Scioscia fighting a losing battle?

[HBMike]

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/11/08/baseball-battle-between-scouting-and-analytics-continues/vplsMNmBXQuYrXfsxlwydM/story.html?event=event25

[Guest]

That was a very uninformative "article."

[HBMike]

That was a very uninformative "article."

 

"In the AL West, the Astros were always more analytical, but they’ve acknowledged scouting is still important. Billy Eppler, Cashman’s longtime assistant who is the new GM of the Angels, leans analytical, though he embraces scouting. Now the question is, can Eppler and manager Mike Scioscia co-exist? Scioscia may be the last of the old-fashioned managers who consider analytics taboo. Scioscia will eventually lose this battle."

 

Yes uninformative, but does ask a good question, can Scioscia get along with a analytical GM?

[HBMike]

Analytical or traditional?

All MLB teams use both stats and scouts to evaluate players, but they also all lean a bit more one way than the other. Here's how we see all 30 teams lining up.

  Analytical Traditional AL East Yankees, Blue Jays, Rays Red Sox, Orioles AL Central Indians Tigers, White Sox, Twins, Royals AL West Astros, Angels, Mariners, Rangers, A's   NL East   Braves, Nationals, Mets, Marlins, Phillies NL Central Cardinals, Brewers, Cubs, Pirates Reds NL West Dodgers, Padres, Rockies Giants, Diamondbacks

 

 

Also the teams and GM's he list as being traditional have been winning rings, so why go analytical. The Dodgers were a traditional team that went analytical and lost more games and got knocked out of playoffs sooner. Traditional seems to be working for KC and the Giants. 

Edited November 8, 2015 by HBMike

[Troll Daddy]

"Scioscia considers analytics taboo" ... who makes up this crap lol

[ten ocho recon scout]

"Scioscia considers analytics taboo" ... who makes up this crap lol

agreed. He may not be the sabr guy a lot of people wa t, but to think hes against numbers is very false.

[Vegas Halo Fan]

I also don't know what column to put a guy in who "leans analytical but embraces scouting." It seems like a whole lot of gibberish to me.

[tomsred]

This article never comes to any conclusions, it just rambles through this subject like a butterfly through flowers.

[Stradling]

Does anyone here question the value of someone who uses analytics and values scouting? To me it seems like the best of both worlds. As much as anyone here wants a manager to make every right decision, it's impossible, because players.

[Stradling]

Oh and it was analytics that got us the likes of Victorino and DeJesus. The analytics said platoon them and we will get somewhere between a .750-800 OPS.

[ukyah]

Oh and it was analytics that got us the likes of Victorino and DeJesus. The analytics said platoon them and we will get somewhere between a .750-800 OPS.

 

source?

[Jobu]

source?

Stradling. He said it a lot.

[Stradling]

Well I guess I could be wrong, but it was pretty much understood that Klentak and Servais were Working the deals and Stoneman was there for guidance. Stoneman himself said something similar. I guess I could have jumped to conclusions but I figured if Jerry brought those two in they were of his mindset. So tell me how I'm wrong.

[2112]

agreed. He may not be the sabr guy a lot of people wa t, but to think hes against numbers is very false.

His teams historically overachieved.  Except, of course last year.  

[Ohtaniland]

Teams were just so much easier to manage when they were all juiced up. Everybody including veteran players hit .300 / 35hrs / 100rbi's. Every pitcher threw 95+MPH.

Baseball life was good. I'm sure Scioscia misses the the good ole days when analytics weren't necessary.

[UndertheHalo]

this article just runs with every stupid negative narrative that there is about Scoscia.  Analytics are taboo ? lol geez.

[marcosantinia12]

Oh and it was analytics that got us the likes of Victorino and DeJesus. The analytics said platoon them and we will get somewhere between a .750-800 OPS.

You're right, we can't judge based off of result. Analytically inclined, I think this it was a good decision bringing in Dejesus and Victorino and I'll defend it, it just didnt work... like you said, players lol

[ten ocho recon scout]

Teams were just so much easier to manage when they were all juiced up. Everybody including veteran players hit .300 / 35hrs / 100rbi's. Every pitcher threw 95+MPH.

Baseball life was good. I'm sure Scioscia misses the the good ole days when analytics weren't necessary.

Aside from 2000, and maybe 2009, were any of those angel teams on par with the competition? 2004 was the most stacked team (on paper) the angels have ever had. Even if they all still stayed healthy, can you say they were "better" than NY? Certainly not better than Boston, and not equal to texas (with the pudge, arod, gonzalez, palmeiro MOTO). So its not like sosh had some advantage over the competition.

And when you consider the rest of the league had the same juicers, no one really had an advantage (aside from bos/NY and their endless budgets)

And FWIW, during sosh's run in the steroid years, the angels had the 3rd best record in baseball (behind NY and Bos) for about a decade. So it want steroids that helped him...anymore than any other team.

[Blarg]

His teams historically overachieved.  Except, of course last year.  

 

The Angels Pythagorean was 79-83, they finished 85-77 +6 

 

In contrast

 

Texas  Pythag 83-79 with a record of 88-74 +5

 

Astros Pythag was 93-69 but their record was 86-76 -7

 

Seattle Pythag was 74-88 with a record of 76-86 +2

 

Oakland Pythag was 77-85 with a record of 68-94 -9

Edited November 8, 2015 by notti

[eligrba]

Imagine what the Angels could have done with a manager who lived in the 21st century?

[Stradling]

The Angels Pythagorean was 79-83, they finished 85-77 +6

In contrast

Texas Pythag 83-79 with a record of 88-74 +5

Astros Pythag was 93-69 but their record was 86-76 -7

Seattle Pythag was 74-88 with a record of 76-86 +2

Oakland Pythag was 77-85 with a record of 68-94 -9

So last year his feel for his team out performed what the analytics said they should have done? Yep Scioscia is the idiot.

[Stradling]

Imagine what the Angels could have done with a manager who lived in the 21st century?

Or with a GM that got him better players to work with.

[laagamer]

This article is a steaming pile of shit.

[ten ocho recon scout]

Imagine what the Angels could have done with a manager who lived in the 21st century?

i dont say this to defend him, i wouldnt mind going with a new manager personally. But the most new school manager couldnt have gotten runs out of the offense we trotted out last year. He couldnt have turned the SP staff of 2013 into the mets, the bullpen of 2010-13 in to a force, etc.

Again, sosh does plenty to get blamed for, but this roster has had big holes since about the second half of reagins' tenure. Bats, no pitchers. Pitchers, no pen. Pitchers and pen, no bats.

As of now, november 2015, we sit with a ton of SP depth (not all of it good, but at least average) and no offense. 2 years ago we had mark mulder as an option to start real, actual major league ballgames for a team that had a 160 million dollar payroll. Along with blanton and hansen, whos out of baseball. But, we also had younger pujols, had just signed hamilton, a younger aybar, trumbo, howie, morales, etc etc.

This teams been bi polar for too long. 2014 was the first complete team we had in years. Sosh deserves blame for certain roster decisions (hamilton) but not the performance of the people who played in that alds.

Edited November 8, 2015 by ten ocho recon scout

[Stradling]

That's usually my point with Scioscia. There's real stuff that he should deserve blame for, so why make stuff up? If we had a total sabr manager this place would lose its shit the first time he pinch hit for Cron with DeJesus because the stats say to do it.