Scioscia's handling of the BP

[ispy45]

1 minute ago, wopphil said:

I am the petulant child? Ok, whatever. Fletcher is a big boy, he can defend himself. Nothing I said to him was even mildly disrespectful. I simply disagreed with his logic. He doesn't need you and others to jump on the back of someone who disagrees with him.

The results of Scioscia's bullpen management speak for themselves. 

The problem was your argument was purely emotion without using facts.  

[Stradling]

2 minutes ago, wopphil said:

I am the petulant child? Ok, whatever. Fletcher is a big boy, he can defend himself. Nothing I said to him was even mildly disrespectful. I simply disagreed with his logic. He doesn't need you and others to jump on the back of someone who disagrees with him.

The results of Scioscia's bullpen management speak for themselves. 

Ok, so he's third best in the AL and 7th best overall.  Not bad.  

[Blarg]

I think you mean your opinion speaks for itself and that was the point IP was making. Your opinion is based on your opinion and that is your only argument. 

4 minutes ago, wopphil said:

I am the petulant child? Ok, whatever. Fletcher is a big boy, he can defend himself. Nothing I said to him was even mildly disrespectful. I simply disagreed with his logic. He doesn't need you and others to jump on the back of someone who disagrees with him.

The results of Scioscia's bullpen management speak for themselves. 

 

[Chuck]

18 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

Sosh is fat.

Finally!! Back on topic.

[Inside Pitch]

13 minutes ago, wopphil said:

I am the petulant child? Ok, whatever. Fletcher is a big boy, he can defend himself. Nothing I said to him was even mildly disrespectful. I simply disagreed with his logic. He doesn't need you and others to jump on the back of someone who disagrees with him.

The results of Scioscia's bullpen management speak for themselves. 

Good lord man...  

It had nothing to do with your response to him, it had everything to you with your response to me..    "You're right, MS is right, the bullpen has been managed perfectly, sorry for daring to disagree".   

Look, I responded to your questioning Fletcher's logic by pointing out how he's been used -- essentially questioning what besides opinion you had to support your argument..   In response you gave me the above..

So yeah.  "Ok, whatever"

 

 

[wopphil]

12 minutes ago, ispy45 said:

The problem was your argument was purely emotion without using facts.  

Actually, I disagree. As I understood Fletcher's argument, Bedrosian and Parker couldn't pitch multiple innings because they haven't done so very often this year. I further understood Fletcher to be saying that we should just accept that as a reasonable position, which is a point I don't agree with. 

[wopphil]

7 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

Good lord man...  

It had nothing to do with your response to him, it had everything to you with your response to me..    "You're right, MS is right, the bullpen has been managed perfectly, sorry for daring to disagree".   

Look, I responded to your questioning Fletcher's logic by pointing out how he's been used -- essentially questioning what besides opinion you had to support your argument..   In response you gave me the above..

So yeah.  "Ok, whatever"

 

 

Why don't you go back and read your response to me, which prompted my response back. You suggested I "should take time to look up facts" before disagreeing with another's opinion. You then suggested I was on the Scioscia "hate wagon" and that my opinion was apparently motivated by my alleged dislike of him. That is why you got the response you got from me.

 

[ispy45]

11 minutes ago, wopphil said:

Actually, I disagree. As I understood Fletcher's argument, Bedrosian and Parker couldn't pitch multiple innings because they haven't done so very often this year. I further understood Fletcher to be saying that we should just accept that as a reasonable position, which is a point I don't agree with. 

You didn't use any statistics to back up your point.   Then you went to talk about how much a forum member makes to prove your point.Thus making it purely emotion. Angelswin is no Facebook Fan group.

[tdawg87]

Lasagna

[JarsOfClay]

1 hour ago, Inside Pitch said:

He mentions two guys, you conveniently fail to mention Trumbo and focus on Joseph.    If you're going to try to dismiss someone's take then at least be honest and include both of them.

Why would you not?  It's chickenshit.

It's not chicken shit because the theory in itself is stupid.  Even if Trumbo homers, it's still a 1 run game, and Caleb is highly unlikely to homer again.  So Trumbo's homer was irrelevant.  And were seriously making a  lot of presumptions here that every guy who homers will likely hit another one - that is silly.

And most importantly, you dont bring in your best pitcher based on whether or not a hitter has homered or not, you save your best pitchers  to face the 3, 4, and 5 guys with the game on the line in the 8th and 9th innings.  Those 3, 4, 5 guys ARE HIGHLY LIKE TO HOMER AGAIN, certainly more so than Trumbo and little Caleb.  And guess what?  Machado did homer again and the angels lost because of it.

 

 

I

 

[Inside Pitch]

12 minutes ago, wopphil said:

Why don't you go back and read your response to me, which prompted my response back. You suggested I "should take time to look up facts" before disagreeing with another's opinion. You then suggested I was on the Scioscia "hate wagon" and that my opinion was apparently motivated by my alleged dislike of him. That is why you got the response you got from me.

Quit trying to lawyer your way out of your childish BS...    

At no point did I call you out for disagreeing with someone -- I did however call you out for questioning their logic when you in turn used NONE yourself.   You have had multiple opportunities to argue why it is you believe those guys should or could be used as multiple inning relievers and chosen not to -- possibly because you know damn well there isn't anything to support it other than your opinion.  

The comment about the Scioscia Hate wagon was independent of anything else - I further stated I looked forward to seeing how things will go when the Angels eventually do get a different manager.   Your position that it was solely directed at you rings hollow.

There was nothing offensive in my response to you -- I responded to your rhetoric with facts.  You didn't like the facts and you bitched out.. 

Not really anything else that needs to be said.  
 

[wopphil]

Dude, take a Midol and a warm bath, and calm down. This isn't something that should raise your blood pressure.

[m0nkey]

Let's all compare bank accounts

[tdawg87]

In a dick measuring contest, I would easily come in 48th.

[stormngt]

18 hours ago, AngelsFaninGA said:

Bedrosian's been pitching well, clean sheets in 7 of his last 8 appearances coming in and three straight converted saves. No idea why people still think he sucks because of one bad appearance 3 weeks ago. Using him in the 6th is absurd. 

Seemed like two weeks ago Bedrosian was struggling and everyone blamed Scioscia for using him on high pressure situations 

[Blarg]

1 hour ago, tdawg87 said:

In a dick measuring contest, I would easily come in 48th.

I think there is only 15 guys in this thread so I'm pretty sure you've got that number locked up. 

[Jeff Fletcher]

Within this story, which I'm going to make you read, is a little more about the usage of Parker, specifically, which adds some insight as to how it worked last night...

http://www.ocregister.com/2017/08/19/angels-notes-blake-parkers-value-goes-beyond-the-9th-inning/

[wopphil]

3 hours ago, Inside Pitch said:

Parker has made 58 appearances this year which is already a career high..   Of those 58, all of but 5 have been one inning.   Only once has he pitched 2 innings --  overall he's allowed 34 hits in 53.2 innings -- and 6 in those 5 multi inning appearances.  In his entire MLB career he's pitched in 149 games totaling 144 innings.   It appears that his track record as a one inning guy is pretty much established.

 

 

This is good stat cherry picking.

How about this:  Parker didn't pitch on August 14, 15, 16, or 17. So when he pitched yesterday, on the 18th, he was pitching on 5 days rest. It took him all of 7 pitches to get through his inning. 7.  He could have (and should have) pitched a second inning.

Scioscia did the same thing last week, pulling Petit for Middleton after Petit had thrown very few pitches the inning before. That decision could have easily cost the team that game.

[m0nkey]

52 minutes ago, Blarg said:

I think there is only 15 guys in this thread so I'm pretty sure you've got that number locked up. 

There will be 16 once English Cops makes an appearance because of your post.

[beatlesrule]

9 minutes ago, wopphil said:

This is good stat cherry picking.

How about this:  Parker didn't pitch on August 14, 15, 16, or 17. So when he pitched yesterday, on the 18th, he was pitching on 5 days rest. It took him all of 7 pitches to get through his inning. 7.  He could have (and should have) pitched a second inning.

Scioscia did the same thing last week, pulling Petit for Middleton after Petit had thrown very few pitches the inning before. That decision could have easily cost the team that game.

So?  Scioscia took him out last night after 7 pitches and since he's the manager, we know nothing and he is ALWAYS right.  Until one of us actually manages a major league ball club, we are all nothing but scum between Scioscia's big fat lasagna entrenched toes. I suggest following a different team if a stubborn way past his prime manager managing your favorite team bothers you.

Also, get ready for an extension after the 2018 season.

[Jeff Fletcher]

It's been explained to me that sitting down and coming back out for another inning has an impact on a pitcher. For starters, there are the extra set of warmup pitches you throw. Also, there's a cooling down and heating up that takes a toll on you. 

So even if you only threw 8 or 10 or 15 pitches, cranking it up for another inning adds some stress. If you throw 15 pitches in one inning, then come back out, the 16th pitch is not the same as if you'd thrown 16 in the original inning.

So if a guy isn't used to being used that way, it's risky to do it. Especially on a night when the humidity is about 1000 percent.

You can chose to believe that or not. I'm not a major league pitcher. I only talk to them.

[JarsOfClay]

I think what a lot of the Scioscia fanboys fail to see is that Scioscia used our 2 best pitchers against the bottom of the lineup, then he used Petit for 2 innings to close out the game which is fine, but when Petit got 2 runners on Scioscia decided to bring in Middleton who is actually A LOT worse than Petit to face the meat of the order with the game on the line.

I mean seriously, what manager actually downgrades in the 9th inning against Machado no less...

Pretty unbelievably bad bullpen decision and I cant believe people still defend this shit.

[Jeff Fletcher]

6 minutes ago, JarsOfClay said:

I think what a lot of the Scioscia fanboys fail to see is that Scioscia used our 2 best pitchers against the bottom of the lineup, then he used Petit for 2 innings to close out the game which is fine, but when Petit got 2 runners on Scioscia decided to bring in Middleton who is actually A LOT worse than Petit to face the meat of the order with the game on the line.

I mean seriously, what manager actually downgrades in the 9th inning against Machado no less...

Pretty unbelievably bad bullpen decision and I cant believe people still defend this shit.

Parker faced 9-1-2

[JarsOfClay]

4 hours ago, Stradling said:

You know why. 

Enlighten me?

You presume guys who hit homers previously will hit homers again.  

Beckham 17 hr's, Schoop 26 hr's, Jones 21 hr's, Mancini 22 hr's.  All were capable of going deep as well.  Yet you fear Trumbo and Joseph because they already homered...

So what makes you think these other guys were incapable of going deep as well?

Way too many presumptions on your part.

[Inside Pitch]

2 hours ago, wopphil said:

This is good stat cherry picking.

How about this:  Parker didn't pitch on August 14, 15, 16, or 17. So when he pitched yesterday, on the 18th, he was pitching on 5 days rest. It took him all of 7 pitches to get through his inning. 7.  He could have (and should have) pitched a second inning.

Scioscia did the same thing last week, pulling Petit for Middleton after Petit had thrown very few pitches the inning before. That decision could have easily cost the team that game.

LOL.  Four hours later and after some limp tripe about Midol and others not needing to get worked up.... you're still trying.   

So....   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking

Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position. It is a kind of fallacy of selective attention, the most common example of which is the confirmation bias.^[1][2] Cherry picking may be committed intentionally or unintentionally. This fallacy is a major problem in public debate.^[3]

Apparently pointing out his usage for his entire career is "cherry picking".... Or maybe you took the contrast between his overall numbers and that smaller sample as an attempt on my part to say he's been bad in longer outings.    Let's assume that's the case..   I put the numbers out there for the sake of discussion, but I fell well short of offering an opinion as to what those numbers meant -- why?  Because the sample size would have made that sort of argument ignorant.  Both the opening and closing comments you quoted point to the largest sample possible (this season, and career) and how he's been used throughout his career.    But hey -- keep ignoring what has been said in favor of what hasn't.  

(Now behaving)