The Kid calls it a career

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Well, sparked the winning from the M's side anyway.

Meanwhile, the Angels lost the heart of their team in Gary Disarcina near the start of August this year, which sparked the losing from their side.

Really?

Gary Disarcina had 6 seasons of over 400 PAs in his career, and his OPS+ was over 65 in just one of those years. SIXTY-FIVE! Meanwhile, the ONE year in the midst of that stunning run of anti-productivity, he plays in less than 100 games and happens to have an OPS+ of 108 when he gets hurt, and he's "the heart of the team"? What in the name of David Eckstein is going on around here?!

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Really?

Gary Disarcina had 6 seasons of over 400 PAs in his career, and his OPS+ was over 65 in just one of those years. SIXTY-FIVE! Meanwhile, the ONE year in the midst of that stunning run of anti-productivity, he plays in less than 100 games and happens to have an OPS+ of 108 when he gets hurt, and he's "the heart of the team"? What in the name of David Eckstein is going on around here?!

Obviously, you were not paying attention to the Angels that year.

Disar was the leader of that team and having a very good year, both at the plate and in the field. In early August of that season, he slid into second, trailing his hand over the base as he did so. His thumb hit the base bad and he broke it and was out for the season. At that point in time, the Angels were 13 games up on the Mariners.

After losing Disar, they pretty much almost immediately started losing. The Disar injury was the spark to the greatest collapse in Angels history, and this was a franchise with quite a number of tragedies/bad finishes in their history to that point (and after).

I wouldn't expect you to know any of this, since no one east of the Mississippi bothered to pay any attention to the West Coast at that time.

Oh yeah, that hasn't really changed.

I'll send you a PM when you need to start paying attention.

[Chief Rum]

P.S. Don't question me about MY franchise history and I won't do the same to you.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Without his grittiness, the season was lost.

[stevew]

I'm going to out white-guy the other team.

[MrBug708]

He was the captain of that team and once he went down, my grandfather told me that they were gonna fade. Sure enough, they did. They weren't the same club after that injury

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

Without his grittiness, the season was lost.

Heh...look, I'm sure it seems silly, just looking at the numbers, but only people watching that team had any idea how important that injury was to the course of the Angels' season. 1995 was a bitter year for Angels fans, a year when we had thought we had finally shaken the tragic history and were on the cusp of having a great team (GA, Edmonds, Salmon young stars, with Finley, Langston, Chili Davis, Lee Smith, a young Troy Percival, etc.).

There were many better baseball players than Disar on that team. But to a man, everyone on that team swore by him. He was as close to a Derek Jeter clubhouse popularity type as the Angels had had to that point.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

I was making a good-natured poke. I can't speak to the season in particular, but don't dismiss your point out-of-hand. I believe that intangibles, while generally overrated (sometimes wildly) do in fact matter.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Obviously, you were not paying attention to the Angels that year.

Disar was the leader of that team and having a very good year, both at the plate and in the field. In early August of that season, he slid into second, trailing his hand over the base as he did so. His thumb hit the base bad and he broke it and was out for the season. At that point in time, the Angels were 13 games up on the Mariners.

After losing Disar, they pretty much almost immediately started losing. The Disar injury was the spark to the greatest collapse in Angels history, and this was a franchise with quite a number of tragedies/bad finishes in their history to that point (and after).

I wouldn't expect you to know any of this, since no one east of the Mississippi bothered to pay any attention to the West Coast at that time.

Oh yeah, that hasn't really changed.

I'll send you a PM when you need to start paying attention.

You're right. Much in the same way the Twins trade for Shannon Stewart was the real reason the Twins made a miraculous comeback to win the AL Central in 2003, Gary Freaking Disarcina was the only thing that separated the Angels from winning the AL West in 1995. Gotcha.

And don't worry - I won't question your revisionist knowledge of the history of YOUR franchise any time soon. My guess is the Angels' dependency on guys like Gary Disarcina to play 150 games a year is mostly to blame for why the team spent a good chunk of his career in or near last place, not the other way around.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

There were many better baseball players than Disar on that team. But to a man, everyone on that team swore by him. He was as close to a Derek Jeter clubhouse popularity type as the Angels had had to that point.

If Jeter hit like Disarcina, they'd be talking about how much of a Don Mattingly Clubhouse Presence he was on maybe 2 WS teams, while just coming close a few other years.

[Ksyrup]

FWIW, I don't completely discount intangibles, either, but suggesting that the loss of a career .630 OPS SS hitting way over his head for 2/3 of a season was the reason his team lost 13 or so games in the standings is preposterous. If that truly was the case, then that team didn't deserve to win anything, because it was filled with a bunch of mental basket cases who weren't strong enough to win anything.

[Marmel]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Obviously, you were not paying attention to the Angels that year.

Disar was the leader of that team and having a very good year, both at the plate and in the field. In early August of that season, he slid into second, trailing his hand over the base as he did so. His thumb hit the base bad and he broke it and was out for the season. At that point in time, the Angels were 13 games up on the Mariners.

After losing Disar, they pretty much almost immediately started losing. The Disar injury was the spark to the greatest collapse in Angels history, and this was a franchise with quite a number of tragedies/bad finishes in their history to that point (and after).

I wouldn't expect you to know any of this, since no one east of the Mississippi bothered to pay any attention to the West Coast at that time.

Oh yeah, that hasn't really changed.

I'll send you a PM when you need to start paying attention.

CR, I usually like what you have to say about baseball, but you are way off on this one, no matter if it is your team or not. It's nice to be able to point to that injury and blame the collapse on it, but c'mon....

When the 78 Sox blew a 14 game lead, and the 69 Cubs blew a 10 game lead, and even throw the 2004 Yankees 3-0 postseason lead over the Sox in here, it wasn't because one mediocre player got injured. It wasn't for any particular reason other than baseball is a beautifully fucked up game that can mess with the head of even the greatest players ever.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I like Griffey, Jr. and all, but Top 10 all time?! REALLY? Are we talking Top 10 Centerfielders?

This is the clarification I was looking for.

I agree with the WAR graph above summing up how great and how disappointing Griffey's career was.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by Logan

I'm less surprised by top 10 all-time than I am that he was called The Kid all these years and I didn't know it.

I remember The Kid nickname, but it kid of threw me for a loop to be reminded that he's actually older than I am.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

FWIW, I don't completely discount intangibles, either, but suggesting that the loss of a career .630 OPS SS hitting way over his head for 2/3 of a season was the reason his team lost 13 or so games in the standings is preposterous. If that truly was the case, then that team didn't deserve to win anything, because it was filled with a bunch of mental basket cases who weren't strong enough to win anything.

Generally speaking, the loss of an all star during an important stretch run, is often hard to replace. Chief isn't saying that was the only reason they lost their lead, but it was the first and biggest domino that started the collapse.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Heh...look, I'm sure it seems silly, just looking at the numbers, but only people watching that team had any idea how important that injury was to the course of the Angels' season. 1995 was a bitter year for Angels fans, a year when we had thought we had finally shaken the tragic history and were on the cusp of having a great team (GA, Edmonds, Salmon young stars, with Finley, Langston, Chili Davis, Lee Smith, a young Troy Percival, etc.).

There were many better baseball players than Disar on that team. But to a man, everyone on that team swore by him. He was as close to a Derek Jeter clubhouse popularity type as the Angels had had to that point.

This is absurd logic - this is the kind that says Derek Jeter was a defensive star, "because I saw it with my eyes" (10 years of evidence notwithstanding - though he has improved recently). The my team argument is patently ridiculous - are you the oracle of Angles knowledge?

[rowech]

Griffey's career is going to be one of the toughest ever for baseball to judge. He was no doubt the best player of the 90s (unless you want to give Bonds some sort of benefit of the doubt)

On the flip side, he aged horribly, mostly due to injury.

It's not totally the same but how can Mickey Mantle be the first player that doesn't come to mind as a comparison? (lose the drinking aspect and it fits pretty well)

Frank Robinson is another one that had a similar path.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

Generally speaking, the loss of an all star during an important stretch run, is often hard to replace. Chief isn't saying that was the only reason they lost their lead, but it was the first and biggest domino that started the collapse.

Generally speaking, the loss of an "All-Star" who was 7th on his team in OPS+ among regulars really doesn't amount to a hill of beans when compared to a double-digit lead with 40+ games left. Even if you award him the maximum number of Derek Jeter Clubhouse Presence Points available.

But let's look at some facts...Disarcina was injured on August 3rd. On August 20th - nearly 3 weeks later!!! - the Angels were at their largest peak playoff probability (they had a 99.988% chance of making the playoffs on that date) and were 9.5 games ahead of the Rangers and 12.5 ahead of the Mariners in the West, and 12 ahead of the Yankees in the Wild Card. It's at this point they actually started their slide (or within a game or two - they went 12-26 the rest of the way after August 20th).

I guess his loss was so stunning that it took them 17 days to realize they should start losing because he wasn't playing.

[Ramzavail]

Originally Posted by rowech

Griffey's career is going to be one of the toughest ever for baseball to judge. He was no doubt the best player of the 90s (unless you want to give Bonds some sort of benefit of the doubt)

On the flip side, he aged horribly, mostly due to injury.

It's not totally the same but how can Mickey Mantle be the first player that doesn't come to mind as a comparison? (lose the drinking aspect and it fits pretty well)

Frank Robinson is another one that had a similar path.

well F-Robbie barely played CF, but yes Mantle is probably a better comparision (I still think Duke Snider is a good one), at least better than Joe DiMaggio.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by rowech

It's not totally the same but how can Mickey Mantle be the first player that doesn't come to mind as a comparison? (lose the drinking aspect and it fits pretty well)

While Mantle was injured a lot, he didn't exactly age "horribly". From the age 30, his OPS+ were 195 at 31 (though 65 games), 178, 137, 170, 150, 142. Pretty good numbers.

Interestingly, I noted while going through baseball reference that Griffey, Jr. never lead the league in OPS+, amazingly. The closest he came was 2nd in 1997.

Frank Robinson is another one that had a similar path.

Not sure if Robinson works either. At 37, he had a 150 OPS+ year, at 38 it was 141, and then only played a few games at age 39 and 40.

Griffey, Jr. is kind of a strange case among Hall of Fame players in rapid decline.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Interestingly, I noted while going through baseball reference that Griffey, Jr. never lead the league in OPS+, amazingly (even though he's 16th all time). The closest he came was 2nd in 1997.

What am I doing wrong? I see him as tied for 107th.

Career Leaders &amp Records for Adjusted OPS+ - Baseball-Reference.com

[ISiddiqui]

Crud... I misread it... I saw Active and not Career... have to edit.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Even if you cut him off at 2001 (before the continuing injury issues) he has a career OPS+ on par with Lance Berkman.

[korme]

The argument that Griffey isn't in the top 20 greatest of all-time also says to that defense that Mickey Mantle wasn't one of the best ever, or Sandy Koufax.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by korme

The argument that Griffey isn't in the top 20 greatest of all-time also says to that defense that Mickey Mantle wasn't one of the best ever, or Sandy Koufax.

Which argument says Mickey Mantle isn't one of the Top 20 of all time?!

And since Sandy Koufax isn't one of the Top 20 players of all time, I could get behind that.

[Alan T]

I think this is one of these cases where all of you are right even though you are arguing with each other. Griffey in his peak was probably one of the best all around talents of any player to have played the game. The biggest problem for him was that peak did not last as long as other hall of famers. From 1991 through 1998, his career was very strong compared to other hall of fame 8 year-spans. Probably not the best, but arguably you could say top 20. The beauty about Griffey Jr was that he started it so young and the great thing was the promise of what could happen if he kept it going, the records he -could have- broken.

As we now know, he didn't age well, and yes it does effect his overall career. He actually aged very similarly to my favorite player of all time Dale Murphy. Murphy was easily one of the better players in the league for a 6 year span in his prime (Even though he of course was no where near Griffey's talent level), but once he hit age 31, his body fell apart and so did his game. Griffey ran into the same problem in his career and just like Murphy, his career is going to be viewed on the entire sum and not on the promise he once had.

Even factoring in the last decade where he played injured and only a shadow of his former self, he still had one of the 50 best careers of all time, and I'll echo what many others have said in this thread, it was a pure pleasure getting to watch him play in his prime. I loved how much fun it appeared that he was having out there, it didn't seem just like a job to him he looked like he was fully enjoying himself when he was playing. Something that I will never forget!

[Alan T]

Dola,

And I'll add to my last comment that probably one of the reasons why Dale Murphy is still my all time favorite player and why I like Griffey Jr so much is partially due to the way their body did break down. Maybe it is just synical of me, but in this era where I suspect almost everyone of using steroids, part of me says that a player like Griffey or Murphy if they had been using would have been able to overcome the injuries faster, and kept their peak longer. So because they did suffer so greatly as they got older just makes me feel that they did play the game with pure ability and no enhancers. Maybe it is wishful thinking, but at least for these two players it is what I'll believe forever.

[dawgfan]

Yeah, this is mostly an argument about peak value vs. total value, with a bit of natural talent arguments thrown in.

Griffey was a tremendous talent with a remarkable start to his career. That FanGraphs chart posted earlier really showcases that - he was on a pace to be one of the top 5-10 position players the game had ever seen, but his body betrayed him (and he probably wasn't helped by all those games played on the Kingdome turf).

[JediKooter]

He's one of the last current players that was in the Majors when I was still in high school. Man these players are getting old.

[DanGarion]

Too bad the best story I ever heard of him was him being a dick. Back in the minors some kids were waiting by the team bus asking for autographs. One kid hands Griffey the 1st Beckett that he was featured on the cover, heads into the bus and the bus leaves.

[oykib]

Originally Posted by Ramzavail

How do you explain the similarities (Snider/Griffey) in AVG OBP OPS OPS+?

Griffey was a 10-time gold glove award winner and is 12th in Total bases, 31st in Runs scored, and 14th in RBI. He's also 6th in extra base hits. oh, and he's 5th in home runs-- he hit 220 more than Snider. And Snider didn't lose any time to army service.

It's not even close.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

You're right. Much in the same way the Twins trade for Shannon Stewart was the real reason the Twins made a miraculous comeback to win the AL Central in 2003, Gary Freaking Disarcina was the only thing that separated the Angels from winning the AL West in 1995. Gotcha.

KSyrup, you should learn better to read what I was saying before getting up off your rocker.

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Well, sparked the winning from the M's side anyway.

Meanwhile, the Angels lost the heart of their team in Gary Disarcina near the start of August this year, which sparked the losing from their side.

I never said Disar was the sole reason they fell apart that year. I said he was just the spark. They were rolling until he got hurt. Then they started losing, and eventually had the worst collapse in club history, and one of the worst in baseball history. His loss was a definite contribution to that.

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

And don't worry - I won't question your revisionist knowledge of the history of YOUR franchise any time soon. My guess is the Angels' dependency on guys like Gary Disarcina to play 150 games a year is mostly to blame for why the team spent a good chunk of his career in or near last place, not the other way around.

The Angels have not always been a well run franchise, and this period in particular was a very poor one because Jackie Autry had taken over the club's daily operations from Gene Autry and was more interested in protecting her inheritance for when the old crooner was about to pass away than she was in keeping the Angels competitive, so she pinched pennies like fellow Anaheim Stadium tenant Georgia Frontiere of the Rams. They made bad free agent decisions and didn't put enough money or emphasis into developing their farm system, and J. Autry treated the Angels like a small market club.

So you're right, there weren't many better SSs around in the Angels organization than Disar, and yes, lack of depth did hurt the Angels that year and in other years (although three of the last four Angels teams Disar played the majority of games for finished in 2nd place, so they didn't always finish in last like you say).

But in my mind, that only says even more how important Disar was to that 1995 team. Regardless of why the depth was poor, the fact that Disar's replacement wasn't even anywhere near as good as him only underlines my point that Disar's loss contributed sharply to the Angels' collapse.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

If Jeter hit like Disarcina, they'd be talking about how much of a Don Mattingly Clubhouse Presence he was on maybe 2 WS teams, while just coming close a few other years.

I only equated Disar's locker room presence and the fact he was essentially the team captain and emotional leader at that time to Jeter. Jeter, of course, is a far, far better player than Disar and always has been.

Not entirely sure what the relevance is of the point you're trying to make here.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

FWIW, I don't completely discount intangibles, either, but suggesting that the loss of a career .630 OPS SS hitting way over his head for 2/3 of a season was the reason his team lost 13 or so games in the standings is preposterous. If that truly was the case, then that team didn't deserve to win anything, because it was filled with a bunch of mental basket cases who weren't strong enough to win anything.

I said his loss sparked the collapse. His loss was not entirely responsible for the collapse. It took many players on that team to do that.

Please, if you're going to be an asshat, at least read my posts before responding.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Marmel

CR, I usually like what you have to say about baseball, but you are way off on this one, no matter if it is your team or not. It's nice to be able to point to that injury and blame the collapse on it, but c'mon....

When the 78 Sox blew a 14 game lead, and the 69 Cubs blew a 10 game lead, and even throw the 2004 Yankees 3-0 postseason lead over the Sox in here, it wasn't because one mediocre player got injured. It wasn't for any particular reason other than baseball is a beautifully fucked up game that can mess with the head of even the greatest players ever.

Sorry, Marmel, you fell into the same trap as KSyrup. Please read my post before responding.

I agree with the general point that it is extremely rare for the loss of just one player (and especially a mediocre one) to be entirely or mostly responsible for a team-wide collapse.

My entire point was that the Angels' slide, emotionally in the locker room and on the field in actual results, really started after Disar got hurt on August 3.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

Generally speaking, the loss of an all star during an important stretch run, is often hard to replace. Chief isn't saying that was the only reason they lost their lead, but it was the first and biggest domino that started the collapse.

I don't even know if it was the biggest domino, but it was definitely the first.

Thanks, Bug, for correctly reading my post and getting my point. You're in rare company at this point in the thread (sadly).

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

This is absurd logic - this is the kind that says Derek Jeter was a defensive star, "because I saw it with my eyes" (10 years of evidence notwithstanding - though he has improved recently). The my team argument is patently ridiculous - are you the oracle of Angles knowledge?

Actually, eyewitness testimony is significantly accepted in courts of law around the country. If a judge and jury will accept it, I hardly think you're in a position to disparage this form of evidence.

I don't claim to be an oracle. But I am an Angels fan, I was an Angels fan during that season and I have not had any major head injuries since 1995 which would deprive me of my ability to recall how that season went.

You look at a page on the Internet to try to understand something that is at best a mediocre facsimile of what happened on the field. I was actually there, and watched it with my own eyes.

If you think my memory is faulty, my eyes are bad or if I am flat lying, then say that. But I hardly think you can otherwise argue you know more about it than I do, and it's unlikely any regular poster on this board has as much knowledge ready at hand about that 1995 Angels' season than I do. I would think you would no more want to question that than I would want to question your memories of any individual Giants' season. I'm not arrogant enough to assume I know more than you do about that.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Generally speaking, the loss of an "All-Star" who was 7th on his team in OPS+ among regulars really doesn't amount to a hill of beans when compared to a double-digit lead with 40+ games left. Even if you award him the maximum number of Derek Jeter Clubhouse Presence Points available.

But let's look at some facts...Disarcina was injured on August 3rd. On August 20th - nearly 3 weeks later!!! - the Angels were at their largest peak playoff probability (they had a 99.988% chance of making the playoffs on that date) and were 9.5 games ahead of the Rangers and 12.5 ahead of the Mariners in the West, and 12 ahead of the Yankees in the Wild Card. It's at this point they actually started their slide (or within a game or two - they went 12-26 the rest of the way after August 20th).

I guess his loss was so stunning that it took them 17 days to realize they should start losing because he wasn't playing.

Funny thing about facts and stats like that. You can make them say what you want. Or you can patently ignore other facts that don't suit your argument. I like to think if I were you, and I found facts that went against my argument, I would be man enough to admit to them and back off or at least amend my point. But regardless, I am not you, and you chose to ignore some important facts.

Like these.

--On the morning of August 3, the day Disar would get hurt, the Angels were 56-34, good for a .622 WP. They were 11 games up on TEX, 12 games up on SEA. Their 11 game lead was the biggest they had all season long. The only reason their playoff probability was higher later was because A) it was later in the season, and B) neither the M's nor the Rangers really had gotten rolling at that point (the M's were playing better, but not to the level they would reach in SEP, and the Rangers actually only played a little better than the .500 ball they were at on Aug 3 the rest of the season). The Yankees actually endured a long losing streak in late August, and did their amazing run to a playoff spot almost entirely in SEP.

--From August 3 on, the Angels had a record of 22-33, a .400 WP. No need to resort to higher math here. With a healthy Disar, .622 WP. Without, .400 WP. Was the loss of Disar alone responsible for that? Of course not. But I have taken pains to point out that his injury was the spark that got that rolling. It would seem hard to argue that, given the above results.

--From August 3-August 20, the Angels went 10-8 against two .500-ish teams in the Rangers and Royals, two very bad teams in the Twins and White Sox, and a Yankees team mired in its season worst 8 game losing streak--the last one they had before Torre, Bernie Williams and Derek Jeter led them back to the WC with a torrid September. So while the Angels didn't immediately go into the tank, they certainly didn't dominate after Disar got hurt either. Prior to Disar's injury, they went 17-3 after the All Star break, and the loss they suffered the night Disar got hurt broke a season best eight game winning streak.

But in any case, I never made the point that Disar's loss was the sole reason for the collapse, so even if the Angels did play extremely well, it's nonetheless a fact that they played great until he got hurt, and rather poorly after that, which supports my only initial point--that Disar's loss sparked--and was the starting point of-- the eventual collapse they suffered (in which the entire team had a hand by the time the end of the season rolled around).

[Chief Rum]

One last point, and this isn't something you'll find at Baseball Prospectus or in the Baseball Reference. Every season, every team has a story, a flow to it. If you don't believe that, you're not fan enough to notice, IMO (this is a general "you, the reader" not targeted at anyone specific). This is especially true in baseball, with games nearly every day for six months. It's very easy to carry results forward from one game to the next when you barely have time to forget about one game before you're playing another.

It's one of those refreshingly human aspects of sports that are difficult to measure with stats, and reminds me that the players on the field are more than just walking numbers.

The Angels of 1995 had a feeling of being cursed at that time. It wasn't as well known as the goat curse in Chicago or the Curse of the Bambino in Boston, but the franchise already had a long history of tragedy and collapse at that point.

The Lyman Bostock and Donnie Moore tragedies come to mind. Coming within a game of reaching the 1982 and 1986 WS, only to lose, particularly 1986. The bus crash in 1992. The ridiculous decision to let Nolan Ryan go in 1979 (although that wasn't a curse, that just flat stupidity).

Here is an excerpt from a history of the Angels in Wikipedia (so take it FWIW; I can attest to its accuracy).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History...els_of_Anaheim

1995: The Collapse
Main article: 1995 California Angels season
See also: 1995 American League West tie-breaker game

In 1995, the Angels suffered the worst collapse in franchise history. In first place in the AL West by 11 games in August, the team again lost key personnel (particularly shortstop Gary DiSarcina) and went on an extended slide during the final stretch run. By season's end, they were in a first-place tie with the surging Seattle Mariners, prompting a one-game playoff for the division title. The Mariners, managed by Lou Piniella and led by pitching ace Randy Johnson, laid a 9–1 drubbing on the Angels in the playoff game, clinching the AL West championship and forcing the Angels and their fans to endure yet another season of heartbreak and bitter disappointment.

The Curse of the Cowboy?

Given the clubs's inability to win a pennant thus far, the postseason disasters of 1982 and 1986, the 1995 collapse, and tragedies such as Bostock's murder and Moore's suicide, it was suggested that there must be a "curse" on the Angels. Since there did not appear to be a single defining moment when things started to go downhill, or one where "the baseball gods" might have been offended, some suggested that it was Autry who was the cause, a grand life seeing all its good luck evened out in his ownership of a baseball team. The idea of a "Curse of the Cowboy" did not take hold, however, due to the great affection Autry engendered as a public figure, and the idea would diminish with the sale of the team and its later postseason success.

To some extent, the idea of a different curse did take hold, however. Prior to the Angels' World Series victory in 2002, some had theorized that the team did not have success because its stadium, The Big A, was supposedly built upon an ancient Native American burial ground (although Anaheim city historians have not been able to either confirm or debunk the theory).

"Heck, people were talking about it in spring training. We were standing around the outfield one day and everyone was concerned about the stadium being cursed because it was built on an ancient Indian burial ground. We were going to go get an exorcist or a Catholic priest or something to get rid of the curse. I'm like, "I don't want to be on an Indian burial ground."

— Ben Weber, former Angel pitcher, in 2002

All this sort of stuff was weighing on the Angels' minds when the losing started in 1995. There was tremendous pressure on them--that 1995 team was easily the best team they had put together since the 1986 AL West champs, and there had been a lot of poor results and suffering since then. Plus, all of the players, to a man, absolutely adored Gene Autry, and everyone knew he was in poor health (he would pass away in 1998). Every year, it was "we have to win one for The Cowboy before he passes away.

If you believe that the pressure of the Curse of the Bambino (real or not) had an effect on the 1970s Red Sox that failed to win a title, or the 90s and early 2000s teams before 2004, or the Cubs in 2003 or in 2008 with their long, sad history, or that the 2007 collapse of the Mets affected their 2008 season, that that pressure can effect players and how they perform, can lead them to choke, then you can understand the Angels had a less publicized but similar situation going on in 1995 and in general after the 1986 Henderson at bat in the ALCS. They didn't remove that stigma until 2002. When they lost Disar, it felt like "oh man, here it comes...". Even though he was the 7th best OPS+ among the regulars and was playing over his head, it was the sort of loss that gets into players' heads in situations like these and begins to haunt them.

That's a story, a very real aspect of the season, you won't find looking at a page of game results or scanning the season ending player stats.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

my only initial point--that Disar's loss sparked--and was the starting point of-- the eventual collapse they suffered (in which the entire team had a hand by the time the end of the season rolled around).

Which isn't true, even based on the facts you posted. They had their biggest lead based on games left in a season (a 9.5 game lead means more with only 38 games left than 11 games up with 56 games left) almost 3 weeks after he went down. All you're doing is looking back at a season concluded and trying to connect the dots to make sense of an historic collapse. I understand that's human nature, but it doesn't fit here.

Sure, they missed their starting SS, no matter how good or bad he was. They obviously didn't have a spare starting SS or 2 sitting around on the roster. But this team would have slid out of the playoffs - or at best, backed into the playoffs and gotten taken out quickly - with or without Disarcina. An injury cannot "spark" a complete team collapse. That's just silly.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Which isn't true, even based on the facts you posted. They had their biggest lead based on games left in a season (a 9.5 game lead means more with only 38 games left than 11 games up with 56 games left) almost 3 weeks after he went down. All you're doing is looking back at a season concluded and trying to connect the dots to make sense of an historic collapse. I understand that's human nature, but it doesn't fit here.

They were losing their lead at this point. They never had a bigger lead than the 11 game lead they had in and around Disar's injury. I'm pointing out that they were losing ground to the teams behind them, which is relevant to the point I was making. You're pointing out that the later lead would be harder for them to blow--which is irrelevant.

Sure, they missed their starting SS, no matter how good or bad he was. They obviously didn't have a spare starting SS or 2 sitting around on the roster. But this team would have slid out of the playoffs - or at best, backed into the playoffs and gotten taken out quickly - with or without Disarcina. An injury cannot "spark" a complete team collapse. That's just silly.

Maybe, maybe not. The season came down to a one game playoff. Disar alone might have ensured they made the playoffs. They only needed to win one game they lost.

As for that last, honestly, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I'm amazed that you can make a summary judgment on my statement when you pretty much know nothing about how things went down that year. Bad things can and do lead to other bad things happening. And there is no doubt that Disar's injury was the first such bad event to take place in what would become an epic collapse.

[Ksyrup]

Looking back on it 15 years later, I see how you can come to that conclusion. I'd be interested in knowing what other "bad events" took place after his injury (aside from the team sucking). Injuries happen all the time. You only assign importance to them after the fact once you connect the dots between the injury and the start of a losing streak. Doesn't mean they were related. If the pitching staff's ERA rose 2 runs a game over the last 50 games, I'm not sure how his injury was really relevant (even if he was Ozzie Smith in the field). Stuff like that.

I just see this as trying to put together a story of the season to make some logical sense of something that is nonsensical. The reality is, his loss had little to do with the collapse. It didn't help, sure, but it's not like the team collectively said, "Oh shit, we lost Gary Disarcina! We're the Angels and bad shit like this always happens to us! We're DOOOOOOOOMED!" And like I said earlier, if they did - they deserved to lose.

[korme]

Feud aside, I wiki'd Lyman Bostock (didn't know the story), and ummm... that crazy sunuvabitch who killed him got released after 7 months in a psych ward? And he's been living a normal life since 1980? WTF????

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Looking back on it 15 years later, I see how you can come to that conclusion. I'd be interested in knowing what other "bad events" took place after his injury (aside from the team sucking). Injuries happen all the time. You only assign importance to them after the fact once you connect the dots between the injury and the start of a losing streak. Doesn't mean they were related. If the pitching staff's ERA rose 2 runs a game over the last 50 games, I'm not sure how his injury was really relevant (even if he was Ozzie Smith in the field). Stuff like that.

I just see this as trying to put together a story of the season to make some logical sense of something that is nonsensical. The reality is, his loss had little to do with the collapse. It didn't help, sure, but it's not like the team collectively said, "Oh shit, we lost Gary Disarcina! We're the Angels and bad shit like this always happens to us! We're DOOOOOOOOMED!" And like I said earlier, if they did - they deserved to lose.

I really see both sides to this. On one hand you can say he wasn't a great player and the injury didn't cost them the division title.

I'd agree with that line of reasoning. But on the other hand, single events can be devastating to a team. A team leader in the clubhouse going down could easily have started some sort of slide.

I'll never forget the 1992 Minnesota Twins. Up one game on the A's with a 60-40 record. Take a 4-2 lead into the ninth inning at the dome. Up steps the immortal Eric Fox with two men on. BOOM. One of his 5 career home runs and the Twins fell 5-4.

After the game the Twins finished the year up at 30-32.

Was the Fox HR the only determining factor that cost the Twins that year? Hell no. They had other issues. But if you ask me to point to one moment the season went to hell, I'll tell you it was that Fox HR. I still think it was the start of everything else that happened.

Hey, we are all baseball fans, right? We are allowed to be dramatic at times. Comes with the territory.

[Ksyrup]

Except, again, that's just revisionist history building a story that fits the ending. How many countless teams have been in 1st place and had a gut-punch game end in that fashion and go on without losing a bunch of games? If we're talking solo sports or individuals, absolutely I can buy that the psychology of it could wreck someone. But collectively, I don't buy that an entire team could be so mentally affected that they collectively perform poorly over a stretch of games. I don't buy that the Angels had this history of doom and gloom and that in 2002, they just happened to overcome it. They lost a bunch, and then they won. It happens. Just like the Yankees won a bunch (when they, not so coincidentally, had the best talent in the majors and minors for decades on end), and lost a few times. None of that has jack squat to do with present day. It's all after the fact story-building.

[chesapeake]

Even in retirement, Griffey finds a way to make Angels fans suffer just a little bit more.

Ksyrup, the Angels had a long history of doom and gloom prior to fnally winning the World Series. Go wiki Donnie Moore.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Actually, eyewitness testimony is significantly accepted in courts of law around the country. If a judge and jury will accept it, I hardly think you're in a position to disparage this form of evidence.

Funny thing about you mentioning this - I was listening to a radio interview of the guys that wrote the recent book "The Invisible Gorilla: And Other Ways Our Intuitions Deceive Us" and they were talking a lot about how human memory works and how fallible it is.

There's been a lot of research into human memory in the last few decades, much of it led by Elizabeth Loftus (one of my profs at Washington - she's since moved on to Cal - Irvine) which shows that our memories are not some unchangeable, static thing that can be accessed like data on a hard drive - it's malleable and highly susceptible to suggestion and revision. And they made the point that eye-witness testimony shouldn't be considered as strong a piece of evidence as it is, that in fact, they would trust a wealth of circumstantial evidence a lot more than a single eye-witness testimony.

Having taken a class on memory from Loftus myself back in college, I already knew that memory is a lot less reliable than we tend to think it is, but that interview with those authors really reinforced that point for me.

I could also go further into how the human brain is wired to want to create stories around events to create a narrative (regardless of whether those events really are related or not), but I know how strongly you feel about the Angels and I know I'm unlikely to change your mind.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

As a Sox fan, I can tell you that the "Curse of the Bambino" was two parts handy way to blame mismanagement/the dice not falling your way and one part marketing phenomenon.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I could also go further into how the human brain is wired to want to create stories around events to create a narrative (regardless of whether those events really are related or not), but I know how strongly you feel about the Angels and I know I'm unlikely to change your mind.

I am sure you're right that you won't change my mind, but I wouldn't mind hearing your perspective all the same. Unlike KSyrup or some others here, you are also intimately connected to the other primary team in that race and will have more experience to draw on with which to comment on the Angels.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by chesapeake

Even in retirement, Griffey finds a way to make Angels fans suffer just a little bit more.

Ksyrup, the Angels had a long history of doom and gloom prior to fnally winning the World Series. Go wiki Donnie Moore.

Uh, right. I'm not in California so I've never heard of Donnie Moore. That story never made it past Arizona, I guess. Oh yeah, I forgot to mention I lived in Atlanta in the 80s, before he ever put on an Angels uniform.