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

Mike Scioscia vs Frank Robinson


Billy_Ball

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Stradling said:

Dude, think about what you are doing.  You are siding with a complete asshole instead of Mike Scioscia.  You lose any sort of credibility with any issue you have with Scioscia when you do that.  

Hitler or Scioscia?

”oh Hitler hands down”

-Bob

Trump or Scioscia?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Stradling said:

Dude, think about what you are doing.  You are siding with a complete asshole instead of Mike Scioscia.  You lose any sort of credibility with any issue you have with Scioscia when you do that.  

Hitler or Scioscia?

”oh Hitler hands down”

-Bob

can't it be both?

images-6 copy 4.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone even remember the context of the situation?  

Game 154.  Guillen PR for by Amezaga who scored from first on Garret's double.  Halos won the game 5-3.  Got them to two games back.  It was the first win of a 5 game streak and 7 of 9 to win the division.  

Guillen had a total melt down like a child.  Literally like a 4 year old in the mall.  

It literally blows my mind how some can post some of the stuff they do on this board.  

Actually makes me concerned that the same people might be someone's boss and that they may actually have significant oversight as the the well being of others.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember being so happy when the Angels got Guillen.  Obviously, the dude could play ball and it seemed like he had the type of passion I like to see from players.  However, as the season went on, you could tell what Guillen had wasn't passion, it was that he was just a very angry man.  Yes, he was a good player, but he had no control of the emotions.  Big difference.

It is a shame too.  All that talent wasted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, VariousCrap said:

I remember being so happy when the Angels got Guillen.  Obviously, the dude could play ball and it seemed like he had the type of passion I like to see from players.  However, as the season went on, you could tell what Guillen had wasn't passion, it was that he was just a very angry man.  Yes, he was a good player, but he had no control of the emotions.  Big difference.

It is a shame too.  All that talent wasted.

Yep.

Also from what I've been told by some people in the FO, Jose Guillen was a total asshole and would act like that spoiled brat we have all seen in the store throwing a tantrum when you just say "poor parents". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I don’t think I’ve ever seen anything as outrageous in baseball as when Guillen had his little bitch melt down over being pinch run for.  Absolutely ridiculous. 

It was also extremely disappointing that he wasn’t in the line up for the playoffs. He was probably our 2nd most dangerous bat.  That’s entirely on Guillen tho.  If the story that he attacked Scoiscia in the club house is true (presumably it is, the unions silence an absolute confirmation) then he had to go no matter what.  Guillen being a selfish baby cost us that year.  I’m still butt hurt about the Angels failure to win another World Series in those years.  Mostly I blame Bill Stoneman for being a miserable failure as a GM.  But in 2004 it was on Guillen more then anybody.   Jesus it’s amazing how after all these years this shit makes my blood boil.  Going to stop now....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

 I don’t think I’ve ever seen anything as outrageous in baseball as when Guillen had his little bitch melt down over being pinch run for.  Absolutely ridiculous. 

It was also extremely disappointing that he wasn’t in the line up for the playoffs. He was probably our 2nd most dangerous bat.  That’s entirely on Guillen tho.  If the story that he attacked Scoiscia in the club house is true (presumably it is, the unions silence an absolute confirmation) then he had to go no matter what.  Guillen being a selfish baby cost us that year.  I’m still butt hurt about the Angels failure to win another World Series in those years.  Mostly I blame Bill Stoneman for being a miserable failure as a GM.  But in 2004 it was on Guillen more then anybody.   Jesus it’s amazing how after all these years this shit makes my blood boil.  Going to stop now....

I was very critical on Stoneman on not getting that one extra piece that would push us over the top for another title.  Then after experiencing Reagins and Dipoto I feel the need to apologize to the man for my comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, ANAHEIMBOB said:

Nothing like getting swept in the postseason by Boston. Guillen is a malcontent yes. Scioscia is a  control freak.  

It’s called managing to win the game, and they won the game.  Guillen is a piece of shit, defending him is just about as bad.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of what you think, Bob, Scioscia was the manager and his decision making is final on the field of play. Insubordination of the kind Guillen is guilty of, an assault, requires him to be removed from the team.  

Stoneman understood this and wrote up the suspension. Stoneman made the call to banish Guillen from the playoffs, this is not a decision a manager can make. It required approval of the owner of the Angels along with the Union and MLB's commissioner's office and it was backed by all.

So really, your argument is against all of baseball, not Scioscia. 

Edited by Blarg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, stormngt said:

I was very critical on Stoneman on not getting that one extra piece that would push us over the top for another title.  Then after experiencing Reagins and Dipoto I feel the need to apologize to the man for my comments.

Stoneman wasn’t utterly incompetent but he did a poor job managing his assets.  He deserves the criticisms because he wasn’t good.  Dipoto obviously also sucked but for different reasons (Dipoto’s damage was obviously more severe as far maintaining a healthy competitive organization).  They’re at opposite ends of the trash spectrum. I do wonder if maybe Dipoto wouldn’t have been better for the job in those years tho. 

Reagins was just worthless and terrible.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

Stoneman wasn’t utterly incompetent but he did a poor job managing his assets.  He deserves the criticisms because he wasn’t good.  Dipoto obviously also sucked but for different reasons (Dipoto’s damage was obviously more severe as far maintaining a healthy competitive organization).  They’re at opposite ends of the trash spectrum. I do wonder if maybe Dipoto wouldn’t have been better for the job in those years tho. 

Reagins was just worthless and terrible.  

He was the architect of the best stretch in Angel history.   He was the GM of the WS champions.  I was critical that he was too protective of prospects and not giving free agents qualifying offers in order to get draft picks if they leave.  However comp are to Reagins and Dipoto he was a god!

In fact compared to Dipoto Reagins wasn't that bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stormngt said:

He was the architect of the best stretch in Angel history.   He was the GM of the WS champions.  I was critical that he was too protective of prospects and not giving free agents qualifying offers in order to get draft picks if they leave.  However comp are to Reagins and Dipoto he was a god!

In fact compared to Dipoto Reagins wasn't that bad.

I’m not willing to give him that much credit for the World Series.  He took over in ‘99.  Anderson, Erstad and Glaus weren’t his guys.  Washburn wasn’t his guy.  He brought on some good players obviously (Lackey, Krod)  he also drafted Weaver and Kendrick.  Santana among others.  Im not really sure how to articulate my issues with him without being overly tough.  He was right for the job at that moment but beyond that he wasn’t good.  I think those teams 04-06 were extremely talented should have won a World Series.  In the hands of a more adept GM I think the odds are solid.  So while i agree he’s not nearly as bad as Dipoto overall, he still wasn’t good.  IMO of course. 

Edited by UndertheHalo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, stormngt said:

I was very critical on Stoneman on not getting that one extra piece that would push us over the top for another title.  Then after experiencing Reagins and Dipoto I feel the need to apologize to the man for my comments.

Yep, the ranking of GMs since 2000:  Eppler, Stoneman, then light years later, J. Pierpont Reagins, Dipussy

And can we please get off the "Scioscia can't handle players" mantra?    He's known for being one of the best players' managers in MLB.  Other than what Napoli commented on about him being too anal retentive with catching instructions, and the hot head Guillen, how many other players have truly had issues with Scioscia?

I agree that he has been stubborn with certain things (like the run from 3B on contact play).    But the Guillen issue was ALL Guillen's!    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, UndertheHalo said:

Stoneman wasn’t utterly incompetent but he did a poor job managing his assets.  He deserves the criticisms because he wasn’t good.  Dipoto obviously also sucked but for different reasons (Dipoto’s damage was obviously more severe as far maintaining a healthy competitive organization).  They’re at opposite ends of the trash spectrum. I do wonder if maybe Dipoto wouldn’t have been better for the job in those years tho. 

Reagins was just worthless and terrible.  

Reagins was bad but Dipoto was damaging. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Inside Pitch said:

First Guillen was a protagonist....   Now Stoneman was an utter failure...     

Looking forward to page 5 when the topic will likely be how Mike Trout was a waste of draft pick.

 

Or how Weave should not have been given 5 years/$80 million, even if it was an incredible bargain in 2011.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

First Guillen was a protagonist....   Now Stoneman was an utter failure...     

Looking forward to page 5 when the topic will likely be how Mike Trout was a waste of draft pick.

 

Perhaps “utter failure” is a bit strong.  I admit that I get pretty pissed when I think about those squads and not winning a World Series then.  I was maybe not being entirely rational.  But I don’t think it’s unfair to say that Stoneman on some level was a failure.  Yes, he was GM of a World Series winning team (mostly not his player) yes he drafted pretty well and the team was competitive during his tenure.  But I think that failing to win the World Series over 3 or 4 year period when your team is arguably the best in the league is a serious indictment of quality.   Particularly when the main cause was potentially guarding several prospects that lets face it were massive busts.  Not all of them were.  But even the ones that were good Angels failed to deliver a World Series.  Timing is important.  I know that hindsight is 20/20 but wouldn’t you trade Howie Kendrick or Ervin Santana for potentially a World Series title in 2006 ? Stoneman was the guy in charge.  He gets the blame and he deserves it.  And I don’t think it’s unreasonable to remember it that way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

Perhaps “utter failure” is a bit strong.  I admit that I get pretty pissed when I think about those squads and not winning a World Series then.  I was maybe not being entirely rational.  But I don’t think it’s unfair to say that Stoneman on some level was a failure.  Yes, he was GM of a World Series winning team (mostly not his player) yes he drafted pretty well and the team was competitive during his tenure.  But I think that failing to win the World Series over 3 or 4 year period when your team is arguably the best in the league is a serious indictment of quality.   Particularly when the main cause was potentially guarding several prospects that lets face it were massive busts.  Not all of them were.  But even the ones that were good Angels failed to deliver a World Series.  Timing is important.  I know that hindsight is 20/20 but wouldn’t you trade Howie Kendrick or Ervin Santana for potentially a World Series title in 2006 ? Stoneman was the guy in charge.  He gets the blame and he deserves it.  And I don’t think it’s unreasonable to remember it that way. 

I think it’s unreasonable to consider the most successful GM this team has ever had, that engineered the greatest run this team has ever had to be labeled a failure.  He deserves nothing but credit.  We can play the hindsight game with every single GM ever. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Stradling said:

I think it’s unreasonable to consider the most successful GM this team has ever had, that engineered the greatest run this team has ever had to be labeled a failure.  He deserves nothing but credit.  We can play the hindsight game with every single GM ever. 

Maybe, but let’s face it.  The standard for “best Angels GM” isn’t very high.  Tbh, I’m more impressed with Eppler thus far.  He inherited a far more challenging situation.  Hopefully at the end of his time with the Angels he’s delivered a championship.

Anyway, I’ve said my piece.  I appreciate the good that Stoneman did but I have it seared in my brain that he didn’t get it done with a good team.  I guess that’s unfair, but whatever.  I’ll be a butt hurt fan about that one. 

Edited by UndertheHalo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tank said:

the same boston team that went on to win the world series. they were loaded that year, and that shouldn't be overlooked or dismissed.

Yes they were. Im not sure there has been another tandom that matches up with juiced manny/ortiz since.

It goes deeper than that, though. Colon and washburn and escobar were good...schilling, pedro and wakefield were better...wasnt even close really. 

Angel fans look back fondly at 04 because on paper we were stacked. And it was exciting because of the offseason. We added vlad, who won an mvp, to the world series core.

But i think people forget how that year played out. The year started with salmon batting 7th. That was insane. 

Then the Gods shit on us. 

I was at game 1 of the ALDS. (Guest of artie, funny enough. Back when the military still got the post 9/11 hookups). Salmon threw out the first pitch on crutches...missed most of the year. GA in 04 started his arthritus decline. He was no longer the 2000-2003 version. Glaus played like 1/3 of the year. Had a hip injury if i remember, came back in september because we were struggling...was supposed to come back later but was rushed back. 

So all the offense depth of that lineup in spring training was gone. When we wondered what to do with GA, erstad, fish, vlad and guillen as outfielders, by may we signed raul mondesi...

Meanwhile in boston, manny/ortiz were insane. Varitek was a beast back then too. (For anaheimbob, guillen or no guillen, we didnt have anything close MOTO wise to match that). Throw in johnny damon, OC, roberts etc, they were built better than us, and healthy. And they had the pitching to match. The astros right now and dodgers the last few years are the closest clones to the red sox / nyy of that era. 

Maybe if we got lucky, the teams match up a bit better. A healthy glaus and GA (circa 2002) gives the team a way different look. But their injuries and salmon's make it lopsided. Vlad or no vlad, guillen or no guillen. Plus pedro. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Angel Oracle said:

Yep, the ranking of GMs since 2000:  Eppler, Stoneman, then light years later, J. Pierpont Reagins, Dipussy

And can we please get off the "Scioscia can't handle players" mantra?    He's known for being one of the best players' managers in MLB.  Other than what Napoli commented on about him being too anal retentive with catching instructions, and the hot head Guillen, how many other players have truly had issues with Scioscia?

I agree that he has been stubborn with certain things (like the run from 3B on contact play).    But the Guillen issue was ALL Guillen's!    

Eppler has been great so far.  However to be fair most thought Dipoto was great until he left.

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...