mp170.6

I'm not a big fan of Simers, but it's refreshing every once and a while to see someone in the media holding the Angels and Dodgers accountable. Everybody else from the LA Times, OC Register, and local TV stations refuse to ask tough questions. I would love to have somebody middle of the road between Simers and his cheerleader colleagues.

Vlad gave an interview last year as he tried to comeback with Toronto. Two thirds of the questions asked had to be translated both ways to Vlad. The other third he understood but answered in Spanish through the interpreter. I wouldn't call this knowing English very well. Vlad is only one example, though. There have been many others with limited English skills. The point I was getting at is how does somebody become a leader in a clubhouse when the players have varying degrees of English proficiency? How do you communicate effectively when a translator isn't around?

Do you mean Hunter's infectious smile? I will say this regarding team chemistry and leadership. There are times over the past decade I've thought the language barrier has been a hinderance to the team. We've had a lot of Latin players who couldn't speak English well, if at all. Remember when Vlad arrived in 2004? After that was when the cliques started forming based on ethnic backgrounds because Vlad couldn't communicate with the white guys very well.

I think you're lumping two problems into one. Public relations is not the players' problem. As long as they aren't pointing the finger at others or threatening people, I don't think the players care what their teammates say to the media. The Angels appear to bottle their emotions pretty tightly and it's not healthy. The players aren't stupid, they know their frustrations are visible to the public. Yet, for whatever reason, the Angels brass forbids them from being human by acknowledging what we already know. The team is not hurt one bit when a player acknowledges tough times in a diplomatic way.

I think chemistry matters most in two areas: Between the pitchers and the catchers, and between all of the infielders (and, to a lesser extent the outfielders) because they work side by side on defense throughout the game. Other than that, I don't think chemistry matters that much. The dugouts, clubhouses, bullpens, and charter airplanes are large enough for players to join whichever clique they feel most comfortable in. However long it takes for leaders to develop, doesn't it strike you as bizarre that no player on this team of 25 took cues from Hunter and is able to emulate him in some way? I find that especially troubling with Pujols and Hamilton here. I suppose Hamilton could grow into a leader over time, but why is Pujols seemingly a zero in this role? As a group, I think the biggest failure of Moreno, Reagins, and Scioscia was not dealing with the catcher dilemma years ago. This was during the era when Scioscia had too much power and wouldn't let Mathis slip away. I think Conger would be much better today (and he isn't that bad) if the Angels hadn't bounced him around so much. Our younger relievers have had a difficult enough job as is without the constant juggling of catchers the last few years.

Go back earlier in this thread. A certain somebody said he agreed with everything Haren said a mere 7 minutes after the link was posted here. How that is possible I have no clue because Haren's comments could be construed different ways. I agree with your comments. The players should be able to speak their minds.

OK, my thoughts: 1. I think the idea of team chemistry is overemphasized, too often used as a scapegoat for other failures. Not saying it isn't important. You just never hear about chemistry problems when a team is winning games. Other teams break up their chemistry without a noticeable effect the following year. Look at the Cardinals and how they've played since Pujols' departure. 2. What is he implying about team chemistry? Were the guys who brought good chemistry to the team shipped out? Or did Dipoto and Moreno make mistakes in their offseason acquisitions? This can be interpreted different ways. 3. I have no doubts Torii Hunter was a good leader. Why is it, though, that no other player is capable of stepping up as a leader? Why isn't Scioscia and his coaches capable of filling that void in leadership? This is what they are paid to do, to provide leadership. 4. Haren places the blame on players' performance. Why then are so many players sucking at once if Scioscia and his coaching staff are doing a good job? Why is underachievement the norm in Anaheim over the last several years?

It's not that. I haven't really thought about his comments yet. There's a couple interpretations that could be made. Some people on this board, though, just step right up in full agreement.

Why is it that when a player is likeable, bandwagons of fans automatically agree with anything they say?

LOL

That's great!

One time I asked a coworker what my ideal weight should be. He said 3 pounds including the urn.

What if we told fat jokes to each other? Are you fat?

Who's the couple next to Lasorda who seem to love this Psy clown?

Yes, it's real life.

Over Scioscia's tenure with the exception of 2002 and a few other seasons, his teams come completely unraveled when Oakland or Texas (or both) field competitive teams, especially when those other teams are predicted to be good. Some of his best years have happened when there was zero pressure from division rivals. When you pair this up with the many playoff embarrassments since 2002, it begins to look like Scioscia -- and his teams -- do not prepare, or play well, under pressure.

Isn't it weird how many of the same problems return year after year, despite, as Scioscia points out, lots of new players on the roster?

This is 100x worse than Scioscia running into TJ Simers. LMAO

http://www.latimes.com/sports/baseball/mlb/dodgers/la-sp-0509-dwyre-20130509,0,3721698.column I can't believe what Mickey Hatcher told them about Mike Scioscia. What awful timing to share a story like that. This is a direct quote: "I came up with Scioscia," he says. "One spring, the Dodgers got worried about his weight. Al Campanis sends this treadmill to camp with a meter on it. Mike was supposed to do so many miles on it. One day, I hear this noise from the training room. I open the door and there's this little guy from the Dominican, running like crazy on the treadmill. Next to him, asleep on the couch, was Scioscia, shirt off and an empty pizza box on his stomach."

If he thinks last year's team improved because of his leadership, how does he explain the horrid start in April and May? Was that poor leadership or just some anomaly that of course wasn't his fault?

I thought millionaires hired tax attorneys to handle these things so they didn't have to worry...

Good gosh he is arrogant. He actually thinks last year got better because of him. Wow.

That's a euphemism for saying it was a bad move. Remember, Scioscia never admits to mistakes. Seriously though, I cringe whenever one of our top sluggers is told to steal bases, especially Trumbo, who is not well accustomed to doing that. Nevermind the fact his SB success rate is really poor. Way too much to lose if he gets injured on a slide into 2B.

Yep.

The Angels' success/failure on the field isn't something worth praying about, IMO. There's a billion things more deserving of prayer.