing.

 

ST for Hamilton will be a key. We can't afford to just play him if  he continues to look lost at the plate. We need some quality production from him or he has to sit or be traded, if possible.

[stormngt]

They exclude it because they want to manipulate stats to favor their argument.

Why must we exclude 2002 when talking about Sosh's playoff record? Seems kinda nitpicky to me.

[Kevin]

I don't agree, especially after a four year hiatus from the playoffs. This year there were no right buttons to hit, the hitters stopped hitting. So he tried to bunt, nope that didn't work either. Also coming down the stretch you play one of two ways, either you keep pushing and risk injury or you rest guys so they are fresh and healthy. Sosh did a hybrid and it didn't work. This year it was on the players.

It's not so much that he tried to bunt but more of who he had bunt as opposed to who he didn't have bunt. I agree that the hitters weren't doing anything but Sosh also helped with the dismal failure that was the pathetic 2014 playoffs. It was a collective team effort. Oh well.

[Vegas Halo Fan]

Maybe the giants have figured something out.  They have been all over the map in terms of how they got to the playoffs yet won regardless.  

I am not overly convinced that there is anything in particular to be done that would make you a better playoff team.  

 

IMO one thing that would have made the Angels a better playoff team was to bench Hamilton when it was clear that any contact he made with the bat was purely accidental. He wasn't the only one not hitting, but he was the only one who looked like he had no chance of hitting while in the batter's box. He might as well have been blindfolded.

Edited January 4, 2015 by Vegas Halo Fan

[maximus p]

They exclude it because they want to manipulate stats to favor their argument.

 

I don't necessarily agree with your statement.  Maybe it would more clear to say since 2002, or in the last 6 playoff opportunities, Scioscia has guided teams to 22 losses in 32 opportunities.  If 2002 happened in, say, 2007 or so (and then the naysayers excluded it), I would be more agreeable to your assertion.