Angels

I can't believe how many Kool-Aid drinkers there are here.

Seriously?

Well Deserved? Extension?

You should really think about that...

It's hilarious and kind of creepy how a certain few members go batshit crazy whenever someone mentions anything negative about Scioscia. They'll go as far as devoting their entire day just to defend him on a message board.

Lol so much for "big game james" dude has been weak this post season. This game might be over with a real big game pitcher in bumgarner on the mound.

Some team will give him a big contract...I just hope the Angels don't. He's overrated and already showing signs of decline. And he'll be 33 and almost 34 by the end of next season. Pass

Of course we wouldn't be. But the fact that it was such a horrendous call that failed is the reason people are still talking about it.

Had it worked it would've been a horrendous call that worked, that's it. But Scioscia's horrible decision significantly decreased the odds of anything positive happening that inning.

Because the guy batting after the best player in the world was bound to get out. Kole should have been able to get the bunt down. By the way, before anyone goes crazy, I was against a bunt in that situation.

It could've worked out. Calhoun could've properly executed that bunt...and Pujols could've had a huge hit to bring in the go-ahead run. All of those things could've happened.

But it still wouldn't change the fact that it was one of the worst calls you'll ever see a manager make in regards to the sac bunt.

Scioscia was awarded for his managing of 162 games, not one plate appearance that you disagreed with in the playoffs. There is your big picture context.

Congrats on the award? But it still means nothing. Only the managers that have a lot of talent to work with have a chance to win this subjective award.

How do we know that the best manager in baseball wasn't someone that managed a lousy team?

He has his strengths and his weaknesses. But yeah. I don't think any good manager does that. Bunting on a 3-1 count was bad enough...but knowing your MVP was just going to get walked intentionally made it even worse. It was a double whammy in such an important moment of the game.

Your reply was to CF8 regarding the bunts. All I did was interject by saying that if you're going to bring up the total number of sac bunts each team had, shouldn't you at least offer some context? Are all rosters alike? Offenses? In-game situations and scenarios? Not all bunts are bad. It's just up to a manager to know when to apply it correctly.

The 3-1 bunt with Trout due up was (obviously) one of the worst managerial decisions you'll ever see as it pertains to the sac bunt. And that wasn't a mistake to him. He believed it was the right call. I don't think any smart/good manager does that.

He actually brought more context than you did. At least he mentioned the team's worst hitter had the most sac bunts.

I'm sure you know the context of the other teams' bunts, including super manager Joe Maddon.

I wasn't the one bringing up the total number of sac bunts each team had... and thinking that proved something without context, though. Some bunts are justified. The one Scioscia called for sure wasn't.

You just can't handle different opinions from your own. Especially ones regarding Scioscia.

And psstt, you're the only one here throwing insults around at other posters.

Pointing out the total number of bunts each team had does nothing without context.

With the way Trout was swinging and missing this playoffs, taking the bat out of his hands was the smart move.

That happened in Game 1. Good to know that you think it's ok to take the bat away from the best player in the world, though.

In 162 games the Angels sacrifice bunted 29 times. That's it, just 29 times over the entire season with John McDonald leading the group with 5.

Two Cleveland Indians lead the American league in sacrifices, Jose Ramirez had 13 and Mike Aviles had 11, between them they had five less than the entire Angels squad. In total 50 bunts from Terry Francona's squad. Remember when so many people wanted Francona over Scioscia? Good times.

Baltimore had 37 bunts, what the hell is wrong with Showalter!

The Royals had 33 bunts and that is obviously why Yost is ruining that team.

The Yankees had 32 bunts and who knows, if they just had only 29 like the Angels they may have made the playoffs.

The A's had 27 bunts. Maybe two more and they win the wildcard play in game. Naw... impossible.

The Mariners had 37 bunts and we all saw what happened to them. Losers.

The Rays were in fourth place in their division but lead it in bunts with 42. Maddon, super genious.

The Rangers were the AL West leader in bunts with 42 and of course were the bottom of the standings. Maddon and Washington, two peas in a pod.

Toronto had 37 bunts and has ended up watching the playoffs for the last couple decades at home.

It is obvious to everyone that Scioscia bunts way too much.

Here's where your logic fails...

Not all bunts are alike. Some bunts actually make sense. Not all bunts are bad.

Also, you are not even taking rosters into account (talent level of hitters). Or in-game situations and scenarios.

However it was not a mistake. It was a calculated strategy that he stubbornly continues to implement.

Exactly. While it was a mistake, he didn't believe that it was a mistake. He actually believed that bunting Calhoun on a 3-1 count was a good idea. And guess what? That "strategy" would've essentially taken the bat out of Trout's hands to boot since first base would've been open.

A good/smart manager doesn't do that.

Not true. I blamed the offense for collectively sucking and Scioscia at the same time. They both deserved the blame.

Lol. Methinks you're giving a wee bit too much credit to a man who sits on his ass in the dugout and too little to the actual players who, you know, actually played on the field.

This award is only given to managers managing teams full of talent. That's a fact. You will never see a manager win this award if their team is devoid of talent. This award really means nothing.

Payroll certainly helped Scioscia out when Skaggs and Richards went down for the season.

The Twins stink, have no talent to compete and no manager improves their lot this season so thanks for the idiotic strawman argument.

How about this, Scioscia manages the A's this season, do you think they take a three month dump to lose the AL West title?

Shoemaker pitching like an ace and Rasmus putting up zeroes certainly helped. Not to mention the shutdown pen that Dipoto gave him.

That's the point! The Twins stunk and had no talent. Had Scioscia been managing the Twins he would not have won this award because managers don't win this award while managing teams devoid of talent.

And Beane would never hire someone like Scioscia to begin with.

One of the silliest awards. The LA Sports Awards might be more legit.

They have to give it to somebody. 1 in 15 chance at the start of the year. Only two or three times in the wild card era has the manager of a non playoff team won. You can generally rule out Yankees or Red Sox managers because they are expected to win games. So, two manager of the year awards for Scioscia in fourteen seasons isn't all that meaningful.

Anyone who watched him manage during the postseason should be able to tell what a farce this win is.

The Angels had one of the highest payrolls in baseball with some amazing talent this year. Would Scioscia have won this award had he been managing the Twins?

Nope

? I sure don't expect Pujols or Hamilton to perform to the value of their contracts. They're both massive busts already.

The thing is, with such a large deal comes large expectations and a much longer leash. Regarding Hammy... do you think that it's OK to expect a league average player (at best) who is set to make $83 million for the next 3 years? $83 million over 3 years for a part-time league average player..? Does that sound ok?

And because of his name and contract he has a longer leash. If he sucks they're stuck with him unless they just release him.

Likewise! You're making some non-trollish posts all of a sudden! I'm just wondering if it's because you're not in character anymore and/or decided to hang 'em up for good or is it because you wanted to mix some non-trollish posts with the trollish posts to make yourself seem less obvious?

Bullpen? Richards? Shoemaker? Weaver? Rasmus? Santiago for some period? Aybar? Kendrick? The catchers? Pujols? Freese? Some of the bench guys? Did you forget about them?

The Angels had the best record for a reason. It wasn't because of two guys, that's for sure.

And yet the Angels IF was still better than theirs.

Not really. You only make trades if they make sense.

Do the Angels have someone ready and capable enough to replace Aybar? How about Kendrick? Iannetta? Freese? Do they have a good farm system with excellent and ML ready prospects that I'm not aware of? These guys are cheap also and bargains. Not like they're killing the payroll.

So, who replaces them? Keep in mind that the Angels are trying to win (and have a team good enough as it stands to do just that)

That's an insignificant piece of information. 2 of the 4 players (Kendrick and Aybar) on the Angels in the IF were some of the best at their positions this year and are consistently good every year. Pujols is above average (top-4 WAR this year in AL among 1B) despite being a shell of his former self. Freese was serviceable. The Angels infield was awesome. They were a big reason why they were so good this year.

How many teams even had an all 30+ IF since 2001? And as good as the Angels one? Would it make you feel better if Freese got moved and someone like Green or Beckham took over? Hey, they wouldn't have a 30+ IF anymore. They may get worse.. but younger. I guess that move would improve their odds in the postseason?

But why would the Angels trade them, though? And who exactly would they replace them with? You can't move Kendrick, Aybar, Iannetta, or even Freese without expecting a massive downgrade whoever replaces them. That would weaken the team. They were huge reasons why the Angels were so good this year.

Aybar had the highest WAR in the AL among shortstops. Kendrick was also one of the very best at his position. Freese was serviceable. Beckham would be a huge downgrade. And Green is someone I don't see as a starting player. Iannetta? Solid job.