Angels

Wtf? Semantics aside, there is not one person on this planet who knew that Tanaka would get injured. He was seen as an injury risk, OK. But so were/are many other pitchers who ended up just fine. Being viewed as an injury risk doesn't mean you will have injury issues. Expressing concern is one thing, but nobody really knows.

Lol. Being concerned and fully knowing an injury would strike are two different things. Nobody knew Tanaka would get injured.

So you're saying they KNEW he would get injured? Yeah, right.

But there were/are many pitchers who were/are viewed as injury risks who haven't had injury issues. You can't predict it.

Being concerned is one thing. Being able to predict it is another. Nobody knows whether or not a pitcher will develop arm issues... or whether they will go under the knife eventually.

He didn't. But the injury he suffered almost always leads to TJ. Maybe he's an exception.

Maybe he did it to lower expectations.. and if things went wrong he can fall back on that. You can't believe everything a GM says to the media. I still don't think they would be dishing out $175 million if they believed that's all he was. $175 million for a #3 starter...does that sound right to you?

You can't predict TJ, though. K-Rod's arm was supposed to fall off. Still going strong.

Dipoto does not tell Scioscia who to play. You can be sure of that. Scioscia wouldn't have any of that. Arte would obviously have the power to force a manager's hand. But I have a hard time picturing Arte telling Scioscia how to manage and who to play.

I don't think it's a part of Dipoto's job description to be telling Scioscia who to play. And I am sure that Scioscia would not let anyone boss him around when it comes to managerial decisions. No f'n way. I'm sure discussions are held. Dipoto and whoever else can all give their 2¢. But if Scioscia disagrees, whose voice carries the most weight and matters the most? The guy who writes the lineup card. This is a big reason I want Scioscia gone. He is not Dipoto's guy. A GM usually gets to pick his own manager - someone who sees things they way they do. Dipoto inherited a guy who is the opposite of him from all we've heard and know. Scioscia is more old school while Dipoto is a SABR-minded GM with new-school ideas and a modern view of the game.

And you're kidding yourself if you believe Scioscia takes orders from anyone regarding things like that. His voice is the loudest because he ultimately writes that lineup card and decides who plays and who doesn't. He's the manager. Dipoto and whoever else can give their 2¢... But it's Scioscia's call.

I'm sorry... but what are you even talking about? And how did this turn into a Mike Scioscia argument? I am genuinely confused. Ok. Do you even know why I want/wanted Scioscia gone? Or did you just assume it was because of what happened during this postseason? If so, you assumed wrong. Which already nullifies everything you said there. Again, I am not sure how you can take what I said about the Royals and turn this into some Scioscia debate. Apples to oranges, for one thing... And two, Scioscia's managing in this postseason was abysmal. However, that was not THE reason I wanted him gone. It made me want him gone even more... but I wanted to see him replaced for a while now. And the Angels finishing with the best record didn't change my mind.

I wanted Scioscia gone for a while now. Having the best record in baseball didn't change my mind. I think Dipoto should be given the opportunity to select his own manager. Someone who sees things the way he does. And yeah, he made many terrible mistakes in the postseason. No question about it. And not for the first time. Playing Hamilton? Wilson? Those bunts? And so forth. Didn't make him look good.

Not a difficult concept to grasp

Huh? Jepsen is a reliever. Tanaka was one of the very best pitchers in baseball before he went down. A true ace. Any pitcher can blow out an arm at any given time. Skaggs did. As did many other pitchers. That's not something you can predict.

It means that the best teams don't always win. You do realize that anything can happen in one series, right?

Nope. Just that the best teams don't always win.

3 games doesn't cancel out what happened over the previous 162 games. The Angels got swept by the Astros in a short series this year. You wouldn't suggest that the Astros were a better team, would you?

The first two games could've gone either way. The Angels had plenty of chances to win both games. They just came up short. They couldn't get that one big hit. Game 3 was bad.

Right. And I suppose you also think the Giants are better than the Nats?

Weaver and Shoemaker pitched fine. The first two games were winnable. It would've been nice to have a little more luck and some better execution during the key moments. Didn't happen Wilson shouldn't have even been pitching. Rasmus was a way better option. Even Santiago The Angels were the superior team, 3 games notwithstanding

Or last year

And whaaat? Weaver was nowhere near as good as Tanaka this year

You definitely said Tanaka would be nothing more than a #3 at best and have similar results as Garza, at best. Not hard to admit you were way wrong.

Are you saying that the Royals beating the A's somehow negatively impacted the Angels and their chances of beating the Royals? Are you saying there is a connection..?