The Best 5-Year Stretch in Franchise History
by mattwelch on Feb 14, 2010 10:07 PM PST
Email
PrintThe Best 5-Year Stretch in Franchise History ... was, obviously, the last five years. But to really drive the point home to you whippersnappers about how good we've had it in the Scioscia era, here are the Top 10 five-year stretches in team history, with the parentheses indicating wins and losses per year, along with the managers responsible.
1) 2005-2009 475-335 .586 (95-67) Scioscia
2) 2004-2008 465-345 .574 (93-69) Scioscia
3) 2002-2006 452-358 .558 (90-72) Scioscia
4) 2003-2007 447-363 .551 (89-73) Scioscia
5) 2001-2005 438-372 .541 (88-74) Scioscia
6) 1982-1986 426-384 .526 (85-77) Mauch/McNamara/Mauch
7) 2000-2004 425-385 .525 (85-77) Scioscia
8) 1985-1989 423-387 .522 (85-77) Mauch/Rojas/Stubing/Rader
9) 1978-1982 384-372 .508 (82-80) Garcia/Fregosi/Mauch
10 1981-1985 385-373 .508 (82-80) Fregosi/Mauch/McNamara/Mauch
Sosh's record after 10 years is a neat 900-720 (.556). Prior to his arrival, the team's best-ever decade-long run was 1981-1990, when we finished 798-770 (.509), or basically an average of 82-80 every year. We been having it good, people.
This Fan-Post is authored by an independent fan. Tell us what you think and how you feel.
70 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
all hail Soth..........
-Buffalo Rumblings resident Chan Gailey basher-
by norcaliangelsfan on Feb 14, 2010 12:41 PM PST reply actions
Once again, nice number crunching.
Golden age indeed. I hope it continues.
In the pole, I voted 2nd. 93-95 wins sounds about right to me.
seconded
Scioscia has been a great manager, but Arte gave Mike the pieces to build a consistent winner.
by The OC Disorder on Feb 14, 2010 2:05 PM PST up reply actions
Let's not forget
Stoneman. He laid the foundation for our success this past decade—GMJ contract notwithstanding.
by tolbs1010 on Feb 14, 2010 2:55 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I voted this 5 year stretch second
Any stretch that doesn’t include 2002 will always finish behind in my eyes. It has been a good decade.
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.
by Moondoggy on Feb 14, 2010 3:32 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
rec'd
What do you need a fancy suit for, Charlie, you ain't got no job to wear it to.
by clover_black on Feb 14, 2010 3:45 PM PST up reply actions
and don't forget Alfredo!
as in Alfredo Griffin, and Bud Black, Mike Butcher, Roenicke, Maddon, and ah whatshisname now coaching third
as well as
the greatest fans in the world!!!!!
(I don’t give a crap what the a-hole sux and yank fans say about us)
We deserve some props too, eh?
Thank you, brother, for the assist
I think got a case of brain freeze watchin’ too much skating with the womenfolk
Just don't forget.
After all, Dino DOES have himself a panther.
FREE BRANDON WOOD!
by halofan4life on Feb 15, 2010 8:00 AM PST up reply actions
See No Evil!
Welcome Rodney, Matsui, Piniero, Stokes, and WOOD!
by Rally Manatee on Feb 15, 2010 4:38 PM PST up reply actions
I must say...
Being a fan since 95 (when I started understanding baseball more at the age of 12), there were some tough years. Nothing like some of the old time fans had to deal with, but, nonetheless, I’m really grateful for our stretch from 02 on. Here’s to continuing a franchise of winning and enjoying it while it lasts
The bat of Howie will rise again!
We Fly Flags
R.I.P. #34
by The Furious Bat of Howie47 on Feb 14, 2010 10:31 PM PST via mobile reply actions
I'll admit
I barely followed the team between 95 and 2000. My excuse is that I was in college, and didn’t really have the time. But that really doesn’t make sense. I think I was just too upset after that season, and it took years to get over. When I met my wife, an OC girl, we both started following the team avidly again.
Welcome Rodney, Matsui, Piniero, Stokes, and WOOD!
by Rally Manatee on Feb 15, 2010 4:42 PM PST up reply actions
You may, and
I think there are some Mariner fans who would share your sentiment about Bavasi.
Nice of him to decimate one of our rivals after leaving a mess in Anaheim.
No you may not.
Not because I’m defending them, but because you already dropped your f-bomb for the month, I believe on the 6th or so. I knew you couldn’t hold out! May I suggest the standard TBS t.v. edited version, “Forget Mike Port and Bil Bavasi.”
Welcome Rodney, Matsui, Piniero, Stokes, and WOOD!
by Rally Manatee on Feb 15, 2010 4:46 PM PST up reply actions
No, I think I will be harsh on him.
If it weren’t for Bavasi, with the core of players we had to work with, we could have won one sooner. I’m convinced of it.
~Till the Halo burns out...
Bavasi inherited Salmon, Edmonds, Anderson, Percival, Snow, Finley, Langston, Curtis, Easley
He drafted Erstad, Washburn, Glaus, Shields, Lackey, and that’s about it (the ‘94, ’96, and ’98 drafts were among the franchise’s worst).
He had zero idea about how to build a rotation, or organizational depth. He thought the team had a “four outfielders” problem with the advent of Erstad and so he traded a great-hitting DH for the last lousy spasm of Mark Gubicza, gave away J.T. Snow just before he got good for a pus-armed nobody, then spent the rest of the decade scrambling to find the “power bat” and/or dependable 1Bman of Bill Plaschke’s dreams.
It is true, he gave long-term contracts to the best Angel ever, a near-Hall of Fame center fielder, and a versatile, sweet-swinging outfielder who looked destined to hit .300 for a decade. But what the hell ELSE was he gonna do? They were the team’s only hope, in part because he was unable to surround them with enough talent to win, and also because he (and the rest of Angel management) was utterly unable to build a coherent organizational culture.
At least he had the decency to go ruin Seattle for a while.
by mattwelch on Feb 15, 2010 1:26 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Funny though
I have heard the Rat interviewed and he speaks about how he wanted or would have traded some of those names you mention. Thing is Bavasi did not trade a lot of the players that would be the core of the teams 2002 WS win. I think a lot of credit should go to Bob Fontaine, Jr.
I laugh but at one point BB was listed as an all time great Angel
by Angel Aviator on Feb 15, 2010 3:52 PM PST up reply actions
This is true
But it’s also true that trading any of them would have made no sense. Not that that didn’t stop people from worrying urgently how you could play Salmon, Edmonds, Anderson AND Erstad all in the same lineup, in the American League!
Now that you’re here, a question: In your opinion, why did our old friend Damion Easley mostly fail in our uniform, then do pretty good for Detroit? I have theories, but I’m guessing you have inside information, or at least insight.
Steroids?
His forearms went from pencils to “marks-a-lot” thickness seemingly overnight when he went to Detroit.
I love this team.
by Downing Rules on Feb 16, 2010 9:50 AM PST up reply actions
I hate to speculate
but I do think playing in your hometown is always tough for a younger player. I also think that the club was never fully committed to him as they traded for that putz Harold Reynolds and brought in Rex the wonderdog in 94. Also bringing in Kurt Stillwell in late 93. Once he was traded to Detroit he was given the job and settled into that spot
Downing Rules also shares in a few others thoughts about his huge burst of pwr over the 97/98 season.
by Angel Aviator on Feb 17, 2010 1:15 AM PST up reply actions
I don't know that he gave all that long-term a contract to Salmon.
After all, Salmon had to be re-signed in 2000 by Stoneman. Percival was extended in 2001, by Stoneman. Anderson might have been Bavasi’s doing, but I’d have to check.
The point is, I don’t know how much credit to give Bavasi for the fact that some of the old guard was still around in 2002. A fair peice of that was actually Stoneman convincing people to sign back up.
~Till the Halo burns out...
Well Bavasi
Was also in charge of the farm system which some may or may not put a lot of weight into but they sure seem to give it a lot of credit when you talk about the football playing Tony Reagins.
I say if your going to give credit to Reagins for the farm system then it is also right to give it to Bavasi for all those that were in the system and also part of the 2002 teams WS.
I will never forget listening to Stoneman interviewed right after the Kennedy trade and talking about how Sutherland (pro scout) liked Kennedy and the fact that he was a local kid (JW North HS) and Stoneman said “i had no idea” kind of summed it up with me for his tenure.
by Angel Aviator on Feb 17, 2010 1:22 AM PST up reply actions
I tend to give GM's credit for trades and farm systems because even if they're not experts
they get credit for keeping smart people who are and listening to their advice. Likewise if the farm system is bad, you have to take the knocks for it. In Bavasi’s case, our farm system was pretty lowly regarded by Baseball America for the entirety of his tenure. In fact when Stoneman took over in 2000, our system had just been rated dead last of all 30 teams.
So Bavasi gets some credit for the farm system, but given that Robb Quinlan and Jeff DaVannon were the BEST of the position players in our system in 2000, that seems like mighty slim pickings to me. There was a reason Stoneman had to go scavenge guys like Eckstein and Figgins from other farm systems. We literally had nothing position-wise at that time.
~Till the Halo burns out...
Look at those that went through the farm system when he was the director though
and as I stated he didnt trade away the talent that would produce the WS.
by Angel Aviator on Feb 17, 2010 6:08 PM PST up reply actions
His inability to accurately guage talent once he was the one making the big calls makes me
question how much effect he had on those brought into the system by others. And I don’t give points for obvious moves like NOT trading away your best talent for no return. Which Bavasi still did twice with Chili Davis and JT Snow.
~Till the Halo burns out...
Lets remember that all moves made by a GM
are not made without having many reports from the big league scouts that are in the organization. Like in the case of Eckstein it wasn’t Stoneman that pushed for Eckstein it was Gary Sutherland.
As for the Davis trade I personal see that trade being done as away to eliminate 37 yr olds payroll prior to Disney purchasing the club and as for the JT Snow thing well he was another guy that hadn’t shown a lot of promise as a Yankee or as a local player in his hometown. Some looked at him as a light hitting (no pop) 1B guy….a Kotchman of sorts. All GMs have trades that they wish they hadn’t made after the fact. Just be glad he didn’t do what he did in Seattle…..Who said anything about trading for nothing? That is called giving ….
by Angel Aviator on Feb 18, 2010 3:31 PM PST up reply actions
I realize that no GM move is made in vacuum, but at the end of the day
you make the decisions, and you are responsible for the results. Bill Bavasi’s decisions resulted in 5 years of disappointment with quality raw material, a farm system ranked dead last, and periwinkle uniforms. That’s pretty low-end from where I’m sitting.
And as far as Chili Davis, I don’t think age was the prime factor since he turned right around and signed Eddie Murray. I do think that he made an absolutely horrible trade.
As far as trading for something rather than nothing, I don’t see how you evaluate the fact that he never traded our guys for something. Was a deal there? What somethings could he have gotten? All you get that way is endless speculation. It’s pointless to give him credit for not trading away our players because we don’t know what he could have gotten in return. That’s why I say I don’t give credit for not frittering away players—that’s the obvious move. Making balanced trades that acquire actual talent is hard, and I didn’t see Bavasi do much of that.
~Till the Halo burns out...
Davis trade
that I mentioned was in reflection of the 3M+ he was making. Eddie Murray was cheap and cost nothing in the big scheme of things.
Sure the GM signs off on the trades and is the one that has to live by them. Don’t think he had much to do with the Uniforms or the cheerleaders though. I do know by not trading away the players that have been mentioned the club did acquire a WS Championship. I just don’t see where the 2 trades you mentioned did any damage to a team that was subtracting payroll and playing its younger players (less farm prospects) would make him a flop like say Mike Port of O’Brien. In my opinion awful GM’s in Angel history
by Angel Aviator on Feb 21, 2010 12:43 AM PST up reply actions
Murray wasn't expensive, but he also couldn't hit
Thus necessitating the trade for the more expensive Tony Phillips, and—after Phillips’ cocaine episode—another trade for Rickey Henderson. Murray/Phillips/Henderson ended up costing almost as much as Davis in salary, while hitting 10 homers. Davis & J.T. Snow, meanwhile, hit 58.
Then we paid Cecil Fielder $2.8 million to suck, after which we broke the bank for some 300-pound Masshole.
Bavasi dumped Davis for far too little, and traded Snow (also for far too little) because he mistakenly thought he had an OF/1B/DH surplus.
Lets not forget
that any of those trades you mention had no future players worth a damn being sent to other clubs. T.P. didn’t have bad numbers either. If you didn’t think the guy was on greenies or other chemicals just think back to him spitting out that cotton each and every time you saw him and those eyes bugging out of his head.
You speak of the big boy Fielder but yet they posted the same sort of numbers that year didnt they? Again this is not me defending Bavasi as it is me wondering why Port and O’Brien aren’t listed as being the ones that did the most damage to the organization.
by Angel Aviator on Feb 22, 2010 5:22 PM PST up reply actions
Oh, I'm not really singling out Bavasi
It’s his father I really hate, though objectively he helped bring the franchise its first success. I’m just saying that the Snow trade was stupid, blew holes into the offense that were filled disastrously, and Watson/Gubicza were no kinds of ROI worth talking about.
Though in fairness on the other side
We do have to give Bavasi props for winning the K-Rod bidding war.
~Till the Halo burns out...
Robb Quinlan was arguably a better move...
;0
I love this team.
by Downing Rules on Feb 15, 2010 5:41 PM PST up reply actions
I think this is more Clay Daniels
then it was Bavasi
by Angel Aviator on Feb 17, 2010 1:28 AM PST up reply actions
Speaking of greatness
It’s too bad Moose Stubing didn’t get more of a shot.
He may have been the uber-Soth
perfection
i’m wondering who managed more games than Moose in the MLB who attained and even higher percentage of perfection.
by Rex Fregosi on Feb 15, 2010 10:02 PM PST up reply actions
you have to go back to 1872 to find some one exceeded the Moose
two guys got to 11 games back then, but Moose rules the last two centuries!!
Thanks to Baseball Reference for the answer, I also saw another familiar name on “the list” but Ted Turner (0-1) didn’t even come close to our Moose.
by Rex Fregosi on Feb 15, 2010 10:06 PM PST up reply actions
Amen, Mr. Welch.
On point as always.
For so many years it was difficult to be hopeful. When others would learn of my love for the Angels and offer some nicety – “They’re doing well this year” – my standard surly response was along the lines of “Well, they’ll find some way to fuck it up”.
I’ve not carried that particular baggage around for quite some time now.
"Sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."
When others would learn of my love for the Angels and offer some nicety – "They’re doing well this year" – my standard surly response was along the lines of "Well, they’ll find some way to fuck it up".
How many times I’ve uttered those words… I’m so glad Scioscia will be here another 10 years & if Arte continues to own the organization, it will be someone from the organization who will take over for Scioscia.
R.I.P. King Ad-Rock #34
1998-2002 was #11 on the list
Also, there’s no ’60s either, even though by a few measures the Angels were the most successful expansion team ever, at least until the Rockies & Diamondbacks spent their way to success.
Don't forget the Marlins, buying a WS title four years into their existence
Angels baseball. We do what we must, because we can -- HaloDutch
The 60's
I look upon the 60’s fondly because they did have some success quickly and many interesting stories.
I remember a Sports Illustrated cover (with Jim Fregosi and Dave Duncan) in 1969 tauting that either us or the A’s would be the team of the future. They got that one right and cursed two players at the same time.
No, the 90's were consistently BAD.
I think our AAA team would dominate some of those 90’s teams.
by Balls and Strikes on Feb 15, 2010 11:27 AM PST up reply actions
we had only 5 bad teams in the 90's
i consider the 90-91 teams as classic underachievers but they were .500 team, and we had some decent teams though in that decade.
1999 though was a low point for the franchise, and it was just 92-94 that we consistently stunk.
Meh, Every year it was the same promise, then a september collapse
With the worst being 95.
I just remember the gaping holes around the IF that whole decade. We had pretty good firstbasemen, but man, look at the other infielders- gary disarcina, Damion easley, Spike Owen, Luis Sojo, Dick Schofield. When your best infielder for a decade is gary gaetti, you know you are in trouble.
by Balls and Strikes on Feb 17, 2010 12:38 PM PST up reply actions
Gaetti was horrible for the Angels
DiSar managed at least one good year, as did Velarde. And most of the 1Bmen were good, though only for other teams — Snow, Lee Stevens, Paul Sorrento, Wally Joyner.
I’m intrigued by the fact that the best-ever second baseman in the history of Japanese baseball, by acclamation, was 1990s Angels prospect Bobby Rose….
Biggest surprise = Garcia
i was really surprised to see Dave Garcia on the list, I had always associated him as the wrost manager the Angels ever had.
But doing a little reserach to support my hypothesis, i see he was actually off to a good start in 1978 at 25-21 when he was canned (but they had lost their last 5 in a row). His overall record as manager was 60-66 which in the first two decades, wasn’t that bad for this franchise.
Now i’m wondering why i am so bitter at the mention of his name. Was it the consistent losing of the past two decades (60s-70s)? Or perhaps it was knowing we had a good team in the late ’70’s and remembering the underachievement of his tenure.
more irony
Rojas (75-79) and Stubing (0-8) make the list, but two HOF managers don’t (Herzog and Williams)
The '77 team was among the biggest disappointments in team history
So he needed to come out swinging in ’78. Also, the clubhouse was all swollen up with big new personalities, and felt rudderless.
Rader and Dave Parker also
really disappointed me too. And 1995 is in a class of its own.
by Rex Fregosi on Feb 16, 2010 11:32 AM PST up reply actions
Rigney's 5-year strecthes - the 1960's
5yr Stretch WP
1962-1966 0.486
1963-1967 0.484
1964-1968 0.480
1961-1965 0.474
1965-1969 0.466
We won 86 games in 1962….and then didn’t surpass that until 1978.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Halos Heaven
Related FanShots on Halos Heaven
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
