Angels dubbed as 'least desirable' managerial opening is annoyingly accurate

There aren't many exciting reasons for a manager to choose the Angels job.
Los Angeles Angels v Detroit Tigers - Game Two
Los Angeles Angels v Detroit Tigers - Game Two / Mark Cunningham/GettyImages

The Los Angeles Angels are once again searching for a manager after a 73-89 season. This will be their fourth managerial hire since 2018 as the dysfunction in this organization reaches a new level.

The Angels, of course, are not the only team in search of a new manager. The New York Mets, Cleveland Guardians, and San Francisco Giants are the other known vacancies as of now, and depending on how the playoffs shake up there could always be more. A team like the Brewers who have Craig Counsell as a looming free agent could be another opening.

Staff writers for The Athletic (subscription required) ranked the four known openings using three pieces of criteria. Things like stability in the front office, state of the roster, and chances of sustained success were looked at which makes sense as those three things are crucial for incoming managers.

They asked a panel of eight writers and editors to assign grades for each category in relation to every team. They used a five-point scale, ranging from one for the least desirable to five for the most desirable. From there, the scores were averaged and ranks were compiled.

LA Angels unsurprisingly deemed as least desirable managerial opening in baseball

For stability, the Angels got a grade of 1.0. One was the lowest possible grade, and each of the eight writers gave them that. This makes perfect sense as the Angels are currently looking for their fourth manager in the last five years. They also have Perry Minasian entering the final year of his deal. With him having no success in terms of winning as GM of the Angels, there's a good chance Arte Moreno lets him go and then the manager Perry hired could get fired if the new GM hire doesn't want him.

Roster got the highest grade of the three categories as the Angels got a 2.25 grade. Mike Trout being here obviously helps, but even he has proven to be unreliable at best, playing in no more than 119 games in the last four seasons. Another example of some potential starpower who cannot be trusted to take the field is Anthony Rendon who was a superstar four years ago but hasn't done much of anything in Anaheim. If Shohei Ohtani returns the grade will surely improve, but that feels like a longshot.

Lastly, sustainability got a 1.75 grade. The Angels have some young players with very obvious potential like Zach Neto, Nolan Schanuel, Logan O'Hoppe, and Mickey Moniak. Even pitchers like Reid Detmers and Patrick Sandoval can potentially thrive with the right coaching staff around them. However, considering the fact that the Angels haven't won much of anything over the last decade, calling them sustainable would be very far from the truth.

The Angels have some things working for them. Southern California is a desirable place for anyone to want to live. They have some young talent to get excited about. I'm sure many managers have wanted to work with Mike Trout. Those good things are overshadowed by the bad, like working for Arte Moreno or being hired by a GM who could be gone in a year, or having a MLB roster that isn't close to competing.

When big market teams like the Mets and Giants have openings as well as a team like the Guardians with outstanding player development, it's impossible to rank the Angels anywhere but last on a list like this. Hopefully whoever they do hire, experienced or not, can help change the culture in Anaheim.