Halos Heaven: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: The Boxing Bulletin for Boxing Fans!

One schlub's opinion

My uneducated opinion regarding the off-field management errors made in the Stoneman era.

Star-divide

I'm no statistician, I've never played baseball professionally, and I'm not a sports journalist. My only qualifications to make the following observations are my long tenure as an Angels fan and career experience in management.

Like any Angel fan, I am distressed by the team's performance this year. While the team would be contending if it merely played up to its defensive potential, an objective analysis of the team's performance reveals a weakness in offense that was quite forseeable. The cause for this lies squarely on the shoulders of the off-field management, most obviously Bill Stoneman. I realize that he may be getting flawed information from his scouting staff and some unproductive direction from Arte Moreno, but for the moment let's just put it on Stoneman for the sake of argument.

Obviously I don't have the knowledge of the game that Stoneman has, and I certainly don't have access to inside information. I'm thus not going to criticize his trading acumen in general, other than to say that it fair to characterize him as timid and perhaps a bit unimaginative.

There are two aspects to his record, however, which I feel are undoubtedly deleterious to the team's on-field performance. The first is his obsessive clinging to minor-league prospects. At first I supported this quite enthusiasticaly, because I was heartsick at the team's historic propensity for trading away the future for washed-up veterans. I took great pride in the fact that the 2002 team was substantially home-grown.

Nevertheless, when a team has a declared philosophy of drafting the best available athletes, irrespective of organizational needs, inherent in that philosophy is the constant effort to trade surplus talent to fill these needs, at least at the minor-league level. This has simply not been done, and as a result we have (for example) virtually no top-level outfield talent apparent in the minors, and a laughable glut of middle infielders. Even a little kid trading baseball cards is liable to do a better job.

The other trait that Stoneman has is a bad temper. Whenever he loses patience with a player, he simply dumps him unceremoniously with no apparent attempt to secure anything in return. The only exceptions that come to mind are Mo Vaughn (admittedly a crucial exception) and Jose Guillen.  He did a great job with these two, which shows that he is capable of a shrewd trade now and then. But there are many more examples of good players let go for nothing. The most recent and glaring examples are Bobby Jenks and Derrick Turnbow. Now, I think it was a good idea to let Jenks go, because he is obviously substandard in the character department, and despite our virtually wet-nursing him through the system he showed no real willingness to respond in kind. But the rational thing to do is sell such a player's strengths to another team and let them deal with the problems, not banish them from the kingdom petulantly.

Turnbow was a less understandable move; we had him up for a whole year dragging down the bullpen as a Rule 5 draftee, and later he had shown distinct promise in brief callups. We had a lot invested in this guy, and just when he was ripe we cast him off, apparently because of a positive test in the Olympic tryouts for a substance that was not banned by MLB at the time. While I respect the ethical considerations involved, why is it that we apparently cut him no slack when we were so indulgent with Jenks? The message sent to players here is at best mixed.

As I said, I don't know for a fact that Stoneman is entirely responsible for these two organizational flaws, and so I don't know whether simply replacing him would fix things. What I am sure of, however, is that these flaws have led to the problems we now see on the field. They must be corrected, and until I see some positive movement in this regard we will not achieve the perennial contender status so publicly valued by Arte Moreno.

This Fan-Post is authored by an independent fan. Tell us what you think and how you feel.

0 recs  |  Comment 12 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Good analysis
I wonder if Stoneman wold have made a better Assistant GM - with the great analytical ability of talent but someone else doing the wheel-dealing needed.

by Rev Halofan on Jun 23, 2006 5:02 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

That strikes me as a good notion
Stoneman clearly is skilled at the financial aspects of running a team, too. The only flaws that really seem evident to me fall under the category of leadership. So perhaps Assistant GM would more ideally fit his skills.

by rspencer on Jun 23, 2006 5:38 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Stoneman's track record
Here is a countdown of the first 15 trades made by Bill Stoneman as Angels GM:

LINK

Add to that Casilla for Romero and Callaspo for Bulger...

by Rev Halofan on Jun 23, 2006 5:06 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

oh dear
my analysis of each trade was WAY TOO generous and optimistic back then. Take each trade down a notch or two, jeez...

by Rev Halofan on Jun 23, 2006 5:08 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You won't get any criticisms from me
for optimism. Any longtime Angels fan must have developed vast reserves of optimism over the seasons.

by rspencer on Jun 23, 2006 6:01 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

There's an inherent contradiction between...
"obsessive clinging to minor-league prospects"

and

"examples of good players let go for nothing ... [like] Bobby Jenks and Derrick Turnbow."

Not that contradictions can't exist, of course.

He doesn't really trade talent, he dumps it (Vaughn/Guillen/Showensic/Yan/Ortiz), lets it walk off rich (Spiezio/Glaus/Molina/Eckstein/Percival/Washburn), fails to appreciate its value (Jenks/Turnbow/Wise), and understands its valuelessness (Amezega, Weber).

Those are all different strains, as is the drafting-athletes-regardless-of-position, picking-relievers-off-the-scrapheap, finding-value-in-career-minor-leaguers, and so on.

But he traded a Grade B or higher prospect in Callaspo, to get a reliever and clear up the SS logjam. He let Bengie go maybe a year too soon because both Mathis and Napoli deserved to be higher than AA. He still hasn't really allowed anyone to get blocked, except arguably Kotchman for half a year, maybe D-Mac for a month, Kendrick for the last month, and Weaver for as short as it takes for someone in the rotation to get hurt.

Point is, he's all over the map, albeit within a range of predictability, and this year so far it ain't been good enough, even while the team is laying terrific groundwork for the rest of the decade. I'm more inclined to blame the coaching staff, which is having a difficult time breaking in youngsters, flailing wildly on hitting strategy, and weirdly failing to extract a good defensive performance.  

Yes, it would be swell to flip Kennedy's contract for Craig Wilson's until the end of the year, or by some miracle find an All-star. But the assembled team could win, if coached right. It ain't being coached right.

by mattwelch on Jun 23, 2006 5:24 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Matt Wise
Got hit with the Tommy John bug in 2002.

Agee, though, the coaching as well as the laidback clubhouse culture is mroe to blame for the current stumbles to be sure.

by Rev Halofan on Jun 23, 2006 5:43 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

All good points
Stoneman's certainly a capable GM, and you bring up some strong evidence of it. As I said, I don't know whether the answer is getting rid of him. I was merely highlighting the two characteristics of his tenure that I feel have unarguably hurt the team's performance.

You're right about the inherent contradiction you cite in my argument, which is, as the kids say, my bad. I should have said "obsessive clinging to certain promising minor-league prospects" and "examples of others with definite promise being cast off for nothing."

As far as the blame the coaching staff bears, I am unsure in what way they could be responsible for the team's shocking collapse of its defensive ability in one season. In the past, Alfredo Griffin has gotten a great deal of the credit for working with the infielders; do you think he in particular has dropped the ball (hey, a pun!) this season?

by rspencer on Jun 23, 2006 6:00 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Something else about Molina
They pointed out on the radio broadcast last night that Bengie Molina is only a part-time player with the Jays, getting about 60% of the time behind the dish.  He had been declining with the team defensively for a while, and he was only going to get older and more expensive. Pass.
Fire Mickey Hatcher. An entire generation of Angels offense depends upon it.

by scareduck on Jun 24, 2006 10:55 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'd still rather have Bengie than Jose
As the backup catcher right now. A player's net worth to a team is not entirely described by his stats, and even with declining defensive skills Bengie worked well with our pitchers and was a clutch hitter. Right now he's hitting .297 with an OBP of .345 and a .423 slugging percentage. Not earth-shaking, perhaps, but we could sure use a player with those numbers this year.

I agree completely that it would have been foolish to resign him for a long-term contract, but we could have had him for one more year easily and fairly reasonably simply by offering him arbitration. At least then we'd have gotten a sandwich pick for him.

by rspencer on Jun 24, 2006 7:20 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

He was looking for the big payday
and would have declined arbitration - speculation, yes, but his frustration about not getting the gigantic payday was evident in the offseason.

by Rev Halofan on Jun 24, 2006 10:49 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

He was indeed frustrated, but
my point still stands. Had he declined arbitration, we'd have gotten a sandwich pick in return (as I understand it). Your speculation may well be correct, but my distinct impression at the time was that he was expecting to be offered arbitration, and would have accepted it. I think his agent said as much.

by rspencer on Jun 25, 2006 2:13 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Halos Heaven is the world's 12th Most Important Baseball Blog, according to Sports Media Challenge.
Start posting about the Angels »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Angels-stadium-angels-helmet_small
Mount Halos (instead of Mount Rushmore)
Small
Vlad to the Rangers?

Recent FanPosts

Small
Aroldis Chapman & Kendry Morales now have the same agent
Small
Juan Rivera for Curtis Granderson?
Adenhart2_medium_small
Read My Lips, No New Free-Agents!!!
Ph_444440_small
HH Quick Tip: "Resign" vs. "Re-sign"
Keepcalm3_small
Alternative Angels Awards
Small
Shore up the Pen
Guerrero2_small
My 2010 Opening Day Prediction
240b_small
Should Troy Glaus be our DH?
4323_1105939621665_1622022962_290465_5300842_n_small
Angels Alternate Jerseys
Small
crazy trade ideas from ignorant fans

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

SPONSORS