Forbes: Mike Scioscia, On Path To Hall Of Fame, Should Get A New Contract With Angels On The Way

[stormngt]

9 minutes ago, GOPSnowflakesHateCezero said:

i'm not a diopoto fan, but that felt like a moreno decision all the way

that seemed to be the sentiment of this board until dipoto quit, too

Not only did he quit but he quit In July right before the trading deadline while we were still in the playoff race.

[T.G.]

18 minutes ago, nando714 said:

Maybe we could be more successful as a team and learn how to run the bases. 

Or at least how to navigate the steps into the dugout.

[nando714]

5 minutes ago, stormngt said:

Looking at the value of a coach over the success or failure of a single series is illogical.  Coaches tactical decisions done make that big of an impact of winning the game (although in basketball tactical decisions impact the game more than baseball). Mark Jackson shouldn't have gotten fired because of the poor playoffs.  However if there was poor chemistry on the tem, or players rebelling from the team, poor game to game adjustments, or using the wrong defensive or offensive strategy for the personal (for those who do not know there is a difference between offensive and defensive strategies that tactical game time decisions) than he should be fired.

I will be honest I do think Scioscia is s better manager when his team has speed where they steal bases, take third on a single or the run on contact play.  However, he really hasn't had that personal to be successful at that. 

So you’re saying Sosh has no say in personnel decisions? You don’t think they have meetings with Sosh in the off-season on how to improve the mlb club? IMO I would like some feedback from the coach who’s with these guys and see if they fit his system 

Like when people say he chose to keep Mathis over Naps ? 

2 minutes ago, stormngt said:

That is speculation.  There is no factual basis.   The GMs job is to assemble the the roster.  That is why I blame Dipoto for Hamilton and Pujols.   Unless there was some actual facts supporting the assertion that Moreno wanted Hamilton and Pujols over Dipotos objection I will blame Dipoto

But let’s be honest. Arte is business man. He’s here to make money . (Even though he said he took a loss last season)

1)Pujols put butts in the seats when he first got here. He knew he was coming up on milestones and it’s good for PR, for sales, etc. 

2) Moreno has always been about competing with the dodgers. he did it when Grienke left the angels for the payout in LA and the angels had to win the headlines again, insert Hamilton 

you can blame dipoto but at the end of the day I think arte is as competitive as anyone else and could have forced jerry’s hand 

[nando714]

29 minutes ago, The Boogie Man said:

Apples and oranges in my opinion.   You also ignore that the players were just starting their prime when Kerr got them.   You don’t think Jackson could get the Warriors to a championship?  So Walton who had a perfect coaching record in Kerr’s absence should be the difference maker in LA?  If so why hasn’t he?   

As for results, they matter if In my opinion another manager would have done more with the same talent.   Maybe you look at this pen and think a better manager would make them better.  I simply think that’s nonsense.  

Jackson took them as far as he could. If Jackson is such a great coach why hasn’t he been hired yet ? Kerr took them to another level. Fact. 

Walton did a great job for warriors and I think he’s taking the lakers in the right direction as is management. The lakers have been far more easier the watch the last couple of season than before. I can live with that 

[T.G.]

So.... Mark Jackson is going to be the next Angels coach?

[70runner]

From one who suffered through Winkles, Williams, basically until Fregosi in 79 the Angels were remarkably bad.  80s weren't much better though Mauch was pretty solid.  Winkles was personally disappointing as I had played for him one year at ASU (non-scholarship scrub team), just before he got the Angels job.  At the college level he was a class person and excellent manager, just didn't translate to MLB though could be argued he had more talent at ASU (Reggie and company) than with the Angels in those days.

Pretty much more of the same in the 90s, then Scioscia arrived, the stars aligned, and they broke the perpetual losing mold.  There is no question of Scioscia's stabilizing value to the Angels franchise, particularly during the first decade.  Having said that, he (and his teams) have been unremarkable during the past several years, with only one (brief) playoff appearance since 2011.  The injury-GM-personnel explanations all merit consideration, however, it seems time for a change, fresh ideas, new strategies.     

[stormngt]

17 hours ago, nando714 said:

So you’re saying Sosh has no say in personnel decisions? You don’t think they have meetings with Sosh in the off-season on how to improve the mlb club? IMO I would like some feedback from the coach who’s with these guys and see if they fit his system 

Like when people say he chose to keep Mathis over Naps ? 

But let’s be honest. Arte is business man. He’s here to make money . (Even though he said he took a loss last season)

1)Pujols put butts in the seats when he first got here. He knew he was coming up on milestones and it’s good for PR, for sales, etc. 

2) Moreno has always been about competing with the dodgers. he did it when Grienke left the angels for the payout in LA and the angels had to win the headlines again, insert Hamilton 

you can blame dipoto but at the end of the day I think arte is as competitive as anyone else and could have forced jerry’s hand 

Of course Scioscia gives input on player personnel; however the final decision is on the GM.  Therefore, the GM gets the accountability.   

The assistant coach will be giving feedback to the head coach but the ultimate decision is the head coach's thus he has the accountability.

I dont think trading Napoli was a bad move considering the allegation that he was coming to the games too hung over to play.  The trade for Wells was a disaster.  The trade for Wells is entirely on Reagins.

I am not going to argue your point regarding Moreno.  You very well could be correct.  However that is speculation with no factual basis.  Until there is factual basis I am going to blame the person who has ultimate responsibility for the signings....Dipoto.  

I am curious. Now that Dipoto is with the Mariners, has come out and said Moreno was responsible for the Pujols and Hamilton signings?

 

 

[jordan]

On 6/4/2018 at 4:55 PM, Dave Saltzer said:

I've asked it before, and I'll ask it again: If keeping Trout meant keeping Scioscia, would you do it?

Just thinking this question out...so if Scioscia gets fired, and Trout bails, would he follow Scioscia to wherever he landed or pick his own destination.  My logic says that Trout may like Scioscia, but is not going to base his decision on what happens with Scioscia.

[nando714]

19 minutes ago, 70runner said:

From one who suffered through Winkles, Williams, basically until Fregosi in 79 the Angels were remarkably bad.  80s weren't much better though Mauch was pretty solid.  Winkles was personally disappointing as I had played for him one year at ASU (non-scholarship scrub team), just before he got the Angels job.  At the college level he was a class person and excellent manager, just didn't translate to MLB though could be argued he had more talent at ASU (Reggie and company) than with the Angels in those days.

Pretty much more of the same in the 90s, then Scioscia arrived, the stars aligned, and they broke the perpetual losing mold.  There is no question of Scioscia's stabilizing value to the Angels franchise, particularly during the first decade.  Having said that, he (and his teams) have been unremarkable during the past several years, with only one (brief) playoff appearance since 2011.  The injury-GM-personnel explanations all merit consideration, however, it seems time for a change, fresh ideas, new strategies.     

 

[Dave Saltzer]

4 minutes ago, jordan said:

Just thinking this question out...so if Scioscia gets fired, and Trout bails, would he follow Scioscia to wherever he landed or pick his own destination.  My logic says that Trout may like Scioscia, but is not going to base his decision on what happens with Scioscia.

Too many variables here to conclude. Scioscia could get fired/not rehired, and not hired elsewhere, and Trout stays or goes. Scioscia could get fired/not rehired and Trout likes the new manager and stays. Scioscia could stay and Trout doesn't want to play for Scioscia and leaves (but all evidence does not suggest this). Scioscia could decide he just doesn't want to manage anymore (no indication of this, in fact, he's said the opposite), in which case Trout could decide to stay or leave.

The only two that are certain are if Trout says he wants to resign to stay to play under Scioscia, then I'd say you have to resign Scioscia. And, conversely, if Trout says he won't play under Scioscia, then you have to fire Scioscia. Trout is that important to this organization. 

[Taylor]

1 hour ago, Lou said:

Everybody goes to games to watch the managers. I'm already looking forward to the next homestand so I can see John Gibbons in the Toronto dugout. 

The way they spit sunflower seeds and look pissed after poor homeplate umpiring — that's what gets me to the stadium.

[jordan]

9 minutes ago, Dave Saltzer said:

Too many variables here to conclude. Scioscia could get fired/not rehired, and not hired elsewhere, and Trout stays or goes. Scioscia could get fired/not rehired and Trout likes the new manager and stays. Scioscia could stay and Trout doesn't want to play for Scioscia and leaves (but all evidence does not suggest this). Scioscia could decide he just doesn't want to manage anymore (no indication of this, in fact, he's said the opposite), in which case Trout could decide to stay or leave.

The only two that are certain are if Trout says he wants to resign to stay to play under Scioscia, then I'd say you have to resign Scioscia. And, conversely, if Trout says he won't play under Scioscia, then you have to fire Scioscia. Trout is that important to this organization. 

Definitely a lot of variables.  Eppler and Arte will have to really think this one out.  I'm sure they are already leaning towards a certain direction.  I still haven't fully made up my mind what I prefer.  I'm leaning towards a new manager, but just afraid of the unknown of a new manager.  I know what to expect with Sosh. 

[Stradling]

51 minutes ago, nando714 said:

Jackson took them as far as he could. If Jackson is such a great coach why hasn’t he been hired yet ? Kerr took them to another level. Fact. 

Walton did a great job for warriors and I think he’s taking the lakers in the right direction as is management. The lakers have been far more easier the watch the last couple of season than before. I can live with that 

Ok and management thinks Scioscia is doing a good job.   Jackson took them as far as they could go with their inexperience.  

[Dave Saltzer]

Just now, jordan said:

Definitely a lot of variables.  Eppler and Arte will have to really think this one out.  I'm sure they are already leaning towards a certain direction.  I still haven't fully made up my mind what I prefer.  I'm leaning towards a new manager, but just afraid of the unknown of a new manager.  I know what to expect with Sosh. 

My only points with that question are to show that it's not a straightforward and easy question. There are other factors that need to be considered. Without doubt, I would want input from key players such as Trout and Ohtani on the future of the manager's position as we don't want to drive them away either by keeping him or not keeping him. There's a lot more to consider in a decision like this than just the perceived wrong decisions by Scioscia by some fans. I can guarantee you that Scioscia knows far more about what is really going with the players than what the fans know, and often there are reasons why a player was or wasn't used, etc. Fans don't realize that other things can and do affect these decisions. For example, a player could be ridiculously sick and unable to play, even though the situation may warrant it. Scioscia and the player may not want that information known to everyone, so he looks like he doesn't know what he's doing to the fans, yet in fact, he knows exactly what he's doing.

There are things that Scioscia does that I think he does very well. There are things that he does that I question. For me, at this point, keeping him or not depends a lot more on what would help the club the most overall (retaining Trout, Ohtani, and some others) more than his perceived decisions on the field. Keeping the key players long term is the biggest factor for this club overall.

[cez]

1 hour ago, stormngt said:

That is speculation.  There is no factual basis.   The GMs job is to assemble the the roster.  That is why I blame Dipoto for Hamilton and Pujols.   Unless there was some actual facts supporting the assertion that Moreno wanted Hamilton and Pujols over Dipotos objection I will blame Dipoto

yeah, we're just speculating. 

pujols didn't seem to feel much affinity for dipoto when he trashed him and defended scioscia on the record.

spending a third of a billion dollars on 2 players doesn't seem like a decision made primarily or even tangentially at the GM level, especially not with a hands on owner like moreno. 

but yeah, could be completely wrong about it for sure.

 

[stormngt]

34 minutes ago, GOPSnowflakesHateCezero said:

yeah, we're just speculating. 

pujols didn't seem to feel much affinity for dipoto when he trashed him and defended scioscia on the record.

spending a third of a billion dollars on 2 players doesn't seem like a decision made primarily or even tangentially at the GM level, especially not with a hands on owner like moreno. 

but yeah, could be completely wrong about it for sure.

 

First: the fact that Pujols did not like Dipoto three years after signing with Angel's does not mean Pujols had a problem with Dipoto when he signed.  In fact it proves nothing.

Second no doubt Dipoto wouldnt spend a third of a billion on 2 players without consulting with Moreno, but that gives no evidence it was on the insistence of Moreno.

You guys could be wrong, you may not be wrong.  There is just no substantiation one way or another.  Therefore absence of further evidence the blame should go on Dipoto.

 

[Stradling]

1 hour ago, GOPSnowflakesHateCezero said:

yeah, we're just speculating. 

pujols didn't seem to feel much affinity for dipoto when he trashed him and defended scioscia on the record.

spending a third of a billion dollars on 2 players doesn't seem like a decision made primarily or even tangentially at the GM level, especially not with a hands on owner like moreno. 

but yeah, could be completely wrong about it for sure.

 

A GM has to have a skillset to communicate effectively to the owner if he is about to make a bad decision.  It isn’t completely on Dipoto, but it certainly is partially his fault.  

[stormngt]

9 hours ago, 70runner said:

From one who suffered through Winkles, Williams, basically until Fregosi in 79 the Angels were remarkably bad.  80s weren't much better though Mauch was pretty solid.  Winkles was personally disappointing as I had played for him one year at ASU (non-scholarship scrub team), just before he got the Angels job.  At the college level he was a class person and excellent manager, just didn't translate to MLB though could be argued he had more talent at ASU (Reggie and company) than with the Angels in those days.

Pretty much more of the same in the 90s, then Scioscia arrived, the stars aligned, and they broke the perpetual losing mold.  There is no question of Scioscia's stabilizing value to the Angels franchise, particularly during the first decade.  Having said that, he (and his teams) have been unremarkable during the past several years, with only one (brief) playoff appearance since 2011.  The injury-GM-personnel explanations all merit consideration, however, it seems time for a change, fresh ideas, new strategies.     

A sound argument.   I would like to see him manage a 20th season, but there is some merit to an approach.

[eligrba]

On 6/4/2018 at 2:55 PM, Dave Saltzer said:

I've asked it before, and I'll ask it again: If keeping Trout meant keeping Scioscia, would you do it?

Does that mean the Angels would not be able to win a playoff series?

[ScottT]

Mike Scioscia and Roger Lodge will be employed by Arte however long they want, it seems. 

[Troll Daddy]

On 6/4/2018 at 3:10 PM, nate said:

You think batting Pujols 4th for an entire year is only a 1-2 game swing?

No I think it’s  closer to a 4-5 game swing in the win column 

[notherhalo]

Players get credit for the wins, managers get credit for the losses