Mike Scioscia on Analytics
Mike Scioscia has a reputation as an old-school manager who has little interest in analytics. He doesn’t want you to believe that. The extent to which you should is subjective. Scioscia certainly isn’t cutting edge — at least not by today’s standards — but he’s by no means a dinosaur. His finger is on the pulse of what’s going on in today’s game, even if he isn’t always pushing the same buttons as his more progressive contemporaries.
On Monday, I had an opportunity to ask the Angels manager for his thoughts on analytics. Here is what Scioscia had to say:
———
Scioscia on analytics: “Analytics have been around forever in the game of baseball, from when Connie Mack would use spray charts and move guys around from the dugout, to now. Analytics for projecting player performance have mushroomed over the last five years. Analytics in dugout probabilities have increased. We’ve had data, we’ve had analytics, since I’ve been in the game. And they’ve evolved.
“Early on here with Buddy Black, Joe Maddon, Ron Roenicke, we would use whatever data we could. Moving forward, with some of the really interesting things that are on the board — they can’t help but help you, and we will apply them.
“The last three or four years, certainly, spray-chart analytics have come into play as far as shifting. Those have been really advantageous for all of baseball. There are some things that are happening in projecting pitching performance — not only start to start, but within a game. That’s very exciting. Billy Eppler, our general manager, has a lot of things that I think are going to help us with that equation of when a pitcher has crossed that line of being effective. Your lineup, your batting order decisions. Those as well.
“I think spin rate serves a purpose. If we can get spin rates analyzed during a game, that’s going to help us within the scope of, ‘What’s a pitcher’s performance?’ Spin rate is more of a diagnostic tool as to maybe why a curveball isn’t as sharp. OK, the spin rate is down; is it the grip? So it’s applicable in a game, but the broader application is as a diagnostic tool.
“There are a lot of applications for spin rates. There are a lot of applications for exit velocities. There are applications for catchers’ receiving, which is quantifying a lot of stuff we had to do by scouting up until the last four, five years. So there are a lot of things being quantified that we believe are important.
“Everything we’ve gotten over the course of, not just last year, but any years, we’ve looked for a way to apply them. If it could make us better, we applied it. There are always new things on the horizon, and there are some things that are being redefined as we move forward. There is no doubt they can be advantageous.
“Why [do many people think Scioscia’s not into analytics]? I don’t put much thought into that, to be honest with you. It’s neither here nor there.”
David Laurila grew up in Michigan's Upper Peninsula and now writes about baseball from his home in Cambridge, Mass. He authored the Prospectus Q&A series at Baseball Prospectus from December 2006-May 2011 before being claimed off waivers by FanGraphs. He can be followed on Twitter @DavidLaurilaQA.
Well that was surprising. He actually sounds more analytically-inclined than Joe Maddon. Or maybe he’s just more eloquent.
Does he? I mean for all the word salad up there, the Angels shift a fraction (~20%) of the league’s shift leaders, have been poor in roster and lineup construction, have been poor in FA evaluation and have seemingly been abysmal in player development.
Other than having Mike Trout, I’m not sure I can point to any data that would suggest the Angels use analytics in a meaningful way.
Notice I said, “sounds”. As in words. I then say, “maybe he’s just more eloquent”, acknowledging the possibility his words don’t align with his actions.
Are you talking about all shifts or extreme shifts?
well…….. my team,Braves, mgr likes to talk a lot about how he loves saber, and follows the stats….etc then turn around and shifts rarely, still uses the standard splits when calling on relievers and trusts his “gut” over the stats nearly every damn time.
I think it’s lip service myself
Let me tell you why, Scioscia. Bottom of the 8th, Game 1 of 2014 ALDS KC @ ANA with the game tied 2-2. Iannetta walks to lead off, and you don’t pinch run. Instead, you keep making Calhoun bunt. Bunt! Calhoun! In the 8th, not the 9th! Calhoun even works the count to 3-1, and you still make him bunt. He pops up to third base. Inning ends with nothing, Angels lose in 11 innings, 3-2.
Scoscia is a dinosaur.
Strangely, he seems like an analytically-inclined coach, but an analytically-disinclined manager.
yeah, thats the sentiment I got, too. He likes to use the data to help improve his player’s performance, but it’s not changing the way he makes in-game decisions.
ahhh good point! had not considered that
The ad for this page hijacked my iPhone and opened the Apple Store page. This is unacceptable. Get your shit together, Fangraphs.
I happen to think Cancer is unacceptable, yet here I am, accepting it.
Deep breath.
Close the Apple Store page.
Return to article.
All better now?
If the text of the article has loaded and the page hasn’t finished loading otherwise: hit the X in your browser ASAP before the ad jump-out scripts manage to load.
They don’t control the ads. As someone will I am sure tell you soon.
I own a food truck in Arizona – we do all the A’s games at Hohokam. One of the clubbies needed a hand getting some stuff out of the visitor’s clubhouse after the final game last spring (against the Angels), and I stole Mike Scioscia’s hat, which he’d evidently left behind after the game.
So that’s my Mike Scioscia story.
What size is the hat? Seems like Scioscia’s got a pretty large noggin
7 1/2… I’ve also got a pretty large noggin. Barely fits.
I surprised the the spin rate stuff….that one caught me off guard coming from him.
I think the disconnect comes from the fact that on a game management basis he appears to not care that much about the numbers, just the old school “small ball” mentality that he taught Roenike (much to my dismay). looking at spray charts and spin rates can help you in player development (though i don’t see much evidence of that in the Angels at all) but his in game management is basically that of a manager in the 50’s
To me this speaks to the fact that we as fans are making judgements based on very limited information.
– Manager X eschews bunting and likes to shift a lot, because that was the way his mentor managed. He refuses to use analytics, though. His owner hired some egghead stat guys, and he makes approving noises about said eggheads when asked, but he tosses all the crap they send him in the trash.
– Manager Y loves small ball … but makes extensive use of analytics in deciding which players go in the lineup, when pitchers get pulled, which skills coaches work on, assigning bullpen roles, planning pitch sequences, player development, injury prevention, and on and on. He doesn’t make an effort to publicize any of this (for competitive reasons), and reporters don’t ask.
As far as the fans can see, Manager X is the enlightened thinker, and Y is the dinosaur.
I’ve heard a lot of oldschool people express ideas like “analytics are great in the front office, but on the field, it’s a human game.” It’s a hallmark of people who don’t really know what statistics and analytics are to draw arbitrary boundaries where they supposedly cannot cross.
Scioscia didn’t actually say anything to this effect, but it may be how he feels.
Who cares what Mike “Sciascia” has to say about anything?
If you’ve followed the Angels for any period of time you’ll see and learn that Scioscia clearly speaks in a smokescreen manner. For example: “If it could make us better, we applied it.” A normal person reads this and doesn’t think twice. With Scioscia you have to ask the question who decides if it makes “us better”. Mensa Mike loves wordplay and misdirection which unfortunately makes any interview he does suspicious in the first place.
Congratulations! We have achieved utter clarification.
In the AL all a manager has to get right is lineup, batting order and bullpen management. He also has to figure out who belongs in the bullpen in the first place. The other stuff he delegates to pitching, hitting and fielding coaches although I imagine he has some say there.
I can only judge him on the on field stuff, and I don’t see him that often, but some of his late game moves are strange, as are his batting orders at times, and he seems worse in the post season
Are there any teams that use spin rates to evaluate pitchers in-game? Coupling this with the standard eye test to evaluate pitchers should be advantageous.