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

List of Scioscia's mind-numbing moves


Recommended Posts

Would you have been happier if Shuck had swung away like Hamilton and struck out or ground into a double play?

 

I would have been happier if Scioscia wasn't determined to gift the Orioles an out when his hitter(a hitter with a really good idea of the strikezone by the way) was way ahead in the count.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would you have been happier if Shuck had swung away like Hamilton and struck out or ground into a double play

Would have been happier with him taking a pitch and getting a free base. Bases loaded 0 outs. Possibly enough to plate the winning run and avoid extras.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scioscia was trying to make sure he has a runner on third with no more that one out so a higher combination of actions at the plate that do not include a strikeout or infield pop up can score the runner. He was playing the better odds and Aybar's next at bat provided that run even though it resulted in an out. Also by playing it the way Scioscia did it almost guarantees Mike Trout will have an at bat with a runner on base.

 

What would you rather have, higher odds of scoring at least one run and Trout up to bat or a potential double play then Aybar hitting that ground ball out to end the inning?

 

I would have been happier if Scioscia wasn't determined to gift the Orioles an out when his hitter was way ahead in the count.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The pitch he bunted was a strike. See above for the rest of the response.

 

Would have been happier with him taking a pitch and getting a free base. Bases loaded 0 outs. Possibly enough to plate the winning run and avoid extras.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scioscia was trying to make sure he has a runner on third with no more that one out so a higher combination of actions at the plate that do not include a strikeout or infield pop up can score the runner. He was playing the better odds and Aybar's next at bat provided that run even though it resulted in an out. Also by playing it the way Scioscia did it almost guarantees Mike Trout will have an at bat with a runner on base.

 

What would you rather have, higher odds of scoring at least one run and Trout up to bat or a potential double play then Aybar hitting that ground ball out to end the inning?

 

With a guy as much speed as Shuck has and a good eye at the plate, I would take the chance and let him try to draw 1 more ball off of O'Day or swing away.

 

Because again, O'Day was all over the place, make him get your hitters out. And bunting means you're playing for 1 or MAYBE 2 runs at most, which then makes it a battle of the bullpens between the Angels and the Orioles. Which does not favor the Angels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Giving away an out to a guy who can't throw strikes is bad managing. There's not a good reason to keep the bunt on with Shuck in a 3-0(and yes, Scioscia did have the bunt on with a 3-0 count, because he was going to give that out to the Orioles whether they liked it or not) or 3-1 count against O'Day there.

 

27 outs is too many! Make them only need 26!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cousins was "hitting" .224 in AAA (and even worse .188 against RHP)

He batted .163 for the Marlins last year. .135 the year before.

 

This is the guy you give up the DH for?

 

We got lucky that O'Day couldn't throw strikes but then Sosh falls all over himself by giving that same pitcher a free out. Stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or Shuck who went 0-3 and is a minor league call up (like Jimenez could be having a flash in the pan momentary success) could strike out and Aybar ends the inning with a double play. So many different scenarios and yet the one Scioscia chose actually was successful.

 

With a guy as much speed as Shuck has and a good eye at the plate, I would take the chance and let him try to draw 1 more ball off of O'Day or swing away.

 

Because again, O'Day was all over the place, make him get your hitters out. And bunting means you're playing for 1 or MAYBE 2 runs at most, which then makes it a battle of the bullpens between the Angels and the Orioles. Which does not favor the Angels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cousins was "hitting" .224 in AAA (and even worse .188 against RHP)

He batted .163 for the Marlins last year. .135 the year before.

 

This is the guy you give up the DH for?

 

We got lucky that O'Day couldn't throw strikes but then Sosh falls all over himself by giving that same pitcher a free out. Stupid.

 

Only reason that move happeend is Iannetta can't bunt. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

good times. 

 

I had the game updating on my phone. 

 

Shuck goes 3-0 after a 4 pitch walk to the previous hitter. 

 

Then I see he bunts the runners over.  First thing I thought of was - Five page thread. 

 

We've had this discussion before. 

the expected number of runs for an inning is virtually the same for first and second no outs as it is 2nd and 3rd one out.  I haven't been able to find the probability of scoring two runs relative to the two scenarios.  In the 'need one run' scenario it actually does increase the likelihood of scoring one run by sacrificing in many scenarios depending on the lineup position that it's being done from. 

 

In this case though, considering that Oday couldn't throw a strike, I think it was a very tough call.  Even though we all think he was bunting 3-0, there is no way he was actually going to.  He was showing bunt but absolutely gonna pull back.  If oday finds the zone and makes it 3-2, then your odds dramatically decrease in moving the runners with your #9 hitter at the plate. It's not as automatic as people think

 

An interesting read for stats folks

http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2006/07/empirical_analy_1.php

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or Shuck who went 0-3 and is a minor league call up (like Jimenez could be having a flash in the pan momentary success) could strike out and Aybar ends the inning with a double play. So many different scenarios and yet the one Scioscia chose actually was successful.

 

"Flash in the pan momentary success" or not, Shuck is

 

A) Fast

B) Patient at the plate

 

And O'Day was not throwing strikes in that inning. Shuck was in a good hitter's count. The Angels needed 3 runs to take the lead.

 

All of these things should add up to a conclusion besides "Welp, better give him a free out!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shuck bunting on a 3-1 count with two men on and nobody out in the 8th, after O'Day threw 7 of 8 pitches out of the strike zone. Actually, eight pitches, since the strike call on 3-0 was atrocious.

We did get the tying run, but who knows if we might have gotten more. Bases loaded, nobody out with Aybar, Trout, and Pujols.

He had him take a pitch. Once the count went 3-1 the bunt had to be execute. You guys complain for just to complain

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a fast guy he has a minor league career 74/46 stolen base success. He was 0-3 and your expectations for his 4th at bat was what?

 

"Flash in the pan momentary success" or not, Shuck is

 

A) Fast

B) Patient at the plate

 

And O'Day was not throwing strikes in that inning. Shuck was in a good hitter's count. The Angels needed 3 runs to take the lead.

 

All of these things should add up to a conclusion besides "Welp, better give him a free out!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

O'Day in the 8th inning:

Ball 1 to Conger

Strike 1 to Conger

Bunt hit by Conger

Ball

Ball

Ball

Ball 4, walk to Cousins

Ball, where Shuck showed bunt and pulled the bat back

Ball, where Shuck showed bunt and pulled the bat back

Ball, where Shuck showed bunt and pulled the bat back

Strike that should have been called a ball, that for some reason Scioscia also had Shuck trying to bunt on

Why on Earth do you give that guy a free out when he's shown no ability to get an out himself?

It's robotic smallball loyalty that should have stayed behind in the 80s.

I know this might be over your head but if schuck takes another strike he cant bunt. Taking the 3-0 pitch made sense. However if the goal was to get the runners into scoring position then he had to bunt on 3-1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Flash in the pan momentary success" or not, Shuck is

 

A) Fast

B) Patient at the plate

 

And O'Day was not throwing strikes in that inning. Shuck was in a good hitter's count. The Angels needed 3 runs to take the lead.

 

All of these things should add up to a conclusion besides "Welp, better give him a free out!"

While I am totally with you on trying not to give away outs, I think you have over simplified the scenario that giving away an out is bad in any scenario.  The managers job is to help create chances to score runs.  In this case we needed two runs to tie the score.  You obviously want to put yourself in a position of greatest probability to do so, and it's very arguable either way in this case.  Even based on the numbers.  MS didn't like his chances of something good happening with Schuck at the plate with runners on 1st and 2nd and a potential 3-2 count coming.  He put the team in a position to have two runners in scoring position.  It was the very safe move.  Granted, where they are at in this season, I would have liked to see them roll the dice a bit and let schuck try to get a hit or walk, but I can't totally fault him for the move he made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know this might be over your head but if schuck takes another strike he cant bunt. Taking the 3-0 pitch made sense. However if the goal was to get the runners into scoring position then he had to bunt on 3-1.

the point is that he didn't have to.  Jshep is saying that he liked the odds of Schuck walking even if the count went 3-2.  MS didn't want to take the chance of not getting that second guy into scoring position.  Tough call. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I am totally with you on trying not to give away outs, I think you have over simplified the scenario that giving away an out is bad in any scenario.  The managers job is to help create chances to score runs.  In this case we needed two runs to tie the score.  You obviously want to put yourself in a position of greatest probability to do so, and it's very arguable either way in this case.  Even based on the numbers.  MS didn't like his chances of something good happening with Schuck at the plate with runners on 1st and 2nd and a potential 3-2 count coming.  He put the team in a position to have two runners in scoring position.  It was the very safe move.  Granted, where they are at in this season, I would have liked to see them roll the dice a bit and let schuck try to get a hit or walk, but I can't totally fault him for the move he made.

 

I don't think giving away an out is bad in ANY scenario. I do think that the scenarios where it really makes sense are far less frequent than scenarios that managers think it makes sense in though.

 

If the team needed 1 or even 2 runs to take the lead, I would have been fine with it.

 

But in a 2 to tie/3 to lead situation, I don't like it, particularly when you're at the point where your hitter already has worked the count in his favor. At that point, you're playing for 1 run or MAYBE 2 if one of the next 2 batters gets a hit.

 

So the best case scenario created by the bunt there still involves the Angels bullpen having to out pitch the Orioles bullpen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is over the entirety of MLB spanning decades. Not on a Saturday game vs the Orioles with Shuck at bat and the Angels with a 11-18 record.

 

By the way, going by Tom Tango's run expectancies

 

Runners on 1st and 2nd, 0 outs: 1.556 runs

 

Runners on 2nd and 3rd, 1 out: 1.447 runs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, going by Tom Tango's run expectancies

 

Runners on 1st and 2nd, 0 outs: 1.556 runs

 

Runners on 2nd and 3rd, 1 out: 1.447 runs

take a look at the link I posted.  although it doesn't have anything about 'needing two run' scenario, it does dive into the 'needing one run' scenario which is much different than run expectancy.  There are many scenarios where a bunt actually increases the odds of scoring a run.  It may decrease the run expectancy overall, but in this scenario we needed two runs.  Not sure if anyone has played that out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, going by Tom Tango's run expectancies

 

Runners on 1st and 2nd, 0 outs: 1.556 runs

 

Runners on 2nd and 3rd, 1 out: 1.447 runs

 

Runners 1st and 2nd 0 outs was the starting condition.

 

Likely outcomes of Shuck attempting to hit (not bunt) are:

A.) base hit: runners 1st and 3rd no outs, run scores

B.) walk: bases loaded no outs

C.) GIDP: runner at 3rd, two outs.

 

Take the runs expected for each of those scenarios, and the weighted average of those outcomes happening given the pitcher-batter matchup, fielding positions etc.

 

As for bunting, likely possible outcomes are:

 

A.) sac bunt, runners 2nd 3rd no outs 

B.) bunt single, bases loaded no outs

 

My intuition on this is if Shuck is as good at running out bunts for base hit as Bourjos or Aybar, bunting is the right call. Otherwise hitting is the right call. I have no idea what the probability of each of those outcomes for Shuck is though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think giving away an out is bad in ANY scenario.

 

If the team needed 1 or even 2 runs to take the lead, I would have been fine with it.

 

But in a 2 to tie/3 to lead situation, I don't like it. At that point, you're playing for 1 run or MAYBE 2 if one of the next 2 batters gets a hit.

Again, I agree with your point yet the opposite is somewhat justifiable as well.  The way it actually played out was ok.  Get the score even and go to extras.  I would have liked to see what would have happened if he doesn't have schuck bunt, but it's not one that I have huge issue with like bringing in Barry Enright to pitch with the bases loaded or walking Flaherty to pitch to wieters. 

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...