Haren speaks the truth!

[Stradling]

Why is it that when a player is likeable, bandwagons of fans automatically agree with anything they say?

Why do you doubt him?

[Eric]

 

[mp170.6]

Why do you doubt him?

 

It's not that.  I haven't really thought about his comments yet.  There's a couple interpretations that could be made. 

 

Some people on this board, though, just step right up in full agreement. 

[tdawg87]

Haren would know more about the Angels' team chemistry than any of us at least. I think it's just an automatic assumption that he's not just making sh*t up. Pretty fair to assume that, I think.

[Mark68]

"If they would have kept the team together and rolled it over into this year, I guarantee that team would have played really good baseball. We got off to a little bit of a slow start [last year], but we really started jelling as a team throughout the year. We came a couple of games short."

 

Yeah, this sounds like a guy who isn't bitter about not being here. He hides it well, but that statement, to me, sounds like, "Well, if I was still there, this probably wouldn't be happening." While that may or may not be true, he's gloating a little. Fine. He and his 5.17 ERA can gloat. He's on a team that is winning.

[Stradling]

He's not gloating. He's just sharing his opinion of how he felt the team played last year and that they figured out how to play together. It really was a strong team after April.

[arch stanton]

Yes and we should have kept the 2002 team together for 2003. 

[Agalloch]

Should've kept Haren or quickly resigned him for less. I was fine with not picking up his option but I always liked the guy and didn't kknow Blanton was the replacement.

[Mark68]

He's not gloating. He's just sharing his opinion of how he felt the team played last year and that they figured out how to play together. It really was a strong team after April.

Except August. And the last week of the season.

[austin724]

Yes I believe we did keep the 2002 team together for 2003. That was a no brainer.

[Mark68]

Should've kept Haren or quickly resigned him for less. I was fine with not picking up his option but I always liked the guy and didn't kknow Blanton was the replacement.

Actually, Vargas was his replacement.

[Eric]

Awesome Thread just became Awesomer Thread.

"He's gloating" :roflmao:

[tdawg87]

Mike paid Haren to say this.

[Mark68]

Awesome Thread just became Awesomer Thread.

"He's gloating" :roflmao:

Yeah, I know it doesn't look like it to those who don't understand subtlety. Of course he's diplomatic about it. But he is either gloating, has sour grapes, or a little of both. I'm sure he feels entitled to be upset.

 

But he still has a 5.17 ERA this year, so, in retrospect, letting him walk STILL looks good.

[Eric]

 You DO realize that I make my living parsing subtlety, don't you?  

[arch stanton]

Yes I believe we did keep the 2002 team together for 2003. That was a no brainer.

How did that work out?

[Lifetime]

But do you understand it?

[Mark68]

 You DO realize that I make my living parsing subtlety, don't you?  

Podoby's nerfect.

[austin724]

It didn't work out but how can ownership justify tearing a World Series team apart. If they would have done that fans would have been irate to say the least.

[Eric]

EPIC Thread Alert!

 

Chuck might want to make room in the AngelsWin.com Thread HOF Forum.

 

[haloman]

Thx Dan, I'm sure chemistry was the the reason the Angels sucked at the beginning of last year and not your fat pitches getting hammered over the fence. Definitely couldn't have been that.

[mp170.6]

OK, my thoughts:

 

1.  I think the idea of team chemistry is overemphasized, too often used as a scapegoat for other failures.  Not saying it isn't important.  You just never hear about chemistry problems when a team is winning games.  Other teams break up their chemistry without a noticeable effect the following year.  Look at the Cardinals and how they've played since Pujols' departure. 

 

2.  What is he implying about team chemistry?  Were the guys who brought good chemistry to the team shipped out?  Or did Dipoto and Moreno make mistakes in their offseason acquisitions?  This can be interpreted different ways. 

 

3.  I have no doubts Torii Hunter was a good leader.  Why is it, though, that no other player is capable of stepping up as a leader?  Why isn't Scioscia and his coaches capable of filling that void in leadership?  This is what they are paid to do, to provide leadership. 

 

4.  Haren places the blame on players' performance.  Why then are so many players sucking at once if Scioscia and his coaching staff are doing a good job?  Why is underachievement the norm in Anaheim over the last several years?

[tomsred]

Dan Haren > Jerry DiPoto.  Jerry can't comment because Dan will say "scoreboard baby."  LOL

[gurn67]

Team underachieved the last three years with Torii as "team leader".

[YouthofToday]

Haren > Dipoto??? Seriously?