Pujols is the worst player in baseball (technically)

[IEAngelsfan]

Albert should change his name to Snuffy.

[Jeff Fletcher]

53 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

I have a historical love for Pujols and I am not mad at him.  I think he is trying.  My annoyance is the culture.

I really don't think there is anything wrong with addressing it.  Get real.  Drop him in the lineup and start engaging in conversations to make a plan to resolve this.

What's the plan?  And I get ripped if I suggest somebody should be asking that question.

I asked the question in Seattle 3 weeks ago. I sat in Scioscia's office for 20 minutes and talked to him about the state of Pujols and what he's going to do about it. 

He said what he said and nothing has changed since then. 

Once again, my job is not to push the Angels one way or another. It's only to ask them the questions you want asked. If you don't like the answers, take it up with the Angels. 

[ten ocho recon scout]

1 hour ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

Up to this point, Albert was just a huge disappointment. He was a Ferrari you couldn't afford that, for whatever reason, couldn't live up to the name. It made you look badass parking it in your driveway but it didn't really do as much for you as you hoped. Now that thing can't drive 15 miles without breaking down and needing to be hauled off to the garage, yet we still use it as our daily driver.

 

[Pujols4MVP]

1 minute ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I asked the question in Seattle 3 weeks ago. I sat in Scioscia's office for 20 minutes and talked to him about the state of Pujols and what he's going to do about it. 

He said what he said and nothing has changed since then. 

Once again, my job is not to push the Angels one way or another. It's only to ask them the questions you want asked. If you don't like the answers, take it up with the Angels. 

Scioscia should run for Governor of California, he sounds like the perfect politician lol.

[YouthofToday]

All good. TheAlbertross will show up next spring "in the best shape of his life".

If dude actually plays out his contract he likely ends up with a career negative WAR with the Halos. Per Fangraphs WAR calculations he's currently sitting at a pathetic 7.6 career WAR with the Halos. A quarter billion dollars clearly doesn't buy what it once did - thanks Arte!

[YouthofToday]

22 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

I wonder what the most money a team has had to eat by releasing a player? After this year, Albert is still owed $124 million, including the $10MM "personal services" contract. Obviously the Angels aren't going to release, at least not within the next year or two. The next stage would be ongoing mystery injuries, then benching, then maybe early retirement/buyout.
But I'm thinking that 2017 is the last year he's going to play a full season, unless he bounces back next year.

That said, as I wrote that I had the thought that Scioscia might only see "19 HR, 79 RBI." By year's end, that could be "25 HR, and 95 RBI" - which he'll think, "he's still a run producer." So until Eppler steps in, Mike "it's still 1985" Scioscia won't bench Pujols until he has to be carted up to the plate.

Kung Fu Panda had nearly $60 million left when the Red Sox Appier'ed him.

[ten ocho recon scout]

Tonya harding today. Looks like she could use some cash. Anyone want to pool some money together?

(Then again i dont know that batoning his legs would mean much at this point).

[AngelsLakersFan]

43 minutes ago, ten ocho recon scout said:

 

Well done. It'd be more accurate if you could find a pic of Albert laying down that you could put on the hood. XD

[krAbs]

51 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I asked the question in Seattle 3 weeks ago. I sat in Scioscia's office for 20 minutes and talked to him about the state of Pujols and what he's going to do about it. 

He said what he said and nothing has changed since then. 

Once again, my job is not to push the Angels one way or another. It's only to ask them the questions you want asked. If you don't like the answers, take it up with the Angels. 

Wait, what DID he say? I'm sure you've reported on this but I must have missed it. I've always wanted to have a conversation and kinda throw out scenarios and see what it would actually take. Like, would he pull him (or at least move him down) if he went into an 0-20 streak? 0-40? 0-80? 0-200? Like, not in a mean way, I'm just curious if there is a line. We have already seen 0-20, and the others seem..less crazy. Or maybe, in BA terms, if he hits .220? .200? .150?

[beatlesrule]

23 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I asked the question in Seattle 3 weeks ago. I sat in Scioscia's office for 20 minutes and talked to him about the state of Pujols and what he's going to do about it. 

He said what he said and nothing has changed since then. 

Once again, my job is not to push the Angels one way or another. It's only to ask them the questions you want asked. If you don't like the answers, take it up with the Angels. 

Yup. At the end of the day, Arte gave him a 10 year extension.  Scioscia is the most powerful manager in the game.  All you can do is ask and ask you did.  We don't know how to take it up with the Angels so we complain on a message board.  

[Stradling]

Hey @Jeff Fletcher, do you think players around the league that are soon to be free agents look at how organizations treat situations, such as the Albert situation when deciding to sign or not sign with a team?  I know it felt like the team took some flack around the league from how Arte handled the Hamilton situation.  Obviously money is the biggest reason, but would something like this be a factor?  

[Dtwncbad]

1 hour ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I asked the question in Seattle 3 weeks ago. I sat in Scioscia's office for 20 minutes and talked to him about the state of Pujols and what he's going to do about it. 

He said what he said and nothing has changed since then. 

Once again, my job is not to push the Angels one way or another. It's only to ask them the questions you want asked. If you don't like the answers, take it up with the Angels. 

That's all perfectly fine.  And maybe this subject is hard to communicate clearly on a message board because things can very easily be misinterpreted.  But I will try.

My personal opinion is the job has functioned fine for decades in the exact context you describe.  You ask the questions and the answers are the answers.

I am predicting that will change for a good portion of fans.  I personally will not be surprised if the job in the near future will be measured by the quality of the info and answers draw out.

Your own words were "If you don't like the answers, take it up with the Angels."

I think fans will.  How?  I dont know yet. That would be like predicting in 1985 that facebook would be the primary way for people to share photos.  So I don't know how it will happen.  I am saying if content hungry people want real answers, and the current sytem and culture pushes them away saying "figure it out on your own" if you want that. . . They will.  And when they are pushed to find another channel to get what they want, they are not going to return to the traditional channels.

Now Jeff to be 4000% clear, I am not criticizing you or saying you are mot doing your job as it sits today.

But the world is changing and people are becoming more and more insatiable for real time information not settling for being pat on the head.

I don't know when, but there will be a day when a Mike Scioscia will have to answer harder questions and will be legitimately accountable for real answers.

 

 

[AngelsLakersFan]

13 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

That's all perfectly fine.  And maybe this subject is hard to communicate clearly on a message board because things can very easily be misinterpreted.  But I will try.

My personal opinion is the job has functioned fine for decades in the exact context you describe.  You ask the questions and the answers are the answers.

I am predicting that will change for a good portion of fans.  I personally will not be surprised if the job in the near future will be measured by the quality of the info and answers draw out.

Your own words were "If you don't like the answers, take it up with the Angels."

I think fans will.  How?  I dont know yet. That would be like predicting in 1985 that facebook would be the primary way for people to share photos.  So I don't know how it will happen.  I am saying if content hungry people want real answers, and the current sytem and culture pushes them away saying "figure it out on your own" if you want that. . . They will.  And when they are pushed to find another channel to get what they want, they are not going to return to the traditional channels.

Now Jeff to be 4000% clear, I am not criticizing you or saying you are mot doing your job as it sits today.

But the world is changing and people are becoming more and more insatiable for real time information not settling for being pat on the head.

I don't know when, but there will be a day when a Mike Scioscia will have to answer harder questions and will be legitimately accountable for real answers.

 

 

Well part of that is that these guys (the team) are insulated. You have guys like Jeff who require access to do their job, while it is ultimately the team that grants them that access and can revoke that access at any point. If Jeff starts berating Scioscia in the post game they will probably find someone else to do his job, or at least Scioscia will continue with his non-answers or start refusing to take questions from him. 

You will see this all change if the Angels actually make the playoffs, and the national media starts caring enough to ask questions, and that is because they don't have to worry about access in the long run.

[Stradling]

12 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

 

But the world is changing and people are becoming more and more insatiable for real time information not settling for being pat on the head.

 

And the world is worse off because of it.  I am not saying you are wrong, I am just saying people feel as though they are entitled to information that they simply aren't entitled to.  If you don't like the answers the team gives you, find another team or another hobby.  Now I could see that the more transparent a team becomes in the future might make them more popular, but we as fans don't need to know what goes on behind closed doors.  I would go as far as saying our enjoyment of sports is negatively affected by knowing how much the players make.  Imagine if we know of all the bickering that goes on behind closed doors.  Or if we are somehow justified in knowing what the game plan is with this player or that player.  I think at some point fans are fans and not an actual team entity that needs to be kept abreast of everything going on.  

[JarsOfClay]

Poo holes really needs to lose some weight.  He looks 9 months pregnant in that photo.

Angels give him 250m and he cant even give back enough respect to stay in shape.  What a damn LOSER!

[ten ocho recon scout]

1 hour ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

Well done. It'd be more accurate if you could find a pic of Albert laying down that you could put on the hood. XD

Or a more accurate ferrari

I like to think of the back wheels as his legs.

[AngelsLakersFan]

4 minutes ago, Stradling said:

And the world is worse off because of it.  I am not saying you are wrong, I am just saying people feel as though they are entitled to information that they simply aren't entitled to.  If you don't like the answers the team gives you, find another team or another hobby.  Now I could see that the more transparent a team becomes in the future might make them more popular, but we as fans don't need to know what goes on behind closed doors.  I would go as far as saying our enjoyment of sports is negatively affected by knowing how much the players make.  Imagine if we know of all the bickering that goes on behind closed doors.  Or if we are somehow justified in knowing what the game plan is with this player or that player.  I think at some point fans are fans and not an actual team entity that needs to be kept abreast of everything going on.  

Excuse my lack of knowledge of your company before reading this post - and apologies for bringing up work...

But lets say In N Out had a long running, long term contract with a single beef patty supplier. Lets pretend that this supplier, for whatever reason, was delivering meat of a significantly lower quality to your stores - significantly enough that the customers could easily tell that the quality had gone down.

Do you think those customers deserve to know what the situation is? Do you think your company would stick with said supplier, even if a long term contract in place? Would you keep telling customers that everything is fine, that those hamburger patties are still putting up 95 rbi's?

 

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

Excuse my lack of knowledge of your company before reading this post - and apologies for bringing up work...

But lets say In N Out had a long running, long term contract with a single beef patty supplier. Lets pretend that this supplier, for whatever reason, was delivering meat of a significantly lower quality to your stores - significantly enough that the customers could easily tell that the quality had gone down.

Do you think those customers deserve to know what the situation is? Do you think your company would stick with said supplier, even if a long term contract in place? Would you keep telling customers that everything is fine, that those hamburger patties are still putting up 95 rbi's?

 

Fair question, but it is simply different.  Baseball contracts don't have performance standards that have to be met in order to keep said contract.  Simply put we can stop doing business at any time with any vendor if they deliver us substandard quality.  If that were true of major league baseball this thread wouldn't exist.  Now of course you can ask the questions of INO through our customer service department, but if you ask us specifically what we are going to do, well we will give you a standard answer of, "We take quality seriously and we will be looking into this situation".  Also, quite frankly, what Albert does wouldn't put the community in harms way, unlike serving an inferior product.  If we find out we are doing business with an unethical company, like has happened in the past, you will read that we have stopped doing business with that vendor.  Do I think you are entitled to know how we run our business, of course not.  If you want a better analogy, do you think you are privy to know what I make a year, and what kind of accountability I face for not meeting company expectations?  If you think that is fair then I would like to know what you make and what kind of trouble you have been in for not being good at your job anymore.  

[Jeff Fletcher]

23 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

That's all perfectly fine.  And maybe this subject is hard to communicate clearly on a message board because things can very easily be misinterpreted.  But I will try.

My personal opinion is the job has functioned fine for decades in the exact context you describe.  You ask the questions and the answers are the answers.

I am predicting that will change for a good portion of fans.  I personally will not be surprised if the job in the near future will be measured by the quality of the info and answers draw out.

Your own words were "If you don't like the answers, take it up with the Angels."

I think fans will.  How?  I dont know yet. That would be like predicting in 1985 that facebook would be the primary way for people to share photos.  So I don't know how it will happen.  I am saying if content hungry people want real answers, and the current sytem and culture pushes them away saying "figure it out on your own" if you want that. . . They will.  And when they are pushed to find another channel to get what they want, they are not going to return to the traditional channels.

Now Jeff to be 4000% clear, I am not criticizing you or saying you are mot doing your job as it sits today.

But the world is changing and people are becoming more and more insatiable for real time information not settling for being pat on the head.

I don't know when, but there will be a day when a Mike Scioscia will have to answer harder questions and will be legitimately accountable for real answers.

 

 

That's already happened. Every single one of you can write whatever you want ripping the Angels for whatever you want. You can put it online and see how many likes and RT's you can get and if you get enough, the Angels will notice. 

There are also columnists (Jeff Miller and Mark Whicker at my organization) whose job is to have an opinion and say what they think the Angels should do. They get tons of emails from readers telling them what they'd like them to write. Feel free to let them know what you think. 

It's unlikely any of that will change what the Angels think.

 

 

[ScottT]

Hot take from ESPN.  Im gonna have to find them on tv and online  

[Dtwncbad]

There are lots if land mines in this subject so I continue to be careful.

I am simply saying the product on the field and the data delivered is gonna have to match the market or the market goes somewhere else.  That's just the way it is.

I personally would never buy a newspaper for sports coverage at this point and about 90% of the time I hear a player or manager interviewed it is blah blah blah.  So I don't even pay attention anymore to it.

I watch sports with friends and I realize how we have the sound down and we have tines out the announcers and analysts because their input is garbage compared to honest conversations among the people in the room.

I spend what time I have on sports stuff in a forum room to share ideas instead of clicking around to read what talking heads say.

I am not unique.  I'm fact I am an old fart at 50.  What do we realistivally expect this next generation to consume?  Blah blah blah from Mike Scioscia?

I can't predict what I am going to have for dinner tonight but I am pretty comfortable predicting the main channel of baseball data delivery (a microphone in MS face with BS, pat me on the head with insulting vanilla answers) is going the way of the way of the dinosaur.

 

 

[AngelsLakersFan]

5 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Fair question, but it is simply different.  Baseball contracts don't have performance standards that have to be met in order to keep said contract.  Simply put we can stop doing business at any time with any vendor if they deliver us substandard quality.  If that were true of major league baseball this thread wouldn't exist.  Now of course you can ask the questions of INO through our customer service department, but if you ask us specifically what we are going to do, well we will give you a standard answer of, "We take quality seriously and we will be looking into this situation".  Also, quite frankly, what Albert does wouldn't put the community in harms way, unlike serving an inferior product.  If we find out we are doing business with an unethical company, like has happened in the past, you will read that we have stopped doing business with that vendor.  Do I think you are entitled to know how we run our business, of course not.  If you want a better analogy, do you think you are privy to know what I make a year, and what kind of accountability I face for not meeting company expectations?  If you think that is fair then I would like to know what you make and what kind of trouble you have been in for not being good at your job anymore.  

Funny, reading this I think I kind of realized that our issue with the Pujols situation comes down to the team being run too much like a traditional business. Albert is in the public eye and therefore a major target of our criticism in ways traditional employees or suppliers are not.

Interestingly enough though, Im sure you have encountered a customer or two who is hell bent on having one individual held accountable for whatever issue they may have. I generally find these people abhorrent, so perhaps I should take a look in the mirror in this situation. However the Angels plan on dealing with the situation, I don't think that the status quo is healthy for the franchise. Knowledge of poor job performance, and putting the quality of the product second to things that don't mean anything to the customer will ultimately cost the organization customers.

[Jeff Fletcher]

3 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

There are lots if land mines in this subject so I continue to be careful.

I am simply saying the product on the field and the data delivered is gonna have to match the market or the market goes somewhere else.  That's just the way it is.

I personally would never buy a newspaper for sports coverage at this point and about 90% of the time I hear a player or manager interviewed it is blah blah blah.  So I don't even pay attention anymore to it.

I watch sports with friends and I realize how we have the sound down and we have tines out the announcers and analysts because their input is garbage compared to honest conversations among the people in the room.

I spend what time I have on sports stuff in a forum room to share ideas instead of clicking around to read what talking heads say.

I am not unique.  I'm fact I am an old fart at 50.  What do we realistivally expect this next generation to consume?  Blah blah blah from Mike Scioscia?

I can't predict what I am going to have for dinner tonight but I am pretty comfortable predicting the main channel of baseball data delivery (a microphone in MS face with BS, pat me on the head with insulting vanilla answers) is going the way of the way of the dinosaur.

 

 

It sounds like what you really, ultimately, want is someone to argue with Mike Scioscia on your behalf. 

That's basically it, right?

[AngelsLakersFan]

Just now, Jeff Fletcher said:

It sounds like what you really, ultimately, want is someone to argue with Mike Scioscia on your behalf. 

That's basically it, right?

I can't speak for Dtwncbad but I know that is exactly what I want. 

[fan_since79]

5 hours ago, zenmaster said:

Don't be so hard on him. He's just having an off-decade.

He'll be going into the Hall as a Cardinal and everyone will be talking about his great seasons in St. Louis.

His Angels career will be an afterthought. A $250 million afterthought.