Duren, Duren

Logically he (or any GM) would come in before hiring a manager. But things are happening too quickly. Not much time for a detailed evaluation of the franchise and putting his people in place. Or strategizing with current staff. The only way I see him coming here (and it's very remote) is if he and Maddon are philosophically on the same page, and have a familiarity with each other. Or if he already has someone else in mind. Arte too would have to be all in, ready to fire Eppler quickly and change direction suddenly. No way it happens. Head of operations is more complex, but also requires a sudden rethink of the entire organization.

Remember, if the Astros lose it will be a monumental choke job. Worse than the Dodgers. Three chances to clinch and unable to beat the underdog.the last one of those at home. If Cole is bad and they lose, his reputation may take a temporary hit, and possibly bring some doubt to prospective bidders. Depending on the actual performance. But that will pass soon as the free agent window opens. One game won't outweigh his body of work. And if he is great, and the Astros move on, he will have chances in a bigger stage. The bigger story will be the choke of the team if they lose. If they win, it will just be seen as was expected, but credit given to the Rays for making it close.

To be fair, it really was just one bad pitch. His strikeout to end the inning before was clinical. Three precise pitches. Gone.. The first homer was a decent pitch. Slider low and inside. Maybe it hung a bit too much, but give the batter credit for turning on it, going low and timing it perfectly. Many hitters wouldn't have done much damage with the same pitch. The second homer was the big mistake. Much too fat, not a lot of velocity, and facing a very good hitter. You wonder if he was shaken by the previous homerun and wanted to sneak a strike by Soto or it was simply a bad pitch. But with all his experience I expected him to be more careful facing the tying run against a power hitter. Nibble at the corners, hope Soto was over eager. Even a walk would have been non critical. Tough for his lifetime reputation. But that's the way things play out. Enough sample size as noted here that the discrepancy between playoffs and regular season can't be attributed to just bad breaks. Perhaps managerial use may be a factor too. Some pitchers are just not good at dealing with a different rhythm and routine. Especially with 5 game series, when all pitching roles are somewhat chaotic.

Was it worse to lose this way for the Dodgers than in the last two World Series? I think so, considering that they have geared up all year to make up for those losses. And that they had the luxury of fine tuning their team for the playoffs virtually since May, given their runaway lead in their division. Their managerial and analytics staff will be replaying this series over and over, wondering what to do. It will be very instructive in sports psychology, watching how they move forward. Stay the course with minor changes or something more drastic? I think they are too invested in the status quo to do anything extreme. It would be admitting failure on their part. Their veterans will be a year older, and possibly losing some physical and mental edge. And their younger stars have now had successive post season failures. How often can you hype yourself up to say "we'll get 'em next year' and believe it? Kershaw probably will never come out of the bullpen again. If they do trade any of their young core I think it will be Pederson.

Do the Dodgers trade any of their core players? Really, they have an odd mix of old and young. I have a feeling they will crack to a degree and make some big moves, realizing this team has just not been playoff clutch. Do they go after Maddon?

If they took Kelly out after his perfect inning, his reputation would have remained at least mostly intact. Now, a monumental albatross forever around his neck. And a total embarrassment to the Dodger brain trust. I don't see how he can remain with them, despite his bloated contract. Ruined, but rich! So much for the dream New York / L.A. network dream.

Worst of all possible worlds for the Dodgers. The entire 2019 season will seem hollow in retrospect. Next year will seem an eternity just trying yet again to get back to where they have been. With even a great season they will be haunted by past failures. Will Kershaw ever have another chance at playoff redemption? His career reputation will always be tainted. Do they make radical personnel moves? How are the young players going to deal with these yearly playoff disasters? Their window is still open because of their talent and division, but internal stress is an intangible that will affect the entire organization. Should be a fun storyline to follow.

Kelly should have been out after the ninth. They played with fire and got burned. All that great young regular season talent for the Dodgers have choked. Except Buehler. And an old time Angel/Dodger delivers the decisive blow. Back to the drawing board for them once again. And six months of a deadened regular season. Robert's exposed again as less than a great big game manager. Too much analytics, not enough intuition.

Just to add another nuance, what about age? There are factors pertaining to managers in their mid sixties not necessarily applicable to younger ones. Bochy and Yost were the closest to Maddon starting the season.Snitker, Black, Hurdle next, along with Gardenhire and Francona, five years younger than Maddon. Health, motivation, communication, adaptability, willingness to incorporate new data sources are potential issues. Also career/retirement plans. Easier to not care about youth movements and long term goals when the end of the career is immanent. Way back after the end of the 1960 season the Yankees invented a team rule forcing mandatory retirement at age 70. An excuse to fire Casey Stengel, who had just lost game 7 of the World Series. I don't believe any other team had such a rule, and today it would be a legal issue. Essentially I think the Angels can't just sit back indefinitely if they hire Maddon. He will be a short term manager, possibly extended a bit more. He didn't stay in Chicago as long as many had expected. And criticism will be loud if the next phase of the Trout era isn't succesful. The Angels have to keep their eyes open for younger managerial potential and groom them within the system. I would love to see Maddon change the culture, turn the team around and become a playoff threat every year, but you never know how long his term will be.

Give credit to Soroka. The first starter in his first playoff appearance to go at least seven innings without issuing a walk in history. Cool, calm, mixing pitches, poised at a young age. The type of young, future top three rotation types the Angels need that could become a fixture for years. And low payroll costs for a number of years. Free agent veterans are needed for the Angels now, but a rotation needs to evolve with young talent, mostly at the low/mid level of the salary scale.

Mantle played his entire career dealing with a string of injuries. Starting in the 1951 WS. This is an amazing review of the entire incident with graphic pictures. Seems DiMaggio really was a jerk as a person. But Mantle never was as good as he potentially could have been. However, still iconic, a great player and my first childhood hero. I have his autograph next to a signed Trout jersey. So many similarities on and off the field. http://jrsbullpen.com/pwigogallery/index.php?/category/384

8 years are a lifetime in sports. Guaranteed to take twists and turns no one can anticipate now. Trout's contract won't seem so formidable in four or so years. Massive, but the gap will shrink as others sign along the way. Depending on his play, and team fortunes in the next few years he may become tradeable. Injuries, skill erosion, internal team tensions, and who knows what else are potentially devaluing factors. So far, only minor injuries have been an issue, but over time, any athlete is at risk. My point is that it becomes a consolation prize by narrowing your satisfaction to the exploits of one player. During a bad season, it may be a legitimate area of focus, watching him march through the record books. But it also condemns the reputation of the franchise, who couldn't exploit his talent to the highest team level. I always refer to Ernie Banks. A marvelous player on a terrible team his entire long career. Back to back MVP, power hitting shortstop, later first baseman. Ideal team leader. Fan favorite. ("Let's play two") The media forever looked at him with pity on the 'hapless Cubs' and thought he deserved better. If the Angels were a contender in three or four years, but still not good enough for a championship, trading Trout would be something to consider. Of course, depending on how his career unfolds between now and then. It would have to be for an amazing return though. Help to get the team over the top as well as setting up the near future. In three or four years Trout will have been in the league over a decade, with presumably his prime years behind. He still should be an all star, but with diminishing numbers. Speed, range, arm strength, bat quickness do diminish with wear and tear and age. But likely incrementally. Management should monitor these things carefully. Ideally, Trout can be the anchor of a revamped, winning team in two or three years and we can enjoy both his and the franchise's success. But winning is the ultimate goal.

Two sides to the story. What do the Angels want/expect from him? What does he want/expect to do with them? Looking from his perspective, what would be appealing? Location and organizational familiarity. Basic things beyond the job itself. And probably a nice increase in salary/future benefits. Managing Trout might just be all anyone could desire. The intrigue of Ohtani's potential. Presiding over Pujols career closure. Trout and Pujols may arguably end up amongst the top ten/twenty players in history. Ohtani potentially a one of a kind phenomena. Just as a veteran manager he might like to experience something unique. That's just the icing on the cake. But the real work is turning the team into contenders. That implies being in sync and on the same page as Eppler as they evaluate the roster and formulate a philosophy that works for both of them. Without that shared approach, there could be friction along the way. Maddon has seen it all. Small market anonymity and big market intense fan base. He succeeded both ways. . The roster obviously is a work in progress. He knows it will take work, time and patience. But also needs signs of immediate progress. Realistically, with some solid off season changes and a healthy core, reaching .500 next season is attainable. Eppler has to provide an improved talent mix. Especially on the mound. In Chicago he had more pieces in place and was the missing factor that got the best from that talent. Tampa was a harder, year by year scramble, but he worked within their philosophy and kept them over achieving. The Angels would be a new challenge, but a potentially rewarding way to end his career. What do the Angels want? A winner. A proven winner in recent years who is comfortable with old and new school input. Hopefully not the time for experimenting with a hotshot young up and coming manager who is generating buzz. Another time but not now. Seems like a good fit, but never assume the obvious.

The original A's/Rays model came well before the term 'money ball.' But now is consigned to the dustbin of history. The Expos of the 90s. Forced by necessity (essentially sabotaged internally by rogue ownership (Jeffery Loria and team president Claude Brouchu) they were still shrewd enough to find ways to compensate. Even when essentially a lame duck franchise under the control of evil Bud Selig. A very strong presence in Latin America before other teams recognized the value there. Pragmatic trades. Usually out of budget necessity Focus on farm system and development. With smart baseball minds like Stoneman and a young Dombrosky. And one of the all time great managers, Felipe Alou, who was a master at orchestrating talent and creating chemistry. There are books written that go into the details (Up, Up and Away by Jonah Keri being the most recent). It really was amazing how a team with a high budget, multiple all stars and very good attendance through the mid eighties was decimated, yet still able to reinvent themselves and become a powerhouse, and even better by 1994 using an entirely different formula. One of the never to be answered enigmas. How far would they have gone had the season been played out? An equal odds chance to win the World Series that never will be known. And as a sidenote, I detest the Washington team. Virtually no acknowledgment to their franchise history. Hopefully they too flounder like their real predecessors, the Senators.

It wouldn't be very smart of Maddon's agent to not try and use leverage for his client. After all, Maddon is probably going to be on his last managerial contract. Everything has to be set up for his best ling term benefit. Probably even with post managerial, front office options. Nothing to be rushed into. Even if everything aligns for the Angels, a lot of details to work out. And the more competition, the better it is for Maddon.

Given the decisiveness and timing of the firing it absolutely has to be a big name, high profile replacement. Those two( Maddon and Girardi) are the most obvious. In house replacements, promotions of inexperienced coaches and journeyman managers aren't as time sensitive hires as those two. Who knows? Maybe the longer you wait, the more competition there will be. Interestingly, Maddon has the inbuilt 'home town/residence' factor with an Angel job. Perhaps at his age with this his likely last managerial job that plays into the equation.

Things weren't working, and the easiest thing to do is fire the manager. Happens all the time everywhere. Kind of odd that there will be three different managers in three straight seasons. After two decades of predictable continuity. So this time it has to be a long term commitment if the franchise is to build a stable foundation. Better be a sound choice that the players are enthusiastic about and fans support. You often see a team immediately go after a fired coach (in every sport) who has proven past success. Even mid season. The reason for their current firing is minimized and their past success inflated. It isn't a simple equation, but emotion usually favors the most optimistic projections. I wonder how much input the veteran players had in their end of season discussions? Certainly you would think Eppler would value candid opinions from Trout, Pujols, and other respected personnel. Or is it just Eppler and/or Arte? Seems like it was already decided before the season ended. But maybe they moved this quickly when Maddon became available? Pittsburgh fired Hurdle the last day of the season, and other league wide moves are underway. Timing is critical. Curious to see how Ohtani in particular adjusts. In three years it will be three managers. Plus some significant injuries. How he's handled has been a delicate question, and coming back from two injuries at the same time muddies the water. Will a new manager tweak his two way usage? Will Eppler meddle into managerial decisions? What about philosophies of potential new pitching and/or hitting coaches? Once we know for sure who manages and coaches we can project past patterns into the future. And there will be a full off season of speculation about everything.

Managers are hired to be fired. That is just the business. Brad seemed like he was competent, but not exceptional or intuitive. Too much preset formula style managing without a deep feel for the moment and the ebbs and flow of a game. Oh well, he will be financially comfortable and land somewhere else eventually. If it is Maddon, it means more than just managing at the beginning of his tenure. Credibility and appeal for free agents deciding on different teams with their positives and negatives. A long track record as a winner who instills confidence that he will turn team fortunes around. And his associates. Managers usually bring some of their trusted assistants and position coaches with them. Assuming Eppler gives him authority to create his own staff then we probably will see some new faces. Not sure of his favorites, but he (or anyone else) will want familiarity and loyalty on the bench. Good PR. After this tragic and depressing season a Maddon or equally prestigious manager will immediately instill a positive attitude for fans and franchise. The idea of starting a new chapter for the team applies perfectly. It buys some time. No one expects instant magic, but seeing evidence that things are on the right (or at least better) path provides for some optimism. Since he only wants to manage 3 - 5 years according to statements then it really is a perfect window for where the franchise stands. Long enough to demonstrate a solid turnaround, and enough time to prepare for the future beyond. I expect that if he is hired soon it really boosts the Angels chances when free agency begins.

I still think that many voters are trying to impress their own peers and audience by showing that they have unique interpretations of the player and season. Many arguments start off noting in agreement that "Trout is the best player in baseball." Then they get clever with a "but ...." Trying to showcase their own views to get attention from their peers. As if "my insights/views" deserve more attention than conventional thinkers. An ego and professionally motivated approach. Create controversy, generate audience interest. MVP choices have been made for decades in all sports. A combination of intellectual and expertise and knowledge with gut feeling and the personal "eye test." Stats analysis, observation, comparison of different variables. And do not neglect conscious or unconscious bias. Voters do not attend or watch the candidates equally. Geography, familiarity, hype, team success and so on factor in to overall opinion. Right now, I think A segment of the media are fixated on one relatively minor issue. Games played. But if the consensus is that Trout is the best player in the game, and his numbers are MVP deserving, these media types are trying to show that they don't want to admit the obvious. Trout has been taken for granted as a yearly MVP candidate so often that the media find it a stale story.

Typical low attention span situation. Trout is off the field, not visible now. Bregman plays and can be watched while his team easily coasts into the post season. What Trout did has been reduced to a distant memory. Bregman refreshes memory every day. And the images of Bregman celebrating their playoff clinching are fresh. The last images of Trout are of an injured player gritting through meaningless games. Obviously, having the guts to play as long as possible while hurt in a dead end season never seems to count as 'valuable.' If his numbers still surpass everyone else then it means no one else was able to be any better. Regardless of games played. Why not use common sense logic and assume Trout would have even better numbers if he was healthy enough to finish the season? As it stands, he still could lead the league in homers. Doing it in fewer games makes it more impressive. In 1961 the baseball establishment went ape shit demeaning Roger Maris for breaking Ruth's record in 162 games instead of 154. And tarnished the accomplishment by putting an asterisk next to the mark in the record books. As well, Trout had a much harder time than Bregman, who had the luxury of a loaded team to take the pressure and responsibility off him. Bregman put up his numbers able to focus on himself without having to carry his team. Many baseball analysts and MVP voters think they are super smart and have esoteric insight into stats and performance. The ESPN talk last night really boiled down to trying to prove how clever they were. But they ended up reducing their argument to an inconsequential subject. Games played. Without thinking of context or crediting Trout for a great season playing hurt longer than anyone knew.

It looked like a rare, decent low scoring game with a minimum of Angel mistakes. Some nice pitching all the way till the ninth. I am so sick and tired of this script. Not just this game, but all of baseball during this obscene, inflated homerun monstrosity of a season. Bloody homeruns almost anytime a hitter makes solid contact. Strikeouts and homers. Monotony personified. Static, slow almost immobile games lasting over three hours with few real bursts of athletic activity. Baseball may have stronger, bigger, better trained players than in the past, but the game itself has become one dimensional.

ESPN constant buildup for Bregman as MVP. As I said a few days ago, Trout missing games seems be their deciding criterion. I really don't buy their argument about 'being there' and in the lineup constantly as very convincing. Maybe playing through pain for a significant amount of time and still putting up great stats is more impressive than going through the motions when there is nothing to play for during those final 30 games? But, it seems attention spans are ridiculously short. Out of sight, out of mind. And stats compiled earlier seem to become devalued as the active player gets all the attention..

Finishing on a hot streak, especially with a playoff contender/lock would be the ideal way to solidify positive impressions for voters. At some point, differentiating between the minutiae of the stats becomes secondary. Most MVP candidates have pretty impressive stats. Some more so in some categories, others in different areas. Comparisons based on decimal points and numbers factor in of course. But arguments are always made that legitimize anyone's point of view. The hilites of a player going well down the stretch, and the success of a winning team also shape perceptions. If Trout doesn't win, you can be sure that it will be because of his injury/absence and dismal team performance.

Last night was a defensive embarrassment in left field. Bringing in raw rookies means living with a pretty extensive defensive earning curve. Each ballpark has it's own quirks and subtleties that are only recognized through experience. Rookies in the field have no experience facing MLB batters so positioning and anticipation are also things that can only be processed through experience. No matter how good a rookie was in the minors, they still will have to adjust to many new things along the way. That's why it usually takes some years for a roster of many young players to gel and fit together on defense. Talent has to be backed by knowledge. Take the Blue Jay vaunted trio of rookies. Lots of flash and power, but also a fair share of blunders and defensive mistakes. Trout and Calhoun have spoiled fans with their consistency and ability in two of the three positions, making it easier to live with Upton's presence.

Watching this season has been an unrelenting nightmare when the Angels are pitching. No point in even breaking it down at this stage. Wait for the season to end, then try and reconstruct a staff that aspires to be at least middle of the pack average. Fitting that Cole is getting even better as the season winds down. A legitimate Cy Young candidate with elite numbers all over the place. If he shines in post season then his price will be astronomical. From an Angel perspective, better that he fails in the big games and brings some hesitation in the bidding war. If the elite contenders have some doubts it may help the Angels cause. Ironic that two of the best comeback, surprisingly productive seasons are by Calhoun and Pujols. Who will have minimal connection to the future. Who will replicate the 50 plus homers and probably about 175 RBIs that tandem will provide this year? Hard to expect Pujols to equal this season. Most likely one of those uncharacteristic situations when his health has remained stable and he maintained a second half surge. But with his age and history, it would be overly optimistic to count on this continuing. More likely a reversion to 2016 - 2018. Can a Kole-less right field put up 30 plus homers approx. 80 RBIs? Possibly a combo or mix of Adell, Goodwin, La Stella and whoever else may combine for respectable production, but you lose on defense, leadership, and a regular everyday player. Neither player has been great for average, but their power output has been consistent. And besides Trout, (and Goodwin to a degree) about the only other consistent positive amongst the hitters. Fletcher has had a nice year too, but has a different role. Ohtani as just a batter has been a mild disappointment. Basically because he has shown more weaknesses than in 2018. I expected a lot of buzz from him at the plate. He had a few hot spells but slumped more than anticipated. Not sure what to expect next year as a hitter who takes a regular place in the mound. Hopefully still a 15 plus homer output. Power and production may be the second biggest question mark beyond pitching next year. Especially if Trout is not near his best. It would be nice if some help came from third, catcher and a healthy Upton. Who himself will be another big question mark.