Baseball thread No. 7: Somebody slip the pinstripers a Mickey

Bobby Valentine... 15 years MLB manager:

Division titles: ZERO
League championships: 1
World Series titles: ZERO
Record: 1117-1072 (.510)
90-win seasons: 2
Losing seasons: 5
Average finish: 3.8
Pathetic disguises: 1

Mike Scioscia... 9 season (plus one his way to another division title in year 10)

Division titles: 4 (soon to be 5)
League championships: 1
World Series titles: 1
Record: 878-704 (.554)
90-win seasons: 5 (soon to be 6)
Losing seasons: 2
Average finish: 1.7


You have degenerated from a dickhead to a total shit-for-brains asshole.

 

Spnited needs to learn how to speak his mind.

 

Yep, I'm glad BYH has enlightened us all. He's convinced me to pine for the glory days of Terry Collins and Doug Rader.

C'mon dude. This is a ridiculous argument we're having here. Morales has gotten his chance this year and he's made the most of it. Why can't we all just appreciate that?

 

But don't forget, if Morales has a few big years and signs a big contract he'll just be another douchebag doing the union's work and shit-for-brains dickhead will hate him.

 

He hit .213 in SIXTY-ONE AT-BATS LAST YEAR. Yes, that's fair, criticizing him for that.

And, once again: When the guy gets red-hot with regular playing time--and I'm sorry, leading a rotation of guys at first base in at-bats one year does not count as regular playing time--then it's quite fair to wonder what he would have done if he ever had regular PT before that. HE DID NOT HAVE REGULAR PT BEFORE THIS YEAR, nor even an extended audition. Not even close.

And if you look at the numbers this year, he didn't begin ripping it up until after about two months (I posted the numbers a few days ago). So it's quite fair to wonder what this guy would have done prior to this year if he was told, hey, go out there, we're going to sink or swim with you. Again: Outside of two months last season, they weren't holding the guy back for All-Stars.

You're talking as if he's Carlos Pena prior to 2007. Morales had barely half a season's worth of ABs and its somehow his fault he didn't produce at a 35-homer pace? OK then.

 

If I'm a shit-for-brains dickhead, at least you have some company on the site now.

And you are so wrong on the argument of two days ago, it's not even funny. Go ahead and find where I declare I hate the players for making big money. My argument there is not even close to that. But if you want to keep arguing the topic of two days ago (very lame and sad and the actions of a shit-for-brains shit stirrer, but whatever), I'll play along. It's fun fattening up on you and gushing fanboi cranberry.

 

He's so bad that he ranks first all-time in games managed in Texas, and is nine games behind Davey Johnson with the Mets. Yes. He is terrible. Both franchises have just burst with success and successful managers since he left (the Rangers did have Johnny Oates).

This is stupid, even for you.

 

In 2006, Morales was recalled in May and played in 50 of the Angels' 52 games from May 23-July 22, starting 46 of them. (Game log here).

Is that not "regular playing time"?

He hit .240 in those 50 games and got sent back down to Triple-A. Got recalled in mid-September and went 2-for-14 through the rest of the year.

In 2007, he played decently in the sporadic appearances he had, but Kotchman -- both of whom were 24 years old then -- was just as good and earned the starting nod at first base with an .840 OPS in 137 games, second on the team to Vlad Guerrero. Morales showed great potential at AAA Salt Lake (hitting .341 in 64 games), so there is a case to be made that he could have been given more of a chance. But Kotchman hit .296 for a team that won 94 games. Hard to argue that Scioscia had the wrong guy starting.

In 2008, Kotchman -- who had earned the starting role the year before, remember -- got off to a smoking hot start. He was hitting .344 at the end of April, was still at .321 on June 1. Morales, meanwhile, was killing the ball in Salt Lake, with a .341 average in 78 games. Nice problem to have. When Morales finally did get some time in September, he hit .208 in 21 games. (Game log here.)

They made the move for Teixeira, hoping to make a run in the playoffs and possibly re-sign him at the end of the year, knowing they had Morales in the wings, too. Lost in the ALDS, didn't sign Tex ... and now Morales, at age 26, gets his chance to shine.

He's taking advantage of it. Great.

But there's absolutely no reason to say he should have been starting over Kotchman, et al, all along. None whatsoever.

 

He/she has NO company in that regard.

 

How about Scioscia bringing lollipop-throwing Jarrod Washburn -- apparently just because the bum is left-handed -- in to pitch to Ortiz in the 2004 LDS, and Ortiz smacking the piss out of it. That was an inspired decision.

 

For fuck's sake, to see where the Angel organization was before Scioscia was hired - compared to where it is today..... there is no comparison.... the Angels were a major league franchise in name only in 1999. They went 16 years without making playoffs until 2002. Now, they make it practically every year, regardless of ownership.. They are easily one of the most stable franchises in baseball.

Its due to one guy - Scioscia. You ever hear of any lingering clubhouse cancers in Anaheim? Never.

Want to criticize the Washburn decision or the suicide squeeze? Fine. They weren't going to win those series anyways. And I can't stand his love of productive outs and small ball.

But to see where he's brought this franchise now, from when he was hired? Any extended criticisms are asinine.

 

Scioscia was an NL player through and through, and the NL plays small-ball. I'm an NL guy, and I'd manage the same way.

Other than that, I'm apt to go with yet another stellar breakdown by bucky: