Thread: The Only Real Game: Baseball 2016 Board: The Circus / Ship of Fools.


To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=28;t=002243
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
quote:
The only real game in the world, I think, is baseball.
--Babe Ruth, in his "Babe Ruth Day Speech" at Yankee Stadium, April 27, 1947

Pitchers and catchers report this week, the official start of Spring Training.

Any thoughts for the start of the season? The early Las Vegas odds favor (of all teams) the Chicago Cubs. But, of course, at this time last year the odds favored the Washington Nationals to win it all--and they didn't even make the playoffs! The Cubs are in the same division with the St. Louis Cardinals and Pittsburgh Pirates, so if they make it, you can't say they didn't earn it!

There is another interesting development this year, as this is scheduled to be the debut year of Euro League Baseball, featuring teams from Amsterdam, Bologna, Bonn, Brno, Munich-Haar, Regensburg, Rotterdam, Rouen, San Marino and Senart. It might be fun to follow that this year as well!

For myself, my Phillies are still in rebuilding mode, but I have hopes that they will win more than they did last year. To be fair, it will be tough to lose more...
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
In USA Today today, they presented their projections for the 2016 season.

I am not sure what shocks me more: that they think the Cubbies will win more than 100 games, or that they think three teams in the NL will lose 100 games!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I'm pretty sure the Pirates were underrated before last season, and our pre-season was dreadful too. If we're better than six behind at the All-Star break I reckon we're good for the play-offs but while we make the play-offs nowadays we still haven't (just my view) got the killer pitcher to win that one game that just has to be won.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
The Baseball Prospectus site just issued their pre-season predictions.

They are more optimistic about the Pirates (or perhaps more pessimistic about the Cardinals--read it how you will). Elsewhere on the site, they have already apologized/made excuses for their ranking the defending World Series champion (Kansas City) as finishing last in their division. They use the PECOTA system (and I don't know what PECOTA stands for), which is apparently purely statistics based. The explanation is that if, for example, a player suddenly got better, the prediction (based on past stats) would be off, and would stay off for a few years until the prior bad years got out of the system. So, for example, if a player was blind for four years and then got an eye transplant for Year 5, PECOTA would still predict him, in Year 5, to play as if he was blind. And the next future year predictions would still take into account the blind years. Having really good young players who don't have many prior year stats to look at will also screw up the predictions. Essentially, something of the kind has happened with Kansas City--its ranking is being pulled down by old bad years that have little realistic bearing on the current team.

I will note that, while USA Today had one team winning 100 games and 3 losing 100 games, the Baseball Prospectus predicts zero 100 game winners and zero 100 game losers.

All of this predicting stuff is bogus when you can have no idea which players will go down with injuries. But, until actual baseball play starts, there isn't a whole lot for me to obsess over, so I browse predictions from various sources. Please bear with me. Game play will start soon.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
There was an interesting note from the Phillies camp in today's paper. You may have noticed, in a lot of ballparks, there is posted (usually on the wall behind home plate) the rather cryptic phrase "No Pepper." Well, it turns out that the Phillies' newish manager (IIRC he started about two-thirds of the way through last season) has decided to use pepper to spice up the camp.

The article is the first time I have had a decent explanation as to what "pepper" is--basically a fielding practice game with some batting hand-eye coordination thrown in. It still isn't clear why it is banned in so many parks (although the article makes some reference to groundskeepers--so maybe it is hard on the grass?). I do like, however, that Pete Mackanin is going old school in spring training.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
I welcome the return of a baseball thread! I've just noticed it - Purg and RL have kept me away from Circus visits recently.

Thanks for the health warning re the linked predictions Hedgehog. I note they predict a wild card for my beloved Giants and I'd be delighted if they did as well as that. Even in an even-numbered year!
 
Posted by Baker (# 18458) on :
 
Well of course the Kansas City Royals will take it again! They make my heart stop sometimes, but I love 'em.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Certainly as defending champs, KC cannot be ignored. But it is very, very difficult to win back-to-back World Series. The last time it happened, it was the Yankees, who won 3 in a row (1998-2000).

While I am a Phillies fan, I do have some fondness for KC because my local minor league team (the Wilmington Blue Rocks) are a single-A affiliate of the Royals.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Some "Baseball Diplomacy" going on right now, as the Tampa Bay Rays play the Cuba National Team in Cuba, with the Presidents of both countries in attendance. Currently, the Rays lead 3-0 in the 5th.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Final score: Tampa Bay 4 - Cuba 1.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Opening Day! Four games on today, but the first is St. Louis at Pittsburgh, starting at 1:05pm EST.

The other games are the Cubbies at La Angels; Toronto at Tampa Bay; and the Mets at Kansas City.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
A double header on BT Sports (ESPN) tonight, featuring Cards/Pirates and Blue Jays/Rays. I'll be there with my popcorn for the first one.

And Giants/Brewers tomorrow, featuring Bumgarner and Peralta. Now that ought to be a bit tasty! Don't think there will be live TV coverage in the UK, but Gameday is my friend.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
A Pirates win on opening day! Against the Cards with Wainwright starting!

We weren't perfect, but a win is a win.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
A Pirates win on opening day! Against the Cards with Wainwright starting!
And the first RBI of the new season belongs to...the pitcher! Pittsburgh's Liriano smashed a grounder through the right side of the infield to drive the run in.
 
Posted by sharkshooter (# 1589) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
... It still isn't clear why it is banned in so many parks (although the article makes some reference to groundskeepers--so maybe it is hard on the grass?). I do like, however, that Pete Mackanin is going old school in spring training.
quote:
Exercise:
Pepper is a common pre-game exercise where one player hits brisk grounders and line drives to a group of fielders who are standing around twenty feet away. The fielders throw to the batter who uses a short, light swing to hit the ball on the ground towards the fielders. The fielders field the ground balls and continue tossing the ball to the batter. This exercise keeps the fielders and batter alert, and helps to develop quickness and good hand-eye coordination.

Banning:
Some ballparks have banned pepper games because of the danger of balls landing in the stands and injuring spectators or because its concentrated play damages the grass on the field. Many ballparks display "NO PEPPER" warnings behind or near home plate.
Sure, it is from wikipedia, but it may provide some understanding of why no pepper behind home plate. I would place more emphasis on possible damage to the field than risk to spectators, due to the screens behind home plate.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:
I would place more emphasis on possible damage to the field than risk to spectators, due to the screens behind home plate.
I agree. Even the spectators along the lines are relatively safe, since the hitting is done with a "short, light swing"--by that standard, batting practice would be far more dangerous for the spectators, and nobody bans that. It must be the damage to the grass.

Roughly 1.5 hours until my Phillies open the season (in Cincinnati). Of course, as things stand right now, the Phillies have a half-game lead over the Mets in the standings. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Caissa (# 16710) on :
 
My beloved Blue Jays are 1-0; 161 games to go.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:


Roughly 1.5 hours until my Phillies open the season (in Cincinnati). Of course, as things stand right now, the Phillies have a half-game lead over the Mets in the standings. [Big Grin]
Not any more. Commiz, Hedgehog.

Meanwhile, the Giants slaughter the Brewers, including back-to-back-to-back homers, Span hits 5 RBIs and an off-colour Bumgarner still manages 5 innings and 101 pitches for the win.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
The Phillies game was strange. In the first 3 innings they had 5 hits (and 2 runs), but had only one hit in the 6 innings after that. They held the Reds for 7 innings, giving up only one unearned run, but then the bullpen came in and the Reds ran rampant, scoring 5 runs in the 8th.

I fear it is a sign of things to come for this season.
 
Posted by basso (# 4228) on :
 
If you check yesterday's box score for the Giants game, you'll notice an interesting thing near the end of the SF lineup. Mad Bum batted eighth.

For the moment, that's the plan for the season. Bochy has moved all of his pitchers into the eight slot, so that he can bat a Real Hitter™ just before the leadoff spots.

I think this makes some sense. We´ll have to see how it plays out.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by basso:
If you check yesterday's box score for the Giants game, you'll notice an interesting thing near the end of the SF lineup. Mad Bum batted eighth.

For the moment, that's the plan for the season. Bochy has moved all of his pitchers into the eight slot, so that he can bat a Real Hitter™ just before the leadoff spots.

I think this makes some sense. We´ll have to see how it plays out.
It's a fair option, especially if your pitcher isn't so bad at bat. The Pirates could consider it with Liriano and Cole. However, if they can barely see a pitch, and should therefore be in the American League, then nine is probably better.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
No 9 becomes the new No 1 after the first 8 at bats? I suppose there might be something in that. May the odds be ever in your favour?

Cueto had a good outing, Crawford a HR, Romo and Casilia held on for the Giants in a tight game. An even-numbered year is off to a decent start for them. Plus quite a few others (including the Cubs, Pirates, Dodgers and White Sox).
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Cincinnati batted their pitcher 8th in the season opener as well. There was a discussion about doing that on MLB Radio yesterday morning. I forget which host it was, but he was not in favor of the idea. Here is his analysis:

Why do you put your top hitters at the top of the batting order? Because they will get more plate appearances than those lower in the order. So, the first spot will, over the season, bat more frequently than the guy in the 2nd spot, and so on, and so on.

It follows, then, that your #8 spot is going to be at more frequently than the #9 spot. That being the case, why would you want your weaker hitter (the pitcher, presumably) to be batting more than whoever you put in the 9th spot? If the theory is that the pitcher is an "automatic out" (and I think there are a lot of pitchers where that is not true--like I said above, Liriano drove in the first RBI of the major league season this year!), but if the pitcher is an automatic out, why have that spot come up more frequently?

If the theory is that, if the pitcher gets on base, he will be clogging up the base for the top of the order, what are you gaining by batting him 8th? He will still be clogging up the bases for who comes later--and, that being true, wouldn't it be better to follow him with people more likely to get hits or even hit homers--i.e., the top of the order?

That all makes sense to me, but I suppose we need to wait for the stats to come in over a full season to see if placing the pitcher in 8th makes any positive difference. I certainly have been wrong about such things in the past. But absent a statistical proof, my belief is that one should put your worse hitter (usually the pitcher) in 9th.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I've been wondering about this convention that the pitcher bats at nine (as one who hasn't studied baseball much or for very long!)

Anyway, does it make sense for the batter immediately before your top three to be halfway decent, ie a player who has been selected to some degree on his batting ability? That would increase the likelihood that a player would be on base when the top three bat and hence the chance of a run. That would have to set against the fewer players on base after your pitcher has batted, say at eight, but I'm sure the stats already exist!

[ 06. April 2016, 20:38: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Another thought: Presumably the players more likely to get on base are higher up on the batting order, including 5, 6 and 7. So why move the pitcher up in the order? To drive them in? Wouldn't you want a better batter there to drive in some runs before the pitcher gets up to bat?
 
Posted by sharkshooter (# 1589) on :
 
Of course you could always adopt the designated hitter rule. [Smile]
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:
Of course you could always adopt the designated hitter rule. [Smile]
Heathen!!!! Heretic!!!!! [Mad]
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
A couple of records have been set this season.

In Colorado, Trevor Story is the first rookie to hit a homer in his first three games. Amazingly, he has 4 hits in three games--and all four were homers! [Eek!]

Meanwhile, the San Diego Padres have managed to be shut out in their first three games, thereby setting a major league record of the most innings to start a season without scoring (27....and counting). The previous record for scoreless innings at the start of a season was held by the 1943 St. Louis Browns (a team that would become the Baltimore Orioles in 1954).
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
The Pirates opening streak continues, but they needed a grand slam in the 8th to win by one run.

Finally the Padres have a run. They managed twelve more besides, to trounce the Rockies.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
That was a close one! Pirates did very well to remain 100% along with only a couple of other AL teams I think.

Curious win for the Giants. A rookie outpitches Cain than gets pulled while still on no hitter. The reliever gives up the first Giants hit, a HR 2RBI (other runner a walk), to level at 2-2. It goes to extra innings, then Crawford wins it for the Giants with a HR in the 10th. Giants have two hits all night compared to the Dodgers 9, but still win to go 4-1. And tonight will be tasty - Kershaw v Bumgarner. Something will have to give ...
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
That was a close one! Pirates did very well to remain 100% along with only a couple of other AL teams I think.
Yes, the annual race to be the last team to lose and the last team to win has been pretty short this year. With the Pirates and Detroit both losing today, one week in to the season the only undefeated team is the Baltimore Orioles (and, to be fair, they are only 4-0, which the Pirates also were before tonight's game...it is just that Baltimore's game today was "snowed out").

The Phillies won today, 1-0, against the Mets. The only teams to not have a win yet this year are Atlanta (who are about to lose their 4th again St. Louis unless they score 9 runs in the bottom of the ninth) and Minnesota, who have started 0-5.
 
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Curious win for the Giants. A rookie outpitches Cain than gets pulled while still on no hitter. The reliever gives up the first Giants hit, a HR 2RBI (other runner a walk), to level at 2-2. It goes to extra innings, then Crawford wins it for the Giants with a HR in the 10th. Giants have two hits all night compared to the Dodgers 9, but still win to go 4-1.
I think Dodgers manager Dave Roberts made the right decision pulling Stripling when he did. Stripling is coming back from Tommy John surgery, and he never threw more than 80 pitches in spring training games. He was at 100 when Roberts pulled him, and he was starting to fade. It's a shame to lose a game, especially to the Giants, but the season is brand new, and better a loss than a wrecked pitching arm.

quote:
And tonight will be tasty - Kershaw v Bumgarner. Something will have to give ...
And Bumgarner hit a home run off Kershaw! Kershaw only really made two mistakes, but he paid for both of them. At least this time the Dodgers held onto their lead. One more in the series ...

[ 10. April 2016, 17:28: Message edited by: RuthW ]
 
Posted by Sir Kevin (# 3492) on :
 
Yesterday's was a very trying game, but at least we had Vin doing the television broadcast instead of the the buffoons from the Major League Baseball Channel, or worse the ex-manager from Arizona!

Can we start winning on a regular basis now?

Kazimir making progress? My eye! Thant's malarkey!

[brick wall]
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
The Cubs' Jake Arrieta has a no-hitter going into the bottom of the 9th. He is pitching against the Cincinnati Reds. He is at 103 pitches.

The Cubs are leading 16-0, so even if he loses the no-hitter, he isn't likely to lose the game!

Facing the first batter in the bottom of the 9th (Scott Schebler)......walks him on 6 pitches. At 109 pitches.

Batter #2 (Tucker Barnhart): pop up to shortstop. One out. At 112 pitches.

Batter #3 (Zack Cosart): Lined to center. Two outs. At 114 pitches.

Batter #4 (Eugenio Suarez): Flied out to right!! Three outs and he has his no-hitter!!! That is the second one of his career.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Last night, the Pirates Andrew McCutchen hit three home runs in one game.

By contrast, the Atlanta Braves as a team have hit only three home runs all season.

I still can't quite get my head around that.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
Last night, the Pirates Andrew McCutchen hit three home runs in one game.

By contrast, the Atlanta Braves as a team have hit only three home runs all season.

I still can't quite get my head around that.
Shows Cutch's value to the Bucs. And the game for that matter.
 
Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on :
 
Not to take anything away from McCutchen, but the Braves haven't gotten to bat against the Rockies pitching staff yet. (Jorge De La Rosa, the starter responsible for two of those home runs, has a season ERA of 10.18. You want to talk about unbelievable...)
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Pitchers aside, doesn't the elevation of Coors fieeld have an effect too? A quick scan of Wike etc suggests that a good hit travels 9% further if you are a mile further up.

Then again, the field might be larger, to compensate.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Famously, the Rockies have been using a humidor to counteract the effect of the field elevation. The thin atmosphere probably still has some effect, but not as much as it used to have.

But, really, the point was not so much that McCutchan hit three home runs in one game--other players have done that over the years. The amazing fact was that the Braves only had three for the season.

Actually, I think they got another one last night, so they are now up to four on the year. There are still a LOT of individual players who have hit more home runs this year than the entire Braves team has hit.
 
Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Then again, the field might be larger, to compensate.
They just raised the outfield fences to turn a few more cheep home runs into doubles and try to bring the park more in line with the rest of the National League. (Three AL parks- Baltimore, Toronto, and New York- yielded more home runs last year, possibly because of the designated hitter rule.)

A major part of the problem is that the team owners are more interested in selling tickets than putting together a good team. They create a fun atmosphere at the park, they keep the tickets affordable, and they put together a team of hitters that will be able to stay in games played in Denver, so that when you have your office party at Coors Field, you have a better than 50% chance of seeing a Rockies win, and usually a high scoring game. (Road games are a totally different story, but no one is watching, so who cares?) It's not enough to get anywhere close to the playoffs in most years, but it pays the bills and then some for the owners.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
A bit of baseball trivia: This weekend, four division leaders (Boston Red Sox, Chicago White Sox, Washington Nationals and Chicago Cubs) are all playing in one city--Chicago. This is the first time in history that that has happened.

To be fair, from 1876 to 1968 it was impossible to have it happen, because you could only have had, at best, 2 division leaders (one NL , one AL). But, still, in the 48 years when it was theoretically possible, this is the first time it has happened.
 
Posted by Prester John (# 5502) on :
 
So this happened. I will say if Bautista had a problem he should have went after the pitcher instead of going after the knees of the second baseman. Mr. Bat-flip deserved that punch from Odor. I'm also a little surprised that there was a baseball player that could actually deliver a clean hit.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
That was awesome!

Also, while it's not strictly baseball*, did you guys see this? Also really, really impressive.


* Softball is close enough, right? [Biased]
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
We have had the first Manager Casualty of the year, as the Atlanta Braves have announced that manager Fredi Gonzalez is out.

Granted, they have the worse record in MLB, but it is not clear to me what anybody expected with that roster. I think Gonzalez did as best he could with what he had. Still, the Phillies' fortunes started improving last year after we fired our manager (Sanberg--who is still available for hire, come to think of it...). So we'll see how the Braves respond to a new manager.
 
Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Prester John:
So this happened. I will say if Bautista had a problem he should have went after the pitcher instead of going after the knees of the second baseman. Mr. Bat-flip deserved that punch from Odor. I'm also a little surprised that there was a baseball player that could actually deliver a clean hit.
Agreed on the second baseman lash out.

That said, is anyone really offended by a bat flip, especially in a big moment? I know it's "just not done" under the "unwritten rules" and so forth, but come on, you hit a series winning home run, in my book, you get to show some emotion. Coming at the guy with a bean ball seven months later seems like far worse sportsmanship to me.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
I see that Johnny Cueto has followed MadBum's lead on Tuesday by pitching another complete game for the Giants yesterday. Both games against the Padres.

Hedgehog, how unusual are consecutive complete games by the visiting team's pitchers? I'm sure it's happened before, but it struck me as a rare event.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
I am having a hard time getting Baseball-Reference to give me the right info, namely not just completes games (CGs), but on consecutive games while being a visiting team. That fault is solely mine, as I firmly believe the info is on the site if I knew how to call it up. The Home-Away part is easy, because it will generate the info for such "splits," but I don't know how to tell it to give me consecutive games.

Still, in modern ball it must be a rare feat for the simple fact that CGs are increasingly rare.
By contrast, 100 years ago, in 1916, there were 1314 CGs out of 2494 games (52.69%). And if you go back to 1885, 1710 CGs out of 1780 (96.07%).

So, just from the stats, 100 years ago it was a lot more likely that you would have consecutive CGs (indeed, it would be mathematically impossible NOT to have some of them consecutive!) and almost certainly many of those consecutive games would be while playing an away game.

In the contemporary game, it is far more unlikely. For example, at the current rate for 2016 (1.5%), the average team, in a 162 games season, could only expect 2.43 CGs all year. That those games would be consecutive and then while the team was playing away seems highly unlikely. Even if you use the 2015 rates (since we are only one-quarter of the way through 2016), 2.14% of 162 games is 3.47 per team on average--still unlikely to even have those on consecutive games, much less while away from home. Even with the comparatively "high" rate of 2011 (3.56%), an average team could only expect 5.77 CGs per year.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
That's a fascinating insight. I suppose the current tendency to limit starting pitchers to round about 100 pitches, plus the development of specialist closers, has severely reduced the numbers of CGs per season. And the stats are probably demonstrating those trends.

I think you are like me about one aspect of the game. I love great pitching and I really enjoy pitching duels, where both starters are really on their game. But I've got used to the rarity of the starter getting as far as the 9th inning. And I think specialist closers have also added something to the modern game.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
I've realized that part of my trouble with Baseball-Reference is that, to get FULL reports, I actually have to become a paid subscriber. So I can tell you, for example, that since 1960, one team managed to have 12 consecutive CGs...but I don't know who or when unless I cough up some money.

I can tell you (from the partial report, which starts at #10 on the list) that in 1962, two teams (Twins & Giants) each had streaks of 7 consecutive CGs, but they were all at home. And the Giants had a double-header in their streak, so they managed two CGs in a single day.

Side note: A CG does not necessarily mean a win. The Twins were 5-2 in that 7 game stretch.

However, I did discover that the 1979 Yankees put together a streak of 6 consecutive CGs, of which 4 were Away games (the Yanks were 2-2 in those 4 games). There may be other examples.

I then restricted the search to CG streaks from Year 2000 on. The top streaks (which I cannot see the details of) are only 3 games long. But I can see that, in 2012, at least 4 teams had back-to-back CGs. On June 29 & 30, 2012, the Reds had CGs away against the Giants (Mike Leake and Mat Latos being the pitchers).

But here is a real freak show: On May 1 & 2 of 2012, the Angels, at home, won CGs against the Twins. Then, on May 3 & 4, the Angels lost to CGs on the part of the Blue Jays. Thus, fans at Angels Stadium saw 4 consecutive CGs: two for the Home team followed by two for the Visitors!

In case you are wondering, Jerome Williams & Jered Weaver did it for La Angels, while Brandon Morrow and Henderson Alvarez did it for the Blue Jays.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I'm no baseball historian but wasn't the era of CG's a time when the ball was subject to far more abuse, eg the spitball and emeryball, which all gave pitchers an advantage? If the pitcher simply didn't too throw so many pitches, then CGs would be far more common and from my (brief) reading some methods made the ball a lot more lively so the pitcher could throw a virtually unplayable strike, because of very late movement. It looks like there was also an expectation that starters would complete a game which doesn't happen now unless you are in the World Series, your gun pitcher is in awesome form and he just has to go the Whole Nine Yards.

What is the lowest number of pitches in a complete game? I've found record of a 58!
 
Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I'm no baseball historian but wasn't the era of CG's a time when the ball was subject to far more abuse, eg the spitball and emeryball, which all gave pitchers an advantage?
Yes, the dead ball era- there are all sorts of pitching records from that era that will never be broken. There are a number of theories for what changed, and many focus on the way that the ball could be treated by the pitcher. The spitball and other ball tampering techniques were banned, and after a player was fatally beaned by a ball that was so dirty that he could not see it, they began changing out balls every time they got just a little scuffed or dirty.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
What is the lowest number of pitches in a complete game? I've found record of a 58!
Yes, that would be the record. Here is the boxscore, with some commentary. As it mentions, the next fewest was 67 pitches. Addie Joss pitched a perfect game in 74 pitches.

In the very early years, I think CGs happened simply because it never occurred to anybody to switch the pitcher out anymore than one would think to change the 3rd baseman during a game. Absent injury, the pitcher was expected to pitch the whole game. The invention of the "reliever" was considered an innovation. I've read about it somewhere, but cannot remember where.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Double post but, well, you know me. Dog-with-bone on these things.

Here is a good article presenting a brief history of pitcher usage. Lots of interesting stuff in it.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Thanks Hedgehog. Fascinating stuff. I noted with regret that the Giants passed on the opportunity to have three consecutive CGs. By the end of the 8th, Samardzija had retired the last 19 bats he faced, but he'd clocked 105 pitches. So -- in came Casilla to close, successfully. Bochy was probably being wise.

But I wouldn't be surprised if Arrieta brings the Giants' 8 game winning streak to an end tonight. All good things come to an end ...

[ 20. May 2016, 21:41: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Arrietta v Peavy never looked like a contest and so it proved! I was surprised that Bochy kept Peavy in the starting rotation and I think he'll be taken off that rotation pretty soon now. An ERA of over 8 tells you all you need to know.
 
Posted by Prester John (# 5502) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Arrietta v Peavy never looked like a contest and so it proved! I was surprised that Bochy kept Peavy in the starting rotation and I think he'll be taken off that rotation pretty soon now. An ERA of over 8 tells you all you need to know.
Didn't Bochy bring him over from the Padres? Maybe he's keeping him out of a sense of loyalty.

In other news, THIS is an abomination. While it makes perfect sense to not actually go through four pitches when will I get a chance to boo the pitcher when he does it- unless my team does it which is perfectly understandable and totally okay. I don't see how this will speed up the game significantly anyway. If they want to speed up the game they should limit the number of relievers. That is a major time suck. Plus, this is baseball- why fiddle around with our traditions?
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
I'm not sure that fiddling about with the strike zone is all that clever, either. Part of the pitcher's art is finding out whether the umpire normally calls a small strike zone or a large one.

I suppose one could use technology (rather like they do in tennis for line calls) to provide a standardised strike zone. But I'm not in favour. I think that mucks around with the traditions of the game as well.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
And, to combine the two themes, forcing a pitcher to throw 4 pitches wide for an intentional walk has been known to get them off rhythm and then they can't find the strike zone with the next batter.

Of course, the strike zone has been fiddled with before. What usually happens is that, for a short time, the umps will attempt to enforce the new rule...then they go back to calling it the way they always have. If they went electronic, we wouldn't get that.

And, honestly, I like when an ump starts expanding the strike zone a little to get the batters to swing more. That actually hearkens back to the original concept of the called strike, which was just any ball that the umpire thought the batter should have swung at.

In more worrisome news, in today's Cincinnati-Pittsburgh game, the Pirates pitcher, Ryan Vogelsong, was hit in the head by a pitch (while he was batting--he didn't hit his own head with a pitch!). They have taken him to the hospital to be checked out. It clearly was not intentional--the bases were loaded and so hitting him drove a run in.
 
Posted by Timothy the Obscure (# 292) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Arrietta v Peavy never looked like a contest and so it proved! I was surprised that Bochy kept Peavy in the starting rotation and I think he'll be taken off that rotation pretty soon now. An ERA of over 8 tells you all you need to know.
I'm baffled by Bochy's attachment to Peavy. I expected him to be let go after the 2014 season, when he was brought in to fill a gap in the rotation and filled it with stunning mediocrity. Why he was kept around last year is a puzzle, and why the Giants hung onto him this year rather than taking one more chance on Lincecum even more so.
 
Posted by Timothy the Obscure (# 292) on :
 
As I was saying... [Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Well, Jake Peavy has definitely picked up and pitched very well for 6 innings against the Dodgers in his latest win The Giants are having a good season so far, despite the losses through injury.

I visited AT&T park 11 years ago, saw a great, close, game. It's a beautiful venue and also a very challenging one for the players. Particularly in afternoon games when the sun is shining. The food was good too! Recent TV coverage in the UK has got me quite nostalgic. Not sure I'll ever get back, but I can dream ...

[ 14. June 2016, 07:07: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
 
Posted by Prester John (# 5502) on :
 
I wish there was a way to shut Pete Rose up.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
So we are roughly halfway through the season. If the playoffs started right now (realizing that there are games going on as I type this that might change the rankings), the playoffs in the American League would involve:

Texas Rangers
Cleveland Indians
Baltimore Orioles
Boston Red Sox
Detroit Tigers (just by a whisker over Toronto Blue Jays)

In the National League, it would be:

Chicago Cubs
San Francisco Giants
Washington Nationals
La Dodgers
NY Mets

In the NL, with the exception of the Cubbies, it looks like the usual suspects. There is a little more of an interesting blend over in the AL.
 
Posted by Prester John (# 5502) on :
 
As a fan of the first and second place NL teams I am a bit worried. It doesn't seem as if either team are consistently good against halfway decent teams.
 
Posted by Caissa (# 16710) on :
 
Happy to see the Blue Jays bats coming alive.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Even happier to see the Bucs over .500 again! Let's keep it that way.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
I'm reviving the thread because we are getting close to the playoffs! How do I know? Because the Minnesota Twins (51-87) are almost eliminated from the playoff hunt. They are officially eliminated from winning their division, and with one more loss they will be eliminated from the wild card hunt.

Other teams have been eliminated from winning their respective divisions. These include: Atlanta, Milwaukee and Cincinnati. Atlanta's elimination number for the wild card is 7 (the Reds are at 12 and Brewers at 14).

The Cubbies have the best record by far (89-48--the next closest is Texas at 82-56) and their magic number for clinching the division stands at 10. Texas and Washington are next closest to clinching, with a magic number of 17.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Believe it or not I am still watching the Pirates, but right now it is painful. We may get a winning season but post-season doesn't look likely.
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
quote:
The Cubbies have the best record by far
... which makes some of us quite happy. (I don't post here much because I can't speak too intelligently about the game ... but boy, are they fun to watch this year!
 
Posted by Ariston (# 10894) on :
 
Not to worry, sports fans; the Nats and Cubs both have a whole entire postseason to epically choke and disappoint us all once again.

Did I mention that I used to be a bit of a casual Cubs fan before (and even after) I lived in DC? One day, a team I support will win something.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ariston:
One day, a team I support will win something.
Glory hunter. [Biased]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
A win! The Pirates win one after an eight game losing streak!
 
Posted by Ariston (# 10894) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariston:
One day, a team I support will win something.
Glory hunter. [Biased]
Still slightly sad that Arsenal won a trophy.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
After the weekend, the field has narrowed somewhat.

Two teams are officially completely eliminated from the playoffs: Twins & Braves.

There are now ten teams who are eliminated from winning their respective divisions: Twins, Braves, Angles, A's, Phillies, Pirates, Brewers, Reds, Padres and Diamondbacks.

Tampa Bay is on the cusp of elimination.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Two more teams are officially eliminated from the playoffs: Tampa Bay Rays & LA Angels. The Oakland A's are hanging by a thread (and Arizona and San Diego hanging by a thread that is only just slightly thicker).

But we now have are first official playoff team. The Chicago Cubs have won the NL Central title. Probably nobody else will clinch their division this weekend. The Nationals' magic number is 7, while the Rangers' number is 8. Cleveland is at 11, La Dodgers at 13 and Boston at 15.
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
We got there, one way or another...
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
This weekend should see more teams clinching their divisions. Texas and Washington almost certainly will clinch this weekend. For the remaining divisions, Boston, Cleveland and La Dodgers all could potentially clinch, but I rather doubt it. More likely they will clinch early next week.

The regular season ends October 2. It is possible, especially in the NL, that the wild card spots may force a tie-breaker game.

Hmmmm. Actually it is possible that the NL wild card will be a 3-way tie for two spots. I wonder, if that happens, if they would do a mini round robin tournament between the 3 teams? That could be a problem because that would probably delay the start of the playoffs in the NL.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:


The regular season ends October 2. It is possible, especially in the NL, that the wild card spots may force a tie-breaker game.

Hmmmm. Actually it is possible that the NL wild card will be a 3-way tie for two spots. I wonder, if that happens, if they would do a mini round robin tournament between the 3 teams? That could be a problem because that would probably delay the start of the playoffs in the NL.
I believe a similar scenario looked likely a few years ago. MLB set up schedules for the various permutations even going so far as to agree with the sides that could be involved what would be done if the round robin didn't resolve matters!
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I believe a similar scenario looked likely a few years ago. MLB set up schedules for the various permutations even going so far as to agree with the sides that could be involved what would be done if the round robin didn't resolve matters!
Good memory! It was 2013 and the AL wild card was possibly heading to a 3-way tie. At the time, the solution was this:
quote:
Before Friday's contests, the Rays led the Indians by one game for the top spot, with the Rangers a game back of Cleveland for the second position. An eventual three-way tie would require two tiebreaker games -- one on Monday and one on Tuesday -- ahead of Wednesday's AL Wild Card Game.

The bottom line is this: The Indians would host the Rays on Monday, with the winner earning one of the berths. The loser would play at Texas on Tuesday for the final spot.

That schedule is the result of the Indians having the best combined record (7-5) against the Rays and Rangers, and therefore having the right to choose to host the first game. The Rays' combined record is second (7-6), and they chose to go on the road on Monday rather than host a game on Tuesday. The Rangers (5-8) were left with only that option.
So you look at the head-to-head records of the three teams. You pray that those are not tied. Then the top 2 teams from that play each other. Loser then plays again against Team 3 (with the worst record). Or, in other words, Team 1 & Team 2 will get up to two chances to win the wild card spot, while Team 3 only gets one shot at it.

I guess that sort-of works. It would preserve the playoff schedule. This year the regular season ends October 2. The NL Wild Card game is October 5, so the tie-breakers could be played on October 3 & 4.

If I have time, I will look up the head-to-head records for the teams in question: Giants, Mets & Cardinals.

Actually, I just re-checked the AL Wild Card standings. They have a chance of a 3-way tie as well. That is a little more problematic because the AL Wild Card game is scheduled for October 4, leaving them only one day between the end of the regular season and start of the playoffs. I think they would probably have to postpone the Wild Card game to October 5 to allow the tie-breaker games to be played. That is not too horrible. I mean, that's what they would do if there was a rain-out of the Wild Card game on October 4.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
So, in head-to-head games, the Mets and Cardinals are both 7-6, while the Giants are 6-8.

So, if all three are tied at the end of the regular season, the Mets & Cardinals would play on October 3. The winner would win a WC spot. The loser would then play the Giants, with the winner of that game getting the last WC spot.

Because they have the same head-to-head record, Home field between Mets & Cardinals will be decided by (I think) their records against their own division. So the Cards vs. NL Central and the Mets versus NL East. There are still plenty of divisional games to play, so that is not settled yet, but right now St. Louis has the lead.

Either way, the Giants will NOT be playing at home.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
I have been struggling all day with how to post this.

It is the end of the season. The playoffs are coming. It should be a fun, exciting time for those who love baseball.

And then tragedy happens.

I didn't really start crying until I read about his girlfriend.

RIP Jose Fernandez.
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
Terribly sad. And the part about him defecting from Cuba as a teen... tragic.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
A truly remarkable game was played in Miami last night.
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
Cubs win their 100th game in regular season play - the first time since 1935. A milestone!
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
We are heading into the last weekend of the regular season. The division winners are all decided (Boston, Cleveland, Texas, Washington, Cubs and La Dodgers).

The wild card spots are still up in the air, although it is possible that the NL wildcard will be settled tonight. The AL wildcard cannot be settled until Saturday at the earliest.

And the Yankees are officially eliminated from playoff contention, which is evidence of a kind and loving God.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
There are a few games to go but right now ten AL team have winning records while only six NL teams do.

Is that evidence that the American League is stronger or does the (spit) Lardarse/Designated Hitter* rule have an effect after all?

*Gotta be careful using DH here.
 
Posted by Prester John (# 5502) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
There are a few games to go but right now ten AL team have winning records while only six NL teams do.

Is that evidence that the American League is stronger or does the (spit) Lardarse/Designated Hitter* rule have an effect after all?

*Gotta be careful using DH here.
I think the only way to know that is to compare the win-loss ratio of inter-league play when an AL team is hosting. In all other cases the playing field is level, so to speak, in regards to the use of the DH. There are a lot of bad teams in the NL this year.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
I don't think it is all that easy to compare. In overall interleague play, the AL won 164 games while the NL won 133. In those games, the AL scored 1418 runs versus the NL's 1305 runs. But, of course, all of that only suggests that AL teams are better than NL teams, without necessarily pointing to the DH as a factor. After all, half of those games were played by NL rules (no DH). And for the half that were played by AL rules, the NL teams were using a DH. Thus, even looking just at the win % of interleague games in the AL would not really focus on the effect of the DH.

It is rare to have a team with a DH play against a team without a DH, which would be the real comparison. Although I seem to recall that there were a couple of games this year when an NL team (Giants perhaps?) decided to keep the pitcher in the lineup when playing an AL team, because the pitcher was hitting pretty well. I forget the results of those games.

One would think that, if the DH were a potent factor, then in general NL pitchers would look better compared to AL pitchers (because the poor AL pitchers have to face the DH more often than the NL pitcher). The info on this comparison is a little curious.

If you are a believer in the "Wins Against Replacement" (WAR) measure (and I am not yet a believer), then it is almost a wash. The 5 best pitcher WAR from the AL:
By comparison, the 5 best pitcher WAR from the NL:

So the best in both leagues has a 6.5 WAR. The second place pitcher is more dominant in the AL (6.3 to 5.7), but the 3rd through 5th spots favor the NL. So, really, it all seems pretty even.

On the other hand, if you just look at ERA, then it is pretty clear that the AL has the more potent offense. Looking at Team ERA, the 5 lowest ERAs are all NL teams. (However, 4 of the next 5 lowest are AL teams, so it starts evening out again.) Nevertheless, the higher ERAs of the AL teams suggests that offense is more potent in the AL, and that might be attributed to the DH.

But even then, it might just reflect that the NL does not have many great batters. Here is a list of the top 10 "offensive WAR" (to factor out players who get WAR points for defense). As you will see, 7 out of the 10 are in the AL. I also added in parentheses the number of games this year that they played as the DH. As you will see, these top oWAR players in the AL only occasionally played DH.
So this suggests that the offense is better in the AL, but that the best offensive players are not normally playing as the DH. Thus, although I think it is fair to say that AL teams tend to be better than NL teams, I do not think you can jump to the conclusion that it is because of the DH.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
The playoff picture is set. From the AL, we have the Boston Red Sox, Cleveland Indians, Texas Rangers, Baltimore Orioles and Toronto Blue Jays (so 3 of the 5 playoff teams came from the AL East division). From the NL, we have the Chicago Cubs, Washington Nationals, LA Dodgers, NY Mets and SF Giants.

On Tuesday, the Orioles and Blue Jays will play a one-game elimination match. The winner will then get an AL Divisional Series (ALDS) against the Rangers, starting on Thursday. The other ALDS, also starting on Thursday, will be Red Sox v. Indians.

On Wednesday, the Giants and Mets will play a one-game elimination match. The winner will have the joy of going into an NLDS against the Cubbies, starting on Friday. The other NLDS, also starting Friday, will be between the Dodgers and Nationals.

The Divisional Series are Best-of-5 series.
 
Posted by Ariston (# 10894) on :
 
Hoping for a Baltwash Series...

Realistically, though...well, if the Nats can just keep things together and not choke like every Washington team always does when the playoffs come around, they might actually clench the division. They've been on form as a team, even if some key players have been a bit off, and have been holding off their traditional late-season meltdown...we'll see.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Madbum v Syndergaard looks like an epic Wild Card shootout. I'm picking Bumgarner to do a number on the Mets.

But after that, the Cubbies? Not sure my Giants have much chance of beating them, even if we do win the Wild Card. I know it's an even numbered year, but ....
 
Posted by sharkshooter (# 1589) on :
 
What an exciting AL Wild Card game last night! Go, Blue Jays, Go!
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ariston:
Hoping for a Baltwash Series...
The "Balt" part of that just took a hit!

Yes, the AL Wild Card game was a great one. Blue Jays take the early lead, then Baltimore took the lead, then the teams were tied and remained so until the 11th inning. And then ending with a walk-off home run. Now THAT is how you do playoff baseball!

Giants-Mets tonight. That shows great potential too! I am not comfortable making any prediction of that game.

[typo edit]

[ 05. October 2016, 13:51: Message edited by: Hedgehog ]
 
Posted by sharkshooter (# 1589) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariston:
Hoping for a Baltwash Series...
The "Balt" part of that just took a hit!

I'd be happy with a TorWash Series! The Nationals are, after all, the old Montreal Expos. That would be as close to a Canadian World Series as we can get.
 
Posted by Prester John (# 5502) on :
 
Definitely happy with tonight's result. Madbum is unbelievable. Now I have to deal with divided loyalties. It's '89 all over again.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Well, there you go. MadBum adds to his post-season legend with another terrific shut-out. That was some pitching duel! In the end, the Giants just made Thor pitch a few more than MadBum so he had to leave after 7. Then one big hit in the 9th did the trick.

I suppose I'd better get strapped in for another white-knuckle ride.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Bumgarner clearly wants the tag of "Best ever October pitcher". If he stays fit it could be 2014 again.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Giants-Mets was another great game. A scoreless game going into the 9this almost too much tension!

So tonight we start the Best-of-5 series. Toronto @ Texas (with ex-Phillies Cole Hamels pitching for Texas) will be the early game today (starting in less than 2 hours), and then Boston @ Cleveland.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Hamels had a nightmare outing in an unexpected (to me at least) blow-out. Tribe-Sox was a lot closer; Francona bringing in Miller in the 5th inning was a master-stroke. The Sox nearly came back - but not quite. I thought it was an excellent game.
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:

But after that, the Cubbies? Not sure my Giants have much chance of beating them, even if we do win the Wild Card. I know it's an even numbered year, but ....
Tonight. Wrigley. 8:15 CST. The city is excited but also holding its breath.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Hamels had a nightmare outing in an unexpected (to me at least) blow-out.
And Toronto is leading Game 2 5-1 in the 8th. I thought this felt familiar. I just looked back at last year, when Toronto and Texas played each other in an ALDS. Texas won the first 2 games in Toronto, and then Toronto won the next 2 games in Texas. Toronto then won the final game at home.

And this year Toronto has won the first game in Texas and is well-placed to win the second game in Texas.

All of which means that (assuming Toronto holds on to win this game) in playoff games between these two clubs, the "home" team is 1-6. So much for "home field advantage."
 
Posted by Timothy the Obscure (# 292) on :
 
As a Giants fan, I'm cautiously optimistic. It's the sort of situation where experience tells. But should it go the other way, I, won't be sad to the the Cubbies make it.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Dodger-Nats looking close now. Kershaw just managed to survive 5. Currently it's 4-3 Dodgers but I don't think it will stay at that.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Jansen pitched brilliantly for the save after a great Dodgers bullpen show. It did stay 4-3 Dodgers, thanks to exceptional defensive pitching. Another excellent game.

Which leaves Giants-Cubs. Cueto gets to show his stuff.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Well, Cueto did show his stuff, holding to the Cubs to only 3 hits. But Lester showed his stuff too. That game was a nail-biter!
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
It was a tough, probably vital, loss. Not sure I see the Shark besting Hendricks either.
 
Posted by Ariston (# 10894) on :
 
What just happened? Did the Nats bullpen fail to fall apart in a postseason game at home? Did it look like the same team took the field in October that was playing in August?

Eh, five games left. Each with (at LEAST!) nine innings. With three outs a side. With three strikes. One day, it won't haunt us.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Goodbye, Big Papi. You'll be missed. Congrats to the Tribe.

And maybe, just maybe, the Nate will get through.

Cubs @ Giants. Arrieta homers, Bumgarner proves he's human after all, Giants rally, Romo blows a save, then Giants win in the 13th!

My nerves are shredded. Truly, "it ain't over till it's over'.
 
Posted by Prester John (# 5502) on :
 
The game lasted until midnight on the West Coast. I imagine there are a bunch of folks in the MidWest who are going to be in extra need of coffee. Still. One of the best games of baseball I have ever seen.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
And they get to gear up and do it again this evening!

Washington leads La Dodgers 2 games to 1. Cubbies lead the Giants 2 games to 1. In theory, both series could end tonight (but I wouldn't bet on it).

Meanwhile, over in the Junior League, the ALCS match-up is set: Toronto v. Cleveland. I will admit, I didn't see that pairing coming. Both are coming off 3 game sweeps in the divisional round, both teams looking pretty impressive in the divisional round. This should be a fun series for the neutral fan!
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Both look tight games to me. Tonight I'm sleeping while the West Coast trauma continues. Up at 0600 GMT+1 when both games should be over - or maybe not.

I'll support Cleveland in the junior league!
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
The Cubs had an amazing rally and got 4 runs in the top of the 9th, then quickly dispatched the Giants to win it 6-5.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
The game day wrap made painful reading. Hard on Matt Moore. That's a tough way for the season to end for the Giants. But it is the lesson of the second half of the season. The bullpen is no longer good enough.
 
Posted by Prester John (# 5502) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
The game day wrap made painful reading. Hard on Matt Moore. That's a tough way for the season to end for the Giants. But it is the lesson of the second half of the season. The bullpen is no longer good enough.
I can't believe they used Romo again today.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
The game day wrap made painful reading. Hard on Matt Moore. That's a tough way for the season to end for the Giants. But it is the lesson of the second half of the season. The bullpen is no longer good enough.
Yup. The awesome and the awful.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
The game day wrap made painful reading. Hard on Matt Moore. That's a tough way for the season to end for the Giants. But it is the lesson of the second half of the season. The bullpen is no longer good enough.
I am not a big fan of the frequent switching of relief pitchers. The Giants use one pitcher through 8 innings and then use 5 pitchers for one inning? I understand the odds on the whole lefty-righty thing but it always feels like desperation to me to change pitchers with every batter.

But, then, I am not a manager and I'd probably be a bad one.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
The game day wrap made painful reading. Hard on Matt Moore. That's a tough way for the season to end for the Giants. But it is the lesson of the second half of the season. The bullpen is no longer good enough.
I am not a big fan of the frequent switching of relief pitchers. The Giants use one pitcher through 8 innings and then use 5 pitchers for one inning? I understand the odds on the whole lefty-righty thing but it always feels like desperation to me to change pitchers with every batter.

But, then, I am not a manager and I'd probably be a bad one.
The least it does (and I wasn't even an armchair manager for this as I was still in bed) is tell your relievers as individuals and a group that you don't have confidence in them. I see the point in pulling your closer if he gets in trouble but to do that four times is reactive, not proactive, especially when you still have a get out of jail card, in the form of your own ninth. Mind you, the Giants don't seem to have been up for a fight in that.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Problem is that Casila was a very effective closer for the first part of the season - and then blew some saves. Bochy tried several options and then in the end went back to Romo who was a very effective regular and post season closer in the past. And Romo pitched 4 consecutive saves at the end of the regular season.

But after the blown save in the 13 innings marathon, I think Romo should have been sat down. Instead Bochy, who is a great coach, trusted him once too often. So it goes. I think it might be thank you and good night for Sergio's career, which is a sad way for him to go. He's been a good club servant.
 
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on :
 
So much drama, and in the end the Dodgers brought in Clayton Effing Kershaw in relief in the bottom of the 9th in the last game of the series with the Nats, 48 hours after his last start. And they're going to Chicago next. [Yipee] [Yipee] [Yipee]
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Kershaw in relief for the save did come as a surprise! I wonder which game(s) he will pitch in the Cubs series? Surely he can't be the Game 1 starter--but, then, before last night I would have said "surely he can't come in to relieve"...
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Kershaw might not start but does 2/3 of an innings affect a starting pitcher much? Some more than others I suppose. I'm sure the Dodgers want him to start game 1 as that gives him more recovery time before a second start in game 3 or 4.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
My understanding is that it is the warm-up to pitch that is the problem in a relief situation. Kershaw only threw 7 pitches in the game, but he had to throw a lot more in warm up, on top of a tired arm from pitching a lot two days earlier.

I have heard of situations of relief pitchers who keep getting up night after night to warm up but then don't get into any games, who eventually have to sit a night a rest because the arm is too tired from all those warm ups!

But Kershaw is Kershaw. It isn't clear that the normal rules apply.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Sorry! Double post! It would help if I looked at my resources BEFORE posting: it looks like Kenta Maeda is getting the nod for Game 1 for the Dodgers.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Thanks Hedgehog. I had overlooked the effect of warm-up which has to be thorough.

Let's see how many innings Maeda can manage in the opener. His last outing wasn't happy.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
I thought bringing in Kershaw was a master stroke. Felt sorry for the Nats. They must be beginning to wonder what it will take for them to advance.

But it was another excellent and very competitive game.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I saw this vine of a member of the crowd catching a ball that it looks like the fieldsman (is that the right word in baseball?!) could have taken. Surely that's Not Okay™ and he should have left the ball be?!
 
Posted by Prester John (# 5502) on :
 
Yeah, he's not supposed to lean over and take it. I will say he does get style points for doing so without a glove.
 
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
the fieldsman (is that the right word in baseball?!)
There are outfielders and infielders. And the fan should have been ejected from the stadium for interfering with play.

But I came here to mourn the Dodgers 10-2 loss to the Cubs. 4 errors. The Cubs made 2. So it was a stinker of a game in several ways. And Adrian Gonzalez was robbed when he was called out at the plate.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
I think the series will go to Game 7, RuthW. Lester to put the Cubs ahead tonight, Kershaw to win for the Dodger in Game 6, and Game 7 could go either way.

Being a National League supporter, I hope the winner will win the WS. The Tribe have looked very good to me, so I expect the WS to be close as well.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
There is a lot resting on Kershaw's arm now. But I think he'll be up for it.

Given the history, a Game 7 will be hard on the Cubs' collective nerves.
 
Posted by Prester John (# 5502) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
There is a lot resting on Kershaw's arm now. But I think he'll be up for it.

Given the history, a Game 7 will be hard on the Cubs' collective nerves.
I'm definitely pleased with last night's results but this is the Cubs we are talking about here. In the back of my mind I'm waiting for their luck to change dramatically and for them to fall short.

I'm surprised by the Dodgers. They didn't look like their hearts were into it. Having said that, the NL West looks to be theirs for the taking for the next few seasons, until or unless the Giants get their bullpen fixed.
 
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
There is a lot resting on Kershaw's arm now. But I think he'll be up for it.
No doubt. But the Dodgers have to score some runs, something they seem rather loathe to do of late.

quote:
Originally posted by Prester John:
I'm surprised by the Dodgers. They didn't look like their hearts were into it. Having said that, the NL West looks to be theirs for the taking for the next few seasons, until or unless the Giants get their bullpen fixed.
They made 4 errors in the last game. Four. The Cubs made 2, but it doesn't matter when their opponents were so busy stinking up the place.

The Dodgers have won their division four years straight, and I think you're right that they could very well keep doing that, but they gotta quit getting out-played in the post-season.

One bright note: Chase Utley hasn't broken anyone's leg this year.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Not looking too good Ruth. Bad error again, no Dodgers runs yet, plus Kershaw struggling.

But good if you're a Cubs supporter.
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
Cubs win! Cubs win! Cubs win!
 
Posted by Prester John (# 5502) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mamacita:
Cubs win! Cubs win! Cubs win!
Time to party like it's 1945!!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Prester John:
quote:
Originally posted by Mamacita:
Cubs win! Cubs win! Cubs win!
Time to party like it's 1945!!
Roast goat anyone? Or is it too soon?

The Cubs really ought to win: they have the best regular season record and have come through a tough post season, which indicate depth and they come from the NLC, so that will be some comfort to Pirates fans, even if we are rivals.
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Roast goat anyone? Or is it too soon?
During last night's game the announcer mentioned that William Sianis, legendary restaurateur who cast the curse (when he and his goat were ejected from the 1945 world series), died on Oct. 22. So, really, it's a message that the curse is well and truly over.

And if you haven't seen it, here is the shirt that diehard Cubs fan Bill Murray appeared in earlier this week: I ain't afraid of no goat! which sold like hotcakes.

[ 23. October 2016, 19:13: Message edited by: Mamacita ]
 
Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on :
 
Well, are we still hot on the Cubs?

It's one game, but when Cleveland has the kind of bullpen that allows them to pull out a lights-out starter in the 6th so that he may have two more games left in him if necessary, you might start to worry a bit.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Og, King of Bashan:
Well, are we still hot on the Cubs?

It's one game, but when Cleveland has the kind of bullpen that allows them to pull out a lights-out starter in the 6th so that he may have two more games left in him if necessary, you might start to worry a bit.
In two post-season games the Cubs failed to score and in another (which they won) the scored just one run. Maybe they are just streaky? Then again, the Cubs batters may be unfamiliar with Kluber to a greater extent than Cleveland's batters are with Jon Lester, who gave the impression that the world was against him by the end of the second inning.
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
No so fast, guys. We beat Cleveland 5-1 tonight. The Indians' one run was in the 7th inning, when Arrieta needed to be taken out. It was a really long (4 hours), cold game. Back to Wrigley tomorrow with the series tied.

PS: Arrieta pitched a no-hitter up to the 6th inning.

[ 27. October 2016, 03:20: Message edited by: Mamacita ]
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Game on!! I am really looking forward to the rest of this WS. And more great pitching. I suspect the winning and losing of this series will be a matter of inches. Strikes called and not called. Catches made and missed. The odd errors. The hits that did and didn't quite make it. Over the fence or to a fielder.

Bring. It. On!
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
I agree! This is shaping up to be a classic Series. I would not be surprised if it goes the full 7 games.
 
Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on :
 
Hypothetical question:

If a series goes seven games but all seven games are won by 5 runs and all but over when the 6th inning starts, can it be a classic?

I suppose it beats the year my Rockies made it on the heels of an amazing winning streak. Jeff Francis got lit up in the first two innings of game 1 and that was the series.

(I had my daughter's birthday on Tuesday and choir on Wednesday, so I haven't been able to watch any of the games. And speaking as someone whose favorite NFL team just won the championship in what many neutral observers considered to be a terrible Super Bowl, I don't mean to knock your excitement if you are a long-time Chicago or Cleveland fan.)

[ 27. October 2016, 17:00: Message edited by: Og, King of Bashan ]
 
Posted by jupitermadcat (# 15395) on :
 
Yes that was a good game last night. I could see this series going 7 I'm rooting for my wife's team (Cubs) plus i like underdogs.
 
Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by jupitermadcat:
Yes that was a good game last night. I could see this series going 7 I'm rooting for my wife's team (Cubs) plus i like underdogs.
Welcome aboard, jupitermadcat! As a new member of the Ship, I hope that you will accept my preemptive apology for going directly into snark mode over your first comment, especially given that we are in the Circus. It's absolutely not personal. That out of the way...

Haven't the Cubs been the odds-on favorites to win it all since April?

These are two really good teams who have plowed through the competition from April to this point. I don't think either team gets to claim underdog status in this one.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Og, King of Bashan:
Hypothetical question:

If a series goes seven games but all seven games are won by 5 runs and all but over when the 6th inning starts, can it be a classic?
If the 5-run winning margin in each game is because one team or the other is kept to one or fewer runs, to me that states that there was a lot of good pitching going on. Both teams can obviously tally up runs (as shown by the 5-run margins) but both also obviously got shut down by the other team's pitching (as shown by the one-or-fewer runs). So, yeah, I'd still call it a classic under those circumstances.

Last year was a 4 games to 1 mopping up by Kansas City over the Mets. It never felt like the Mets were ever really in it. This series has a different feel--two evenly matched teams slugging it out.
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
The weather report for Chicago for Game 3 is intriguing: the temps will be moderate for this time of year, but the winds will be blowing at 16-25 mph from home plate into center field. And possible gusts. Hang onto your Cubs hats. It will be lively.
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
And here's a little local color. Tickets for the next three games at Wrigley are retailing at $5000 to as high as $30,000. Also, some of the bars in Wrigleyville are advertising cover charges (entry fees) of $100 and up. You gotta love capitalism.

The aldermen on the Chicago City Council are having hissy fits because they can't get cheap tickets. They have to pay retail price (see above) like the rest of us. Boo hoo.

I do feel for the residents of Wrigleyville (a largely residential and densely populated area) who can't park their cars on the street for the next three days. Good luck schlepping those beer kegs.
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
Ok, this just in: Bill Murray will be singing "Take me out to the ball game" for tonight's 7th inning stretch. [Yipee]
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
The Cubs now have a huge hurdle to climb. Cleveland have looked significantly better in the last two games. They are obvious favourites now.

The Cubs have Lester and Arrieta as start pitchers in the next two, and of course both could lead to wins. But I think the Tribe plan to start with Kluber in any Game 7 and, based on his stellar post-season so far, that would probably dash the Cubs' hopes. Even if it got that far.
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
Yeah, they've played two amateurish games and need tonight to stay alive. We are all trying hard to keep the faith.
 
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:

Last year was a 4 games to 1 mopping up by Kansas City over the Mets. It never felt like the Mets were ever really in it. This series has a different feel--two evenly matched teams slugging it out.
Well, it started out that way, but the Cubs looked awful in games 3 and 4.

I find myself cheering for the Indians. I am generally very loyal about favoring the National League over the junior circuit. But it felt like the whole country was rooting against my team when the Dodgers were playing the Cubs, and now I wonder how many people outside Cleveland are pulling for the Indians.
 
Posted by Prester John (# 5502) on :
 
Okay. I figured out the problem with the Cubs. When I don't watch the game, they win. Sorry! Problem solved. Go Cubbies!!
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
It was a good game. The Cubs won, 3-2, not enough margin for us to relax, but lots of good plays. Chicago is thrilled that we won a World Series game at Wrigley.
 
Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
I find myself cheering for the Indians. I am generally very loyal about favoring the National League over the junior circuit. But it felt like the whole country was rooting against my team when the Dodgers were playing the Cubs, and now I wonder how many people outside Cleveland are pulling for the Indians.
I initially felt that way, but watching two of the three games at Wrigley got me on board with the Cubs. It helps that I am not actually watching with anyone from Chicago- if I was sitting through the games with someone going on an on about curses and Steve Bartman, I'd probably be all in for Cleveland. Given that I was one of the few people rooting against the Red Sox in 2004, I think I'm allowed a bandwagon jump.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Well well well! The Cubs are 7-0 by the middle of the third, including a grand slam.
 
Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on :
 
Assuming this keeps going well, I'll be in choir rehearsal for most of game seven.

The Choirmaster is actually a baseball fan, but I suspect we'll still be checking scores at our own risk.

Hopefully Game 5's 8th inning is the standard for tomorrow night, or we might miss the whole thing. [Waterworks]
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Game 7 it is! Is Kluber the man to Kontinue the Kurse? Will Hendricks turn the Hope into Hallelujah? The world waits. Well anyway, a lot of people in Chicago for sure.

Og, I'm impressed that you aren't trying to develop a very sore throat, but maybe singing is better for the nerves than trying to watch the final game? That I could understand - I was exactly like that when Andy Murray was playing Djokovic in the Wimbledon Final in 2013. Sometimes it seems safer to "hide under any duvet, or equivalent of duvet, you can find".
 
Posted by Timothy the Obscure (# 292) on :
 
If the Cubbies do pull it off, how will their fans cope with the identity crisis? Being a Cubs fan has always signified wistful acceptance of the tragic futility of life in a fallen world--what will it mean if the Cubs are winners?
 
Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on :
 
I was sitting next to a guy from Providence when the Red Sox won it all in 2004.

He ran down the hall of our apartment building screaming "The Sox just won the Fucking World Series!"

Then he came back and literally within a minute of the end of the game started to talk about how long it had been since the Bruins had won a Stanley Cup.

100% true story, no exaggeration. I swear I am not making that up.

So based on that experience with long-suffering fans, my best guess is that they will start moaning about the Bears.
 
Posted by Timothy the Obscure (# 292) on :
 
Helluva ball game--don't they know I have to get up early tomorrow?
 
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on :
 
One more reason I can never leave the west coast!

Great game, fun series. And blessings upon both teams for giving us as much baseball as humanly possible. An extra inning in the 7th game! So awesome.
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
The Cubs have won the World Series.

Although the Cubs had a comfortable 6-3 lead for much of the game, it turned out to be an absolute nail-biter. Cleveland tied it up and it ended up going into a tenth inning.

Did I mention the rain delay? Yes, after the 9th inning, with the score tied up, the rains came in. The brief downpour that had hit Chicago earlier in the day made its way east to Cleveland and caused a 17-minute pause in the game. And this, I think, was a Godsend. Because the Cubs were tired and starting to despair, and this gave them time to regroup and refocus. And in the 10th inning, Cleveland got 1 and Chicago got 2, to win it 8-7.

There were some decent plays (although nothing as dramatic IMO as in Game 6) but it was a game that contrasted the depth of the pitching staff in both teams, and Chicago was a little weaker. Madden (manager) subbed in a new pitcher at the 11h hour, and it worked.

I'm glad that retiring catcher Ross (age 39) got a run in his last game.

I am admittedly a fair(ish)-weather fan and so I am happy but humbled at the fans who have been loyal for decades. This week there have been so many photos of really elderly men (and some women) who were at the 1945 game and who got to see this. People holding up signs saying "This is for Grandpa." It's a hard-fought win, and one deeply steeped in memory and nostalgia.

And well done, Cleveland. You made us work for it. It could have gone either way.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
A fantastic WS with a nerve-shredding ending. I take my hat off to both teams and give hearty congratulations to the Cubs. Baseball was a real winner tonight.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Agreed! Chicago and Cleveland were very evenly matched. To take Game 7 to extra innings was just added suspense. What a way to end the season!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
One helluva game! Probably more notable for errors than excellence. Kept me up late (after 4:30!).

Now then, can someone explain to me how Aroldis Chapman was awarded the win after what looked like a blown save? Remember, I'm still pretty new to this game but it didn't look like he should have been pitching.
 
Posted by Prester John (# 5502) on :
 
Yesterday's game was baseball at its best. In 2010 my favorite team, the team I grew up watching in person, finally ended their drought. In 2016, my second favorite team, the team of the city I was born in, finally ended theirs. I will always watch baseball. I will always love baseball but I will never again experience the emotional highs and lows that I got to experience last night. This was magical.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Now then, can someone explain to me how Aroldis Chapman was awarded the win after what looked like a blown save? Remember, I'm still pretty new to this game but it didn't look like he should have been pitching.
This is one of the quirks of baseball scoring (and why win-loss record is not a good measure of that pitcher's performance). In general, a starting pitcher must go 5 innings to get a win. But if the game is tied after that, the "winning pitcher" is the pitcher of record when the winning run is scored.

So, in this case, Chapman finished the 9th inning. He was still the pitcher of record when the Cubs scored in the top of the tenth. Although 2 more Cubs pitchers pitched the bottom of the 10th, Chapman gets the win because they took the lead in the top of the 10th when he was still the pitcher of record--even though the only reason we were in the 10th inning to begin with was because of the blown save.

According to the box score on MLB.com, Chapman is also credited with a Blown Save. So he has both a Win and a Blown Save.

The Official Rule is actually more complex.

quote:

10.17 WINNING AND LOSING PITCHER
(a) The official scorer shall credit as the winning pitcher that pitcher whose team assumes a lead while such pitcher is in the game, or during the inning on offense in which such pitcher is removed from the game, and does not relinquish such lead,unless
(1) such pitcher is a starting pitcher and Rule 10.17(b) applies; or
(2) Rule 10.17(c) applies.

(b) If the pitcher whose team assumes a lead while such pitcher is in the game, or during the inning on offense in which such pitcher is removed from the game, and does not relinquish such lead, is a starting pitcher who has not completed
(1) five innings of a game that lasts six or more innings on defense, or
(2) four innings of a game that lasts five innings on defense,
then the official scorer shall credit as the inning pitcher the relief pitcher, if there is only one relief pitcher, or the relief pitcher who, in the official scorer’s judgment was the most effective, if there is more than one relief pitcher.

(c) The official scorer shall not credit as the winning pitcher a relief pitcher who is ineffective in a brief appearance, when at least one succeeding relief pitcher pitches effectively in helping his team maintain its lead. In such a case, the official scorer shall credit as the winning pitcher the succeeding relief pitcher who was most effective, in the judgment of the official scorer.
Now, you might say "Aha!!! Chapman was ineffective in relief! So under 17(c) he should not be credited with a win!!"

But, that is when you have to look at the official comment to the rule:

quote:
Rule 10.17(c) Comment: The official scorer generally should, but is not required to, consider
the appearance of a relief pitcher to be ineffective and brief if such relief pitcher pitches less than one inning and allows two or more earned runs to score (even if such runs are charged to a previous pitcher).
Chapman pitched more than one inning, even if he is credited with giving up 2 runs, so he is not automatically considered "ineffective." The Official Scorer clearly has discretion, and the fact that Chapman came out in the 9th and shut Cleveland down probably weighed heavily in the decision to give him the win.
 
Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on :
 
Yeah, Chapman making it through the 9th will probably not be remembered as much as Chapman almost blowing it in the 8th, but it was a great achievement, and kudos to Alex Rodriguez for giving him credit.

The difference between last night and the Bartman game of 2003 was that the Cubs found themselves in a mess but didn't panic. I've always hated the "Bartman blew it!" angle; not just because every other fan in his section was reaching for that ball, but because the Cubs didn't need to follow that moment up by missing an easy out, giving up nine runs, and then losing game 7. They panicked because of a fluky play, and it cost them the series.

Last night, Chapman stepped up in the 9th, they regrouped during the rain delay, and they did what they had to do in the 10th. I was sure they were dead after that home run. But really, the only way the Cubs could have finally won a World Series was to show that they could overcome what looked like another legendary Cubs meltdown.

Great game, great series.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Thanks to Hedgehog for the rules and especially an explanation in plain language of the rules under which Chapman scored his unlikely double! Don't ask me to do the same for the Duckworth-Lewis method used to calculate target scores in abbreviated limited over cricket matches. I'm OK with leg-before-wicket though.

Anyway, it was a great series and the finale had just about everything: a dramatic start, some big hitting, a comeback just when things got desperate, Ross's error and a home run in his last game, extra inning and a rain delay. Oh, and some very, very tired pitchers.

See you in April.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Og, King of Bashan:
I've always hated the "Bartman blew it!" angle; not just because every other fan in his section was reaching for that ball, but because the Cubs didn't need to follow that moment up by missing an easy out, giving up nine runs, and then losing game 7. They panicked because of a fluky play, and it cost them the series.
I've always felt the same way about Bill Buckner in the 1986 World Series. Everybody talks about Buckner letting the ball go through his leg "losing" the series even though it did no such thing.

It was Game Six. Boston was ahead 3 games to 2 over the Mets. Game Six went to the 10th. Boston scored two runs in the top, and so looked good to win the series. Calvin Schiraldi got the first two batters out. Then Gary Carter got a single. Kevin Mitchell got a single. Ray Knight got a single (scoring Carter). Schiraldi was removed as pitcher and Bob Stanley came in. He promptly uncorked a wild pitch, allowing Mitchell to score--tying the game, and allowing Knight to go to 2nd base.

Note that the two run lead has been blown and Bill Buckner's name has not been mentioned yet.

Then Mookie Wilson came up and hit the little dribbler that went through Buckner's legs, allowing Knight to score. From second base. Where he would not have been if it hadn't been for the wild pitch. Mets win the game and tie the series 3-3. So there is another whole game to be played (which Boston lost).

And yet people blamed Buckner for it all. To quote Wikipedia: "Buckner began receiving death threats and was heckled and booed by some of his own home fans. Meanwhile, he was the focal point of derision from the fans of opposing teams on the road—especially when he faced the Mets in Spring training 1987, and the first time he came to bat at Yankee Stadium during the regular season. The Red Sox released Buckner on July 23, 1987..."

I have never understood it. It's America--we love to blame others.
 
Posted by Timothy the Obscure (# 292) on :
 
I thought the David Ross story was especially cool. A journeyman second-string catcher (almost a slightly more successful version of Crash Davis from "Bull Durham") in his last game, comes in in the middle, starts by making a throwing error (on a ball the pitcher should have fielded, but Lester's crap defensively), then gets hit in the face by a passed ball, causing another crisis, but ends up saving the game with a home run in his last at bat in the majors (if not for Ross's HR there would have been no 10th inning)... no scriptwriter could have done better.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
So about 100 days (give or take) before pitchers and catchers report for Spring Training....

In the meantime, the Australian Baseball League will start its season on November 17, with a game between Canberra Cavalry at Brisbane Bandits. The Bandits are the defending champion.

As usual, I will be cheering on the Sydney Blue Sox, despite their lackluster performance last year.
 
Posted by Prester John (# 5502) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
So about 100 days (give or take) before pitchers and catchers report for Spring Training....

In the meantime, the Australian Baseball League will start its season on November 17, with a game between Canberra Cavalry at Brisbane Bandits. The Bandits are the defending champion.

As usual, I will be cheering on the Sydney Blue Sox, despite their lackluster performance last year.
After you mentioned this last season I started catching games on You Tube. It definitely helps with the waiting.
 


© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0