dprep80

2 minutes ago, The Boogie Man said:

The timing.  

Are you also complaining about Trout’s playoff history?  Because that is about as relevant.  

Because every year that passes without a playoff appearance makes questioning the manager (along with everyone else) more relevant.  And with his contract set to expire, it becomes even more relevant.

3 minutes ago, Scotty@AW said:

So you want to replace one manager that's stuck in his ways with a great clubhouse rapport for another manager stuck in his ways with a crappy reported clubhouse rapport. 

I assume Girardi is a bit more of a hard %&*& which I think would benefit the Angels.

2 minutes ago, The Boogie Man said:

Ok, but in your words he hasn’t been, so why bring it up now?  Why bring it up any of the last three years?  If you spilled milk, would you bitch about it four years later?  

Are you seriously asking why I would bring up criticizing a manger or the topic in general in an internet forum. 

2 minutes ago, The Boogie Man said:

Ok, so why?   The last three years he has been given shitty, incomplete injured rosters.  So why now do you want him criticized?  

Allow myself to clarify myself.  I've wanted him criticized for longer than 2018.

4 minutes ago, The Boogie Man said:

Why?  Isn’t it too late for that because the last few years haven’t been his fault?  

Oh and 100% chance he has posted here before.  

Wrong 

2 minutes ago, Scotty@AW said:

You joke but still haven't named one.

And a big reason why you haven't named one is because there really isn't a bette manager than Scioscia that's available.

And it's really a fit issue.  Bringing in a veteran manager that's stuck in his ways really doesn't fit the Angels because they already have that.  Bringing in a new manager isn't a bad thing but that new manger has to take what Scioscia did so well (the clubhouse and media relations) and then handle the lineup card and bullpen better than his predecessor. 

It's a very specific circumstance, and there isn't a single available manager that fits it. 

Sorry to answer the question for you, but you clearly weren't answering it. 

 

I thought it doesn't matter one way or another?  Kidding aside, I like Girardi.  Wouldn't be that different personality wise.

9 minutes ago, Scotty@AW said:

Josh Paul, Brad Ausmus are the most likely candidates given that Eppler brought them in and they currently work for the Angels in some capacity. 

I think what's even more interesting is if they do replace Scioscia, will any of the remaining coaches stay on board?  For example, let's say Paul is promoted, do Dino Ebel and Alfredo griffin say, "F it, I just got passed for a job by a kid that's only been here a year and I've been here a decade.  I'm out."

But yeah, I had to guess I'd say if they do get rid of Scioscia, it'll be Ausmus as manager, Paul as bench coach, Nagy and Hinske stay on.  Everyone else is replaced. 

Nagy and Hinske would likely go too if Scioscia was fired.

7 minutes ago, True Grich said:

I keep thinking about this.  This has always been the case.  It stings a bit to see it written...

In the grand scheme of things - the Angels even with 2002 are somewhat irrelevant.

Yes but it could be both a blessing and a curse.  The lack of constant media scrutiny could be a big reason guys choose to play here.

5 minutes ago, Scotty@AW said:

To be fair, you're openly critical of him and still haven't named a single manager that's available that's better than him, even after being prompted. 

Shane Victorino (though he will later secretly convince Trout to sign with Philly so it may be a net loss.)

1 minute ago, Scotty@AW said:

Chances Prep has been here before and simply been banned but has returned with a new username.....I give it 80%. 

Zero. I use the twitter machine though.

Just now, Scotty@AW said:

Name a single manager that is available that is as good as Scioscia in handling a clubhouse and is better than Scioscia at building a winner.  If you can name one that is better than Scioscia than I'm all for it.  I mean Scioscia might be the worst I've ever seen at bullpen management, but everything else about this team's sale of play seems pretty solid. 

Also, this new manager of yours should probably speak Spanish.  It isn't a requirement, but given the amount of Latin Americans on the roster, it's probably a good idea.  Scioscia is fluent in Spanish. 

To be fair (even though this is exceptionally intellectually dishonest), I never said the Angels should fire MS. I just want in the short term everyone screaming and debating about his performance and how it must be measured.

4 minutes ago, Torridd said:

Perhaps, but I guess I don't see the point in controlling such criticism. Arte can either ignore it or not. Moreno has his own ideas on Scioscia already and he doesn't seem like the insecure type not  to let people talk freely.

Wanting to maintain control and being insecure are not mutually exclusive.

3 minutes ago, Torridd said:

Dprep, what is your theory why there has been "no" criticism by the media on Scioscia?

I think its a product of lack of media coverage/interest (which can be blamed on fans) plus the control Arte has over KLAA as both mentioned by Jeff.  I honestly don't know how much control Moreno has over other media entities but given his background I imagine he's got more proxy-type influence than other owners.  

1 minute ago, True Grich said:

 

@dprep80 You "joined" today... but you post like you've been here a while. 

I'll take that as both a complimentary insult and insulting compliment.

1 minute ago, True Grich said:

Dude... I even called myself an idiot.

Don't be so hard on yourself.

2 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

First, you have to decide who you are expecting to criticize him. 

I would say most of the media criticism in sports is done by two entities: columnists and talk radio. In LA, there are only two newspapers so there are only about 4-5 columnists, and a few of them pay no attention to the Angels. As for talk radio hosts, I don’t really pay attention to what that scene is like is LA, but my sense is there just isn’t that much of it. One of the stations that has that stuff is actually owned by the Angels. 

Is there’s much “institutional criticism” in LA of the other teams? I don’t know because I pay little attention to what anyone writes about the Clippers or UCLA.

When you talk about the rest of the media, like beat writers, our job is not to criticize Scioscia. It’s to make him accountable. Basically, our job is to find out why he does what he does and let you guys decide if it’s good or bad. 

In general, I find the focus on managers in MLB to be overblown. Managers win if their players stay healthy and play well.

That's fair and thanks for the response Jeff.  I agree that the small size of our media (especially relative to the population) plays the biggest role.

2 minutes ago, The Boogie Man said:

No, that’s not what you want.  What you want is to be told you are right in your criticism.  Some here will agree with you while others don’t.  

Next topic, was Scioscia the second gunman on the grassy knoll?

I can tell you with 100% certainty that is not what I want.

3 minutes ago, True Grich said:

Hey I didn't make it personal and you are! Bad form for a blogger no?

2 minutes ago, The Boogie Man said:

He gives them about the same chance to win as anyone else.  

Debatable, or better yet, impossible to prove one way or another.

1 minute ago, Inside Pitch said:

So in short.  This is a MS sucks thread. 

When everything is an excuse, and no possible outcome other than he is bad and or makes the wrong decision there is no discussion to be had.  

I anxiously await our next manager and tip my cap to the innovative approach that was taken in the opening post.

Not being snarky, I actually thought it was a good question.

That's fair.  However, I still legitimately would like to know if Angels media is unique in not criticizing MS or if that is the nature of the beast for all non NY/PHI media.

1 minute ago, True Grich said:

I love how some people dismiss facts as an excuse.

While I believe this is Scioscia's last season in the dugout, I just don't buy into the narrative that this season is his fault.

I'm dismissing your use of "facts" as an excuse because you are using them to implicitly defend the manager or a lack of criticism against the manager.  It's either an excuse or a tangent.

1 minute ago, True Grich said:

Yeah, ten starting pitchers going on the DL is an excuse.  Team overcome that all the time.

Ok.  You got me. 

I'm not blaming him for the DL'd staff.  Never did.

2 minutes ago, True Grich said:

I guess, having ten starting pitchers go on the DL this year hasn't had any impact. And there's the rest of the DL list...

That is an excuse and is in no way a justification for poor lineup choices and in-game management.

1 minute ago, Scotty@AW said:

Because at the very least, you won't have issues in the clubhouse. Trout seems to enjoy playing for him and at this point, the Angels need to win baseball games and keep Trout happy IVF they want him to retire as an Angel.

A good clubhouse means nothing if you aren't winning or even making the playoffs. Winning games = Happy Trout.  Does Scioscia give them the best chance to win?  

3 minutes ago, Torridd said:

I'm sure he's been criticized over the years. I remember a specific situation when we lost the first game in the 2002 playoffs against the Yanks. It was some bullpen snafu. I think the writers were saying he should have put in Percival early.

It shouldn't be that hard to find, especially this year. When your bullpen ERA is in the middle of the pack and yet you're dead last in blown saves, that can and should lead to legitimate questions about in-game management.