Question for long time fans

[Lou E Ville]

As in, before 2002....

 

 

When Mike Scioscia took over as manager this franchise was a couple hundred games under .500. He got us to the brink before this year, where it looks like we're about to fall back on hard times again.

 

My question is this....for those who remember what it was like before Scioscia, it seems like two out of every three years we would get off to a pretty good start, then more often than not fade in September. Under Scioscia it seems like the opposite, we get off to slow starts more often than not, but almost every year he's been here we have kicked ass in September. Why do you think this is? What is it about his managing style that flipflopped one of a franchise's biggest personality traits?

 

Has the schedule changed? I know the Angels used to get a lot of home games in April because the Midwest teams would have problems with rainouts and even snow cancellations.

 

Does his National League style of ball take longer for teams to "get"? 

 

Is it more about personnel decisions than anything to do with Scioscia?

 

What say you?

 

[Brandon]

I think it's just coincidence and people are looking too much at this season and last. I don't think his coaching style has anything to do with the guys in the batters box that either produce or don't.

As for the pre-Sosh era, those 90's teams just sucked really bad.

[Angel Oracle]

It goes back to 2002 though.

They tanked in September 2000 and 2001.

2004 and 2006 also saw slow starts that became great 2nd halves.

2009 was a .500 struggle for the first 2 months before the lineup performed 300.

The only contending season, since Scioscia arrived here, where they struggled in September was 2011. He does deserve some credit for his teams mostly playing well down the stretch in contention seasons.

[Brandon]

Ok, let me ask this then.....what could Sosh or any coach for that matter do to earn his team victories on the field at various points in a season?

[Lou E Ville]

AO wasn't 2004 the year they actually got off to a great start, but Glaus and a couple others got hurt and then we almost blew a huge lead before getting it together at the end? Glaus came back in September and we came back and beat Oakland?

[Lou E Ville]

Ok, let me ask this then.....what could Sosh or any coach for that matter do to earn his team victories on the field at various points in a season?

 

Brandon here's what got me thinking about this question. We had a decent team last year. We had a better record than the Tigers and swept them in Anaheim in September. We blew a bunch of games earlier in the season where everyone was blaming Scioscia (the horrible game in Texas to name one). Well, if we blame Scioscia for defeats, we have to give him credits for the positive trends, right? My thought process was that Scioscia lets a couple of games go early in the season to figure out who he can rely on later in the year. Is that realistic? 

[Angel Oracle]

2004's first half was a tale of two quarters.

They started off 29-15 and then went 13-24 to fall to 42-39, before going 50-31 in the 2nd half starting with a 3 game sweep in Toronto.

Colon had a 6.50 ERA in the first half and then a 3.50 ERA in the 2nd half. Escobar also pitched well in the 2nd half.

The most memorable thing was of course being 3 back with 9 to play, and then winning 7 of the next 8 games (all against fellow contenders Oakland and Texas) to take the division.

[ScottT]

I think it is absurd that people think he turned the franchise around.

 

I also think it is absurd that people blame him for where the Angels are in the 2013 standings. 

[Bruce Nye]

I have a couple of thoughts here.

 

1) Mike Scioscia always stresses winning a series and if his teams win the first 2 games of a 3 game series, we see him use the bench (much to the dislike of this crowd), and

 

2)  Scioscia preaches that it is a long season and he likes to keep his players fresh as long as he can so when September comes along he hasn't spent his starters.

[edcoffin]

I have a couple of thoughts here.

 

1) Mike Scioscia always stresses winning a series and if his teams win the first 2 games of a 3 game series, we see him use the bench (much to the dislike of this crowd), and

 

2)  Scioscia preaches that it is a long season and he likes to keep his players fresh as long as he can so when September comes along he hasn't spent his starters.

I've been comparatively watching all the AL West since probably 1986.  The one thing in addition to the 'win series, keep players fresh' take is pitching performance, particularly in late season matchups.  But yeah, I agree with both of BN's points.  

[ScottT]

Trout has played every game... almost every inning.  Same goes for Kendrick and Trumbo.  Pujols has missed two games.  I don't believe what he says.  He wants to win every game. You don't take the first two games of a series and then decide to give bench players some at bats in the third game.  If you are going to give someone a day off, you usually do it before an off day or on a day game after a night game.  

[Caralho]

Those mid to late 90's teams had poor starting pitching which means the bullpens get taxed earlier in the season. Also slumping in September might not be related to fatigue, it could be random or crumbling under pressure.

[Bruce Nye]

Trout has played every game... almost every inning.  Same goes for Kendrick and Trumbo.  Pujols has missed two games.  I don't believe what he says.  He wants to win every game. You don't take the first two games of a series and then decide to give bench players some at bats in the third game.  If you are going to give someone a day off, you usually do it before an off day or on a day game after a night game.  

 

 

This year, yes.  But injuries to Bourjos, Aybar and Callaspo have probably forced him to manage differently.

[FabulousFabregas]

2001 they were absolutely terrible in September.  I remember it felt like they lost every damn game.

 

Mike was a good manager when he was younger but he's gotten older and too comfortable, arrogant, and stubborn.  He also lost key coaches, who played a huge part in the team's 2000's success management wise.  His bullpen management and management of the running game has gotten worse too, and those used to be two of his strengths.

[ScottT]

This year, yes.  But injuries to Bourjos, Aybar and Callaspo have probably forced him to manage differently.

 

A bit, but I don't think he has ever decided to sit someone because they've won the first two games of a series. Unless it was at the end of the season.  If so, that is a weak move.  

[stormngt]

As in, before 2002....

 

 

When Mike Scioscia took over as manager this franchise was a couple hundred games under .500. He got us to the brink before this year, where it looks like we're about to fall back on hard times again.

 

My question is this....for those who remember what it was like before Scioscia, it seems like two out of every three years we would get off to a pretty good start, then more often than not fade in September. Under Scioscia it seems like the opposite, we get off to slow starts more often than not, but almost every year he's been here we have kicked ass in September. Why do you think this is? What is it about his managing style that flipflopped one of a franchise's biggest personality traits?

 

Has the schedule changed? I know the Angels used to get a lot of home games in April because the Midwest teams would have problems with rainouts and even snow cancellations.

 

Does his National League style of ball take longer for teams to "get"? 

 

Is it more about personnel decisions than anything to do with Scioscia?

 

What say you?

Past Angel teams would quit late in the year.  It does seem that Scioscia's team don't show up until May!

[stormngt]

Brandon here's what got me thinking about this question. We had a decent team last year. We had a better record than the Tigers and swept them in Anaheim in September. We blew a bunch of games earlier in the season where everyone was blaming Scioscia (the horrible game in Texas to name one). Well, if we blame Scioscia for defeats, we have to give him credits for the positive trends, right? My thought process was that Scioscia lets a couple of games go early in the season to figure out who he can rely on later in the year. Is that realistic? 

Actually that seems exactly what he is doing.  However, his attempting to get Abreu AB's and juggling the lineup really hurt last year.  Can't explain this year except it seems like one aspect of the teams break downs.  If its not the starting pitching, its the offense....if not the offense its the relief pitching, and like today, if not the relief pitching its the F'n defense breakdowns.

[Angel Oracle]

Is that a reflection of just being one of those seasons (everything goes wrong)?

Or a reflection on this coaching staff's ability to prepare and manage?

Or some of both?