Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxfan791. Show redsoxfan791's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    In Response to Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?:
    [QUOTE]if it were a choice between sciosa and francona managing the RED SOX, i'd, without hesitation, select sciosa.
    Posted by byebyeepstein[/QUOTE]

    Well, first I would suggest you learn how to spell Scioscia.  Then, I'd ask you why you think Scioscia's better than Francona.  I'm not saying you're wrong, but I think that a lot of people overrate Scioscia's overmaneuvering.  He tends to fall in love with effort guys that don't contribute as much as most would like to think (see Eckstein, Willits); pushes an overly aggressive approach at both the plate and the base paths which frequently cost the team base runners; and seems to have this huge man cursh on Jeff Mathis--who quite frankly might be the worst offensive player in baseball not named Cesar Izturis or Yuniesky Betancourt. 
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from byebyeepstein. Show byebyeepstein's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    9 OUT OF 10 trolls feel that scioscia is a better field manager than terry.
    9 out of 10 people with a brain feel that CONCERN TROLL has issues.
    9 out of 10 people who watch baseball know that francona couldn't manage a 7/eleven.
    scioscia is a harder name to spell than francona.
    francona has had more talent to bail him out than has scioscia.
    deniro and keitel don't agree with me, so i know i'm right.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxfan791. Show redsoxfan791's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    In Response to Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid? : LOL That's some coincidence! 4 years running - All the starters doing better/ much better with Mathis over Napoli...with Scioscia calling 'em all! 61% points win/loss difference covering three hundred games. That's some pitch framing! Sorry Katz . I don't buy into it. In fact, I disputed it on the Caddy thread and asked someone to show evidence. Nobody did.  Managers/bench coaches signal their catchers to throw over to hold runners close. Scioscia didn't invent this. If he were calling these games, then Mathis would be looking over there on every pitch . He doesn't. I watch these games too. I watch the replays and freeze-frame it. I watch when the camera is on Scioscia directly after a pitch and he just shuffles around. Watch it closely when nobody's on base . Then observe it with runners on. That's when he's flashing signs. He's an aggressive manager, as you said. But never have I heard that he calls the pitches. Never have I read it or heard it from any announcer. And I get the live feed from all teams in the MLB package. Never have I seen evidence of it. It's press BS. The only times I have ever heard of a manager calling games is with a rookie receiver or a catcher with the IQ of a Softlaw - just out to lunch. These guys (managers) have a hell of a lot on their minds during a game. The last responsibility they want is to delay the game and call 130 pitches a night.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    I have actually heard this rumor as well--from multiple reliable sources.  I don't know how much stock I take in the rumors, but it looks like it's a possibility. 
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimdavis. Show jimdavis's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    In Response to Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?:
    [QUOTE]9 OUT OF 10 trolls feel that scioscia is a better field manager than terry. 9 out of 10 people with a brain feel that CONCERN TROLL has issues. 9 out of 10 people who watch baseball know that francona couldn't manage a 7/eleven. scioscia is a harder name to spell than francona. francona has had more talent to bail him out than has scioscia. deniro and keitel don't agree with me, so i know i'm right.
    Posted by byebyeepstein[/QUOTE]

    The only problem with your self-serving position is one person doesn't agree with you...Theo.  So, that makes you wrong and that makes me happy.  Your 9 out of 10 nonsense is nothing more than your own, sad drivel.  Just because concern troll eats your lunch whenever you clash is no reason to take it out on me.  Deniro and Keitel think you are a tool.  9 out of 10 agree.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from byebyeepstein. Show byebyeepstein's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    get out of la la  land mr davis and get a real life.
    neither deniro or keitel would give you the time of day.

    btw, theo is a fool as are you.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimdavis. Show jimdavis's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    In Response to Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?:
    [QUOTE]get out of la la  land mr davis and get a real life. neither deniro or keitel would give you the time of day. btw, theo is a fool as are you.
    Posted by byebyeepstein[/QUOTE]

    Why would I want either to give me the time of day?  You, on the other hand, seemed obsessed.  All I know is that you want Theo and Tito gone.  One day, you will get your wish.  But I will be happy from this day until then knowing the misery you feel.  Every game the Sox win makes me happy and you sad.  Sad because it means there is no turmoil for you to latch onto in the hopes that folks will get fired.  Sorry to disappoint.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from byebyeepstein. Show byebyeepstein's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    actually, i love the SOX. have for a long time.
    the man who turned the SOX around was not THEO or TITO, it was JOHN HENRY.
    he financially covered all of THEO'S expensive mistakes, and was able to afford a team good enough to overcome TITO'S ineptness as a field manager.
    so yes, in words that even you can understand, i'd like to see THEO and TITO
    in the next TAXI out of town and i don't care who's driving the cab.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimdavis. Show jimdavis's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    In Response to Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?:
    [QUOTE]actually, i love the SOX. have for a long time. the man who turned the SOX around was not THEO or TITO, it was JOHN HENRY. he financially covered all of THEO'S expensive mistakes, and was able to afford a team good enough to overcome TITO'S ineptness as a field manager. so yes, in words that even you can understand, i'd like to see THEO and TITO in the next TAXI out of town and i don't care who's driving the cab.
    Posted by byebyeepstein[/QUOTE]

    Great.  Even better.  The team you "love" is being run by those you hate.  I love that! That "ineptness" you speak of helped a team get to 89 wins without the talent on the field to do so.  Tito did a great job in 2010.  Because you don't think so does not take away from the fact that it happened.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    In Response to Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid? : I have actually heard this rumor as well--from multiple reliable sources.  I don't know how much stock I take in the rumors, but it looks like it's a possibility. 
    Posted by redsoxfan791[/QUOTE]

    Bullpen coaches, via delegation from higher up, could do this. Varitek may do it also, but I doubt it.
     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from newenglanderinexile. Show newenglanderinexile's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    In Response to Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?:
    [QUOTE]actually, i love the SOX. have for a long time. the man who turned the SOX around was not THEO or TITO, it was JOHN HENRY. he financially covered all of THEO'S expensive mistakes, and was able to afford a team good enough to overcome TITO'S ineptness as a field manager. so yes, in words that even you can understand, i'd like to see THEO and TITO in the next TAXI out of town and i don't care who's driving the cab.
    Posted by byebyeepstein[/QUOTE]

    How long before you turn on the next general manager and manager?  After one loss? 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxfan791. Show redsoxfan791's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    In Response to Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid? : Napoli's career OPS is 838, Mathis's is 574.  Napoli is gone, Mathis is still there.  It does say a lot.
    Posted by Hfxsoxnut[/QUOTE]

    Yeah, it does say a lot--about the Angels organization.  Sure they pulled off the Dan Haren trade, but they also pulled off the Vernon Wells trade--which might be the single worst trade of all time when you consider the marginal value implications. 

    Here's the deal with the Napoli vs. Mathis debate.  Even if we assume Mathis was a better defensive catcher (subjectively that makes sense, but objectively the jury is still out), the difference between the two would have to be so large that it drowns out Napoli's far superior offensive skills.  Considering the incredibly large gap, the Angels probably would've been better off giving Napoli far more PAs than they had been giving him over the years. 
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    In Response to Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?:
    [QUOTE]I'm watching Haren on the replay in the 7th frame. Two out, Pedey up. 1-0 the count. He just shook off Mathis two-three times. Is he shaking off Scioscia? Is he allowed to? Why isn't Mathis looking over to the dugout after each shake-off? Mathis is simply putting down alternative signals/suggestions. Same as any other catcher. The difference between Mathis and Napoli sure as hell ain't Scioscia!
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]It was possible to draw the conclusion the Mike doesn't call pitches because the catcher does not look to Mike after pitcher shakes of a pitch but it isn't the only possibility.

    After all what is a pitcher in effect doing when he shakes off the catcher and what does the catcher do in response?

    The pitcher is telling the catcher that he has something else in mind. At that point the catcher puts down another sign trying to guess what the pitcher wants to throw and where. The pitcher will continue to shake of the catcher until he gets the right pitch in the right location. If they can't get it on the same page, the catcher comes to the mound so they can talk through it. No reason for Mike to send his guess to the catcher to send to the pitcher, is there?

    Even the very confident Scioscia knows that if the pitcher has no faith in the pitch called and has more confidence in something else it is almost always better to let him throw his pitch with confidence than yours with apprehension. But you will notice that Angel pitchers do shake off far less calls than the RS pitchers do.

    Hey, maybe it is all urban legend and Mike is signalling defensive alignments on almost every pitch in the game but that is what the belief has been in the Angels market for years.  
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxfan791. Show redsoxfan791's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    After all what is a pitcher in effect doing when he shakes off the catcher and what does the catcher do in response?

    The pitcher is telling the catcher that he has something else in mind. At that point the catcher puts down another sign trying to guess what the pitcher wants to throw and where. The pitcher will continue to shake of the catcher until he gets the right pitch in the right location. If they can't get it on the same page, the catcher comes to the mound so they can talk through it. No reason for Mike to send his guess to the catcher to send to the pitcher, is there?

    Just a question for harness, and it's meant with very little snarkiness.  If what 5katz is saying is true (and I believe it is), should the catcher really be credited for game calling abilities?  Ultimately, the pitcher is the one making the decision.  The catcher is only suggesting a pitch and/or location.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    791, that's obviously true that the pitcher makes the final decision.  But it seems just as obvious to me that if the catcher knows the hitters and is adept at choosing pitches, the pitcher is more likely to agree with his selection, and perhaps more importantly, to have a lot of confidence that he's about to throw the right pitch.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    In Response to Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?:
    [QUOTE]After all what is a pitcher in effect doing when he shakes off the catcher and what does the catcher do in response? The pitcher is telling the catcher that he has something else in mind. At that point the catcher puts down another sign trying to guess what the pitcher wants to throw and where. The pitcher will continue to shake of the catcher until he gets the right pitch in the right location. If they can't get it on the same page, the catcher comes to the mound so they can talk through it. No reason for Mike to send his guess to the catcher to send to the pitcher, is there? Just a question for harness, and it's meant with very little snarkiness.  If what 5katz is saying is true (and I believe it is), should the catcher really be credited for game calling abilities?  Ultimately, the pitcher is the one making the decision.  The catcher is only suggesting a pitch and/or location.
    Posted by redsoxfan791[/QUOTE]

    Only partly; catcher 1 may put down a fast ball in a certain location, and the pitcher accepts; catcher 2 puts down a curve, and the pitcher declines; he then asks for a fastball in a different location, or a slider, etc, and this the pitcher accepts; a different result based on the pitch call dynamics between the battery.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    A lot of it has to do with a pitcher's rhythm. If the battery is on the same page, the flow is smoother. If a pitcher constantly shakes off signs, it's hard to maintain continuity.
    For example, Bill Lee had issues pitching to Fisk. The data often backs this up.
    Others rave about Fisk. Scioscia sees this on an individual (pitcher-catcher) basis.

    When both are on the same page, the flow of the game is fluid. Pitchers get into a groove as would a hot gambler. Once their stuff is established, the less a pitcher thinks about repetition, the better.

    Tempo is one area where some catchers are better than others - "thinking along the same lines" as his pitcher. Familiarity is one reason, but I think it's more a celebrial ability with receivers when this affects most every pitcher they handle.

    "Game calling" is only one area that affects a pitcher/catcher relationship.

    And while Scioscia looks at it on an individual basis, he's obviously not blind to the overall affect Mathis has had on his pitchers. Napoli can't make up the difference with his bat. No catcher can when the variance is this great
    It's reflected year after year with these two receivers catching the same pitchers.
    It's reflected in a 61 point win-loss disparity between 2007-2010.

    As 791 alluded, Mathis is horrid with the bat. No way he stays in the majors unless his impact is greater elsewhere - and it has been.

    In addition, there's no way this vast difference in pitcher performance with each catcher is the result of 'game calling by Scioscia'.

    No way.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from JamaicaPlain67. Show JamaicaPlain67's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    Yes but what is everyone's opinion about the OP? If you wish to pontificate about other matters then why not start another thread?
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    m
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    Scioscia's managing covers a lot of territory.
    That's what's being discussed.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    In Response to Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?:
    [QUOTE]A lot of it has to do with a pitcher's rhythm. If the battery is on the same page, the flow is smoother. If a pitcher constantly shakes off signs, it's hard to maintain continuity. For example, Bill Lee had issues pitching to Fisk. The data often backs this up. Others rave about Fisk. Scioscia sees this on an individual (pitcher-catcher) basis. When both are on the same page, the flow of the game is fluid. Pitchers get into a groove as would a hot gambler. Once their stuff is established, the less a pitcher thinks about repetition, the better. Tempo is one area where some catchers are better than others - "thinking along the same lines" as his pitcher. Familiarity is one reason, but I think it's more a celebrial ability with receivers when this affects most every pitcher they handle. "Game calling" is only one area that affects a pitcher/catcher relationship. And while Scioscia looks at it on an individual basis, he's obviously not blind to the overall affect Mathis has had on his pitchers. Napoli can't make up the difference with his bat. No catcher can when the variance is this great It's reflected year after year with these two receivers catching the same pitchers. It's reflected in a 61 point win-loss disparity between 2007-2010. As 791 alluded, Mathis is horrid with the bat. No way he stays in the majors unless his impact is greater elsewhere - and it has been. In addition, there's no way this vast difference in pitcher performance with each catcher is the result of 'game calling by Scioscia'. No way .
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    Maybe true, but he killed the Yankees in the '09 PS.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    I will say this about Mathis: His physical defensive tools are among the best.
    He's made plays that are downright amazing! I can see what the Angels see in this guy.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxfan791. Show redsoxfan791's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    In Response to Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?:
    [QUOTE]791, that's obviously true that the pitcher makes the final decision.  But it seems just as obvious to me that if the catcher knows the hitters and is adept at choosing pitches, the pitcher is more likely to agree with his selection, and perhaps more importantly, to have a lot of confidence that he's about to throw the right pitch.
    Posted by Hfxsoxnut[/QUOTE]

    I agree with the sentiment of your statement to a degree.  The key word in your statement was "if".  If the catcher knows the hitters and is adept at choosing pitches...  That description would seem to fit the bill, but it doesn't guarantee the catcher will call the right pitch in the right location.  It also doesn't guarantee a specific outcome. 
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxfan791. Show redsoxfan791's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    In Response to Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid? : Maybe true, but he killed the Yankees in the '09 PS.
    Posted by nhsteven[/QUOTE]

    Yeah, but anyone can do anything over a few games.  David Eckstein and Adam Kennedy have playoff MVPs and they're poor hitters as well. 
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?

    In Response to Re: Is Mike Scioscia really this stupid?:
    [QUOTE]Scioscia's managing covers a lot of territory. That's what's being discussed.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    Harness,

    One benefit of having Scioscia call the pitches is that the pitcher is far less likely to shake it off. 

    I think it helps when the pitcher and catcher are in sync, but on the Red Sox that doesn't always happen.  My favorite recent example was Lester in his last start--a brilliant 7 innings, 11 K's, 1 run.  But in the first inning he had like a 1-2 count and Salty signaled three fingers, which must have been a breaking ball, because the previous one had worked well.  Lester shook him off until he signalled a high fast ball, which the batter promptly put over the green monster.   
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share