THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

I think I said once that the breakeven point for the guy on 3B with 2 outs is 25-30%.  Would be even less if Punto is at bat.

It was a short fly, and it was Griffey who at this point probably has no better than an average arm (though MGL would think it’s even worse).  It would take an almost perfect and fairly average strength throw, and that’s what we got.  I have to believe that if Griffey makes that throw 10 times, he’ll get it there no more than 5 times.  So, a good running play by Cuddyer.

***

Anyone else think that the mid-inning relief change kinda took the oomph out of the game at that point?

***

The announcer was calling Junior’s replacement a pinch hitter, instead of runner.  He made another obvious gaffe, that I don’t remember.  And no one corrects him.  I’d rather see the correction made.

Oh yeah, there was a double down the left field line that went to the wall.  The announcer said that if the LF could have cut it off, he could have held the batter to a single.  That’s ridiculous.  His momentum would have carried him away for a good 2 seconds. 

***

This game is what soccer fans enjoy.  I love 1-0, 2-1, ballgames.  I don’t know why soccer gets blasted on it, but baseball doesn’t.  Close games, with close plays, and limited errors is what makes a great game.  Be it baseball, soccer, hockey, I love them all.  I don’t in football; it’s hard to have that kind of game in football (low score and limited errors as a good game).

I’ve always wondered about that - is it really so hard for networks like TBS to find a decent crew of baseball announcers? There are a lot of people working in television, and only 30 teams and three national networks - can there seriously be so few announcers available that you can’t find 80 or so for the entire country that are well-versed in baseball?

Colin, our idea of a good announcer is completely different from what the networks (and probably the average fan) consider a good announcer.

Darling is very good with Hernandez and Cohen on the Mets broadcasts (other than the fact that how are you supposed to tell the difference between 2 guys with lisps?).  It is just that Reynolds (who was always bad yet occasionally decent) and Stockton (I know nothing about him as a baseball announcer) just bring him down.

Anyway, I agree with Tango 100% about the Griffey/Cuddyer play. 100% the correct move to send Cuddyer (lots of 3rd base coaches would NOT have sent him though).  What was really annoying was all the announcers going on about what a “great” throw it was and how it was so indicative of Griffey’s “gold glove” caliber defense (they did at least admit that his defense is not what it used to be).

For one thing, as WE know, arm is but a very small component of OF defense.  For another, Griffey indeed has an average arm NOW, at best (the data indicate that is a lot worse than average).

For another thing, Griffey’s defense is as far away from GG caliber as a major league player can humanly get.

Finally, and most importantly, it was a good throw because it was reasonably accurate.  NO ONE would have to make a strong throw in that situation because the fly ball was so shallow and Cuddyer (despite being an OF’er sometimes) is slow.

And the throw was not even all THAT good.  It was a 2 hopper from about 200 feet and kind of tailed at the end.  Everything just worked out well for the Sox on that throw and AJ did a good job holding onto the ball.

Don’t get me wrong.  It wasn’t a bad throw.  It was a good one considering that it just needed to be accurate.  What can you call a throw that is going to nail a runner 50 or 60% of the time no matter who throws it?  An average one?  Sure. A decent one?  Sure. A “good one?” Maybe.  A great one?  No, you cannot call a throw which happens 50 or 60% of the time from any fielder a “great one.”

Other than that, I didn’t pay that much attention to the game.  The Sox certainly seemed to have played well and pushed all the right buttons.  Unlike DET who looked like a single A team last night (3 walks, 3 wild pitches, and a grand slam on a cookie right down the middle, all in one inning!) and during much of the season.  I guess Leyland won’t be winning the MOY award this year.

From a VERY casual soccer observer, I think the main problem I have with soccer is not necessarily that it’s low-scoring - it’s because it’s so hard to score.  If a team has a 1-0 lead late in the game, their chances of winning are huge (at least from my limited observations).  If they have a 2-0 lead, forget it - why even play?  The losing team should just forfeit right there. 

I’d say that each soccer goal is equivalent to 4 or 5 runs in baseball (in that a team coming back from a 2-0 deficit with 10 minutes to play is about as likely as a team coming back from a 10-0 deficit in the 9th inning).  Do you agree?

One of the things that makes baseball great for me is the variety of scores.  We have 3-1, 6-5, and 11-8 games every night and those scores are all perfectly normal.  No other mainstream sport aside from football can say that.

And a team coming back from a 1 or 2 run deficit is normal as well.  Coming back from a 3 or 4 run deficit is just likely enough to allow the losing team (and its fans) to maintain hope.  In soccer, you get out to an early lead, and the game’s over.

Sorry to hijack the thread…

On announcers: Dick Stockton over-explains every detail, no matter what the sport. You’d think he’d be a radio guy with as much talking as he does. But I guess it’s what the networks want for Americans with short attention spans who aren’t naturally drawn to baseball.

On mid-inning relief: I’m guessing Tangotiger is referring to the move to bring in Nathan to face Dye. If so, I have to say I agree with you there. I don’t see why you bring Nathan in at that point. When I saw him warming up in the pen, I figured he’d be saved for a higher leverage situation after someone reached base.

No, I was thinking in the 7th inning.  I didn’t necessarily mind the strategic move.  Just pointing out that I really enjoyed the back and forth between the two starters, and then the reliever comes in, we take a commercial break, and now we have a new dynamic.

I don’t have a problem with bringing in your best reliever regardless of situation.  And remember when I said that on multiple mid-inning switches, you get to start the batter at 1-0, 2-0, 3-0?  I’ll make one exception: let the manager before the game designate his “closer”.  When THAT guy comes into the game, he gets a freebie on a mid-inning switch, if it happens in the 8th or later innings.  Doesn’t actually have to be Nathan.  Maybe a loogy.

I think the throw by Griffey was a very good one.  There are so many centerfielders with rag arms these days, I don’t think most of them would have made it.

Griffey ranks poorly on arm ratings, using pbp data, because he’s slow and runners do most of the advancement before he even picks the ball up.  When he was younger Griffey had outstanding arm ratings.  Given the situation, where he had all the time in the world to make the catch and get in throwing position, it played to Griffey’s remaining strength.  He can still throw the ball.

Still, I agree 100% that given the base-out situation, you had to send the runner.

Thanks for the clarification, Tangotiger.

Good point too. I had to double check using Gameday, but Blackburn had only thrown 89 pitches when Gardy yanked him, which you could really say was 85 because of the intentional pass to Alexei Ramirez right before the switch was made. Also, looking at the pitchF/X in Gameday, Blackburn left the ball up and out over the plate on both the Griffey double and the Thome HR. Probably a case of Gardenhire being conservative and not wanting a second run to cross from another mistake pitch. Of course, if that had happened, the break may have felt a bit more natural to the game flow.

I wonder if the pF/Xers can find anything to support/refute the idea of Blackburn fatiguing.

As somebody who has watched very little soccer, here’s the difference from how I see it: In baseball, scoring can happen at pretty much any moment. There is tons of tension, even in a fast-paced 1-0 game. In soccer, most of the game appears to be purposeless running around. Now, I know that’s not actually the case. I’m sure there are strategic elements I just don’t understand going on. That might make it compelling to play, but for me it doesn’t make it compelling to watch because I’m reasonably sure that if I walk away for 5 minutes I won’t miss anything. I held off on getting a drink from the fridge last night because I knew that at any moment I might be missing the most important pitch of the game.

As for Griffey’s throw, the real point here that has been overlooked is this: Wouldn’t the White Sox be significantly better off with Anderson in center and Swisher in left than the Griffey/Wise combination? Anderson is a meh hitter with a little pop, and Swisher has been very unlucky this year. Neither Griffey nor Wise have done much with the bat either. The difference is that Anderson, at least by the eye test, is a phenomenal defensive player in a key defensive position. I would think the defensive upgrade there (and I’m not sure you lose anything significant with Wise/Swisher in left) more than makes up for a minimal offensive boost the Griffey/Wise combination gives you.

If you miss a goal in soccer, that will definitely be the most high-leverage play you will miss.  If you miss a pitch in baseball, it won’t be the most high-leverage play. 

Given both games at 1-0, you’d be nuts to walk away from a soccer game with 20 minutes to go.  The next score (by the losing team) will turn the game from a very low leverage to very high leverage.

Walking away from a 1-0 baseball game with 2 innings to go means that a run or two from the losing team goes from a medium leverage to a medium leverage game.

That said, the chances of getting a score in baseball will be much higher than in soccer.  Your overall payoff is still the same.  In baseball, you buy some to alot of fun along the way.  In soccer you either buy a little or tons of fun along the way. 

I highly prefer baseball’s pace, but soccer does have good pace too, and fantastic pace in World Cup.

I just don’t like those who automatically give soccer a knock because “uh… 1-0”. It’s just so small-minded, especially since the fan base in soccer is far far far greater.

Whitesox fans think that Anderson is the best fielder on the team.  But, as far as CF go, he’s 12th out of 52.  Swisher is #52.  Wise is #42.  The 35 Whitesox fans who took the time to evaluate Anderson would call him pretty good.

If Junior had enough playing time in CF, he would be dead last.  So, given the 4, it’s an enormous benefit to have Anderson in CF.

As for the bat, Anderson, in 650 career PA, is horrible.  Swisher we all know.  Griffey is ok.  Wise is 30 years old and has 500 PA.  Of the 4, Wise is the useless one.  Of course, this year, he has 6 HR in 20% of a season.  It’s like the Shane Spencer question 10 years ago.

If you have to select 2 of them, I don’t see how Swisher is not the one that definitely plays. 

The easiest way to think about their value is: how much would you pay them for next year?  Swisher would get lots of millions, while for the other 3, you can argue than any of them will be out of baseball in 2010, so how good can they possibly be right now?

It’s frankly embarrassing that you have to choose between those 3 guys. 

I think I’d put Swisher in CF, Junior in LF, and after Junior’s 3rd PA, bring in Anderson to CF, and shift Swisher to LF. 

If you insist on putting Junior in CF because he’s too old to adapt to LF, then fine.  Swisher still needs to be the regular.

Is Swisher hurt or something?  I assumed he was because I can’t imagine playing Wise over him by free choice.  Maybe a leg injury that prevents him from running, because he came in for late inning 1B defense?

Rally - He’s not hurt. Ozzie Guillen just looks at his .219 average and doesn’t realize he’s been one of the (if not the) unluckiest hitters in baseball this year.

Tango - On the soccer point: I think a better comparison is hockey since the sports are in many ways very similar. I enjoy hockey just because it appears that more is going on. I don’t get the same impression from soccer. And I think soccer’s popularity has everything to do with tradition and accessibility than some inherent excitement value.

As for defense: Swisher really isn’t that bad. As I said in another thread, I believe White Sox fans are taking out their frustration over his offense on his defense. He isn’t a CF, but he’s not dead last in baseball. I’d love to see where Swisher ranks in some of the metrics. At least Guillen gets it right against LHP, where Anderson plays center (he does slug .563 against LHP this year, even if it is a small sample size) and Swisher plays left.

Wow.  I didn’t realize that it was a platoon.  Even having a terrible year by his standards, Swisher is about even in OPS+ with Wise.  Obviously he projects better.

For me, it’s never been about the amount of goals, just the CHANCES of scoring.  A 1-0 hockey game with 70-80 shots on goal between the two teams is wonderful.  A 1-0 hockey game with 25 shots between the two teams is horrendously boring.  In soccer they seem to go hours without even being within a chance of getting a shot on net, which takes away the excitement for me.

October is my favorite month of the year by the way.  MLB Playoffs finally start, and the NHL gets underway.  What time is better?

JD - agree with you on soccer.  If I understood the game more I’m sure I could appreciate the “running around.” And also agree about the reasons for its popularity. 

Another thing I prefer about baseball is its suspense.  The tense moments last for much longer than in other sports.

For example - 8th inning, tie game, man on 3rd, 2 outs.  That situation can exist for many minutes.  Tension is building all the time.

A comparable situation in soccer would be a close game where the losing (or tied) team has the ball close to the opponent’s goal, and can make a shot on goal.  First problem doesn’t even happen very frequently (at least to this observer), and second, the moment lasts for a couple seconds.  Sure, that one second where the ball is in the air headed towards the goal is incredibly tense, but to me it doesn’t match the experience of living and dying with each pitch and pickoff throw in a tense baseball situation.

As a huge observer of both soccer and baseball, I say they are both equally entertaining to watch. As for suspense during the game, I’d say there are just as many in soccer as there are in baseball. One example is the Barca game today, who came back from being 1-0 with like 10 minutes left in the game and won 2-1, and not just the last 10 minutes, either. Anytime there was a free kick, corner kick, or the other team had the ball on our half, it’d make me want to go nuts. Build-ups and just the act of searching for a goal when the game is close carry a lot of tension, or at least for me.

The “running around” is strategic. Not sure if strategic is the correct word, but yes, they do serve their purpose. One thing that strikes are always told is to “recycle their runs”, which means they need to continually be checking to and away from. The majority of the running is simply to create space, check to the ball, or make a run to receive a ball and get into attacking position.

I’d just like to give a big thanks to Lou Piniella for deciding that out of the following pitchers:

* Carlos Zambrano
* Rich Harden
* Ryan Dempster

he decided that Ryan Dempster was his staff ace.

That is all.

I’m convinced that the play-in game alone will make the Griffey trade a great one in the minds of a lot fans.

General playoff/sabermetric question. I always hear about how “playoff baseball is a different animal” or something to that effect. So here’s my question: Should a manager change what he does during playoff games?

Actually, scratch that. Lots of managers do dumb things, so of course they should change that. A better way to ask the question: Do the normal rules (many of which are rarely followed in real life anyway) still apply to the playoffs? I remember a while back MGL made a post to the effect of “What I would do if I were manager.” Would any of this change? If not, does that make all the talk of how playoff baseball is different untrue (or only true because managers change their style for no reason)?

Colin, Lou, like everyone else, believes in the magic fairly dust of a pitcher pitching “well at home” or on Tuesday’s or on days with a half moon, etc.

A healthy Harden is 100 times better than either of those pitchers (I don’t know if he is healthy) and a healthy Zambrano (don’t know about him either) is better than Dempster.

At least he got the list itself (his 3 best pitchers) right.  Hey, Marquis could have started game 1!

I have a few non-sabermetric observations from the BOS/ALA game:

The umpire had a refreshingly tight strike zone.  None of those “6 inches off the plate but the pitcher hit the catcher’s mitt” strikes.  He was consistent too.  The only egregious error he made was when he rang up Lowrie on the check swing.

The home plate umpire should not ring up a batter unless the check swing is obviously a swing, and they rarely do.  In this case, not only was it not an obvious swing, it was not a swing.

Buck Martinez is a really poor analyst.  To the average fan, he probably sounds like a genius.  If you really know about the game and pay attention to what he says, you will realize that he says a lot of stupid things.

For example, he said, when Vlady got thrown out at third, “There is no reason to take that risk.  He was already in scoring position.”

Of course it is EXACTLY the opposite.  Any Little Leaguer can tell you that in a 1 run game with 1 out, you definitely DO want to “take a risk in getting to third.” How much of a risk, of course, is the operative question.

Plus, it is no wonder that Buck was a lifetime (amazingly in 2743 AB) .225/.284/.343 hitter.  He kept trying to tell us exactly what pitch the pitcher was going to and was supposed to throw.  Unfortunately, I think he was right like 1 in 10 times.  Then he would go on and tell us why the pitch he did NOT call was the right one.  He also spoke as if there were no such thing as game theory.  That a pitcher decides what pitch to throw in any given situation and then throws that pitch 100% of the time.  Since he was a catcher for like 17 seasons, you would think that he would have noticed that you can’t really predict a pitcher’s pitches with any degree of accuracy (other than perhaps a 3-0 fastball and similar situations). If he or anyone else could, that pitcher would likely be selling pizza rather than pitching. 

Speaking of the Vlady play, I do not believe it was a bad play.  It was a minor miracle that Youkilis was able to pick up the ball so quickly.  Usually after a dive and a miss, the ball kicks away or the fielder has a lot of trouble picking it up and then getting back on his feet.  Youkilis made a very good play after he dove for the ball, and there was a lot of luck involved in the ball not kicking away.

Vlady saw that the catch was not made and kept going to third. I think it was a wise play on his part.  If not wise, it was close.  It was not the blunder that EVERY one of the broadcasters made it out to be.

Why can’t otherwise knowledgable and intelligent broadcasters, ex-players not think and/or communicate logically.

BTW, according to Martinez, all pitchers struggle in the first inning and then get better, or at least the good ones do.  Of course we hear that all the time.  Then why do pitchers do BETTER the first time through the order and then progressively worse after that (which we also hear from the broadcasters). I would love to ask them sometime, “Which is it guys?  Pitchers often struggle in the first, or batters need time to get used to the pitcher.  You can’t have both!”

Oh, and teams that win the first game in best of 5 series usually win the series because they have the momentum going into the rest of the series.  Silly me, I thought it was because they won the first game and the other team has to win 3 of the next 4 games to win the series, which is hard for any team to do (plus the team that wins the first game is more often than not the better team!).

Finally…

Lester pitched brilliantly and if he does not get hurt, there is little chance I think, that he won’t be a star or superstar.  His stuff is awesome, he knows how to pitch, he rarely throws to the middle of the plate, his command is great, and he mixes up his pitches terrifically. At least he did all that the few times I have seen him.  I realize that on any given night, you can see just about anything from any pitchers, although “stuff” does not fluctuate much.

I don’t think I’ve even seen a pitcher that likes to pitch inside as much as Lester.  You would think that lots of other hard throwers would and should do the same thing.  About the only beef I have with Lester is that he throws the fastball inside TOO much.  Anytime you do anything almost all the time, it loses its effectiveness, game-theory-wise.  He did throw a few outside fastballs (on purpose - BTW, don’t you hate how when a pitcher completely misses his target in a pitch and the announcer pretends like the pitcher meant to throw it there!) and it froze the hitters.  He needs to do more of that if only to keep the hitters honest.

For example, let’s say that I knew a certain pitcher only threw inside.  Well, I would just move away from the plate and all those inside pitches would be right down the middle!

A pitcher *should* struggle, it would seem, in the first inning, compared to *settling down* in the second, considering he is facing the top 1-2-3-4 hitters usually in the first inning, and then the bottom of the order later.

Nick, that is true of course and that is why the first inning has the highest average runs I think, but of course that is not what the announcers mean.

Regarding the Vlad play, does anyone know if the 3rd base coach put up a stop sign? I remember while watching the replay, Vlad had barely touched 2nd when Youkilis threw the ball. Vlad was at most 10 feet from the bag, probably less, if I remember correctly.

Not only that, but I also distinctly remember there was nobody covering 2nd. When the throw came into Lowell at 3rd, I remember seeing someone (I guess Lowrie) scrambling to get to 2nd in case there was a rundown. If the 3rd base coach had put up a stop sign and Vlad had seen it, he could have EASILY gotten back to 2nd.

I was just curious if Vlad ran through a stop sign (maybe he didn’t even look for the 3rd base coach) or if the 3rd base coach was asleep at the wheel

The announcers kept saying that he “ran through a stop sign.” However, that is not really even the correct terminology (imagine that, ex-player announcers saying the wrong thing).  The only time you really refer to a player going through a stop sign is at third base going home.  In that case, the decision is the coach’s only.  At any other base, the coach is merely an “adviser” and ultimately the responsibility is on the player.

That being said, Vladdy should have been looking at the coach as he rounded seconded and the coach definitely should have signaled for him to stop.

So while I think it was correct for Vladdy to start to go to third on the assumption that the ball would not be retrieved too quickly, it was also his mistake if he did not look at the coach after rounding second and the coach’s fault if he did throw up the “stop sign.”

You teach a player, by the way, to pick up the coach before touching the bag and then again after touching the bag, if at all possible.  You also teach him that the ultimate responsibility for baserunning is the runners other than at third base.  That is not to say he is supposed to disregard or disobey the coach at other bases.  It is to say that he is supposed to make the decision on his own and then use the coach for support.

With this play, it is more likely that a player would use his coach as the ultimate decision-maker, as opposed to say stretching a double into a triple which is normally 100% the runner’s decision.

In non-sabermetric terms, a runner really has to use the coach in that situation because the only other way he can know where that ball is going is if he’s looking behind him, and that’s clearly going to slow you down quite a bit. And, the announcers noted, he did slow down around second base. I’m not sure if he looked back or just hesitated, but either way he made a baserunning error even if going to third was the right move (because of the score, inning, where the ball was, etc.). Perhaps this is a good example of how doing the right thing but in the wrong way can hurt you.

The 3rd base ump let a big one go when he didn’t call Ortiz check swing a strike, when he clearly didn’t check it. Obviously, I had the advantage of a great angle. Wasn’t that the PA in which Ortiz singled in a run?

As for the Vladdy play, a lot of credit has to be given to Youk on that. That was a brilliant play. Vladdy clearly didn’t think Youk was going to scoop it and react so quickly.

Martinez really was saying a lot of stupid things, and not just from a saber perspective.

Regardless of whether Vlad ran through a sign or not, why didn’t Scioscia use a pinch runner like Willits once Vlad reached?

Also, Evan Longoria is a beast.

Yup, Vladdy is pretty slow now.

I remember the Ortiz check swing.  It was a swing, but not ridiculously so.  Easy for a third base umpire to occasionally miss I would think.  I think that was in the AB prior to the single, but I’m not sure.

The idea that Alexi is the ROY as opposed to Longoria is laughable.  Of course, most of the Ramirez ROY talk came after his grand slam.  I can’t imagine that one AB can (should I should say) ever have much impact on an award other than in the minds of the voters.

The reason why Alexi gets a lot of love for ROY and having a “great” (he didn’t) season with the bat is the same reason (one of them at least) the fans chose the clutch team they did.  Walks.  Look at Alexi’s walk total for the year.  The average fan (and sportswriters) do not like walks when it comes to things like “clutch” and MVP and awards.

The Ortiz check-swing that should have been strike 3 came in the first inning.  After that, he popped up, so no big deal.

Lowrie got called out on a check swing, but so did Mark Teixiera earlier.  I don’t think the umpiring affected the outcome.

Going to third raelly only needed to be a 50/50 shot for Vlad to break even.  What bothers me is that he hesitated going around second base.  It may have been the right thing to try for the extra base, but he needed to commit fully to that course of action, or default to his coach’s judgement and stop.

BTW, I’ll be the first one to mention this, but TBS doing the post-season so far is about 10,000 times better than Fox that I think that Fox ought to retire from baseball permanently (not the Fox sports affiliates, but network Fox).  Why is that?

One, while the TBS announcers are not all that great, they are not even close to being as annoying as the Fox ones.  Two, and this is the prime reason, they are simply broadcasting and showing the games without all the stupid, stupid, gimmicks and schmaltz we are used to seeing from Fox.

OK, the Frank TV commercials are mildly annoying, and can anyone tell me why Ripken Junior says, “really” off-camera at the end of that of that Holiday Inn commercial?

Did anyone see the Frank TV commercial throughout the games where Frank says something along the lines of, “I never played baseball, never watch it, but I still love it”?

Any chance the guy from FJM(Junior, I believe) who writes for Frank TV was behind that and wrote it as a satirical dig at saber guys?

MGL, I think he’s saying “Really?” to the guy wanting to have “Snake Eyes” as a nickname. Like “Really, _that’s_ your choice?” Could be wrong in interpretation there.

So, anyway, here’s a good one. Cubs/Dodgers. Listening on the radio as I’m driving. Martin hits the bases-clearing double and the color guy, I think Sutcliffe (it sounded like him, but correct me if I’m wrong. It wasn’t Jon Miller though, definitely the color guy) says something to the effect of, “Manny Ramirez was responsible for that and all he did on that play was stand in the on-deck circle. Carlos Zambrano saw him there and had to throw a good pitch to Martin.”

Yep, Zambrano threw Martin a meatball because of Manny. It had nothing to do with the fact that the bases were loaded (no place to put him), two runs had already come in (didn’t want to walk him and add a third run), and Martin is a pretty good hitter. And, just maybe, Z is off tonight. None of that. It was all Manny, who was barely on the field of play.

From everything I saw (was/am at work so I missed some innings) Zambrano was on, or at least good enough - 3.99 FIP-ERA? I’ll take that. The infield defense was quite frankly embarassing. I am, say again, embarassed by our infield play tonight.

Billingsley is a very good pitcher (BTW, another Cub infield error as I type) and the Dodgers obviously have a decent lineup.

Almost every post-season game is a 40-60% deal for one team or another (probably 85% of the games).  There ain’t much to say when either team loses a game or series other than the ball just didn’t bounce their way.

To “predict” that one team will beat the other in a series, other than just calling one team a small, medium, or large favorite, is an exercise in profound silliness.

So far, I had the Phillies a 57% fave, the Rays and Cubs 59%, and Boston 55%.  With those numbers, obviously no result can be even remotely surprising.  BTW, that is a decent amount of parity for a typical post-season.

Yeah, I had the Cubs at like 60% to win the series. It’d be a bit easier to swallow if these were close games, I guess, not that the results are any different either way.

I have to laugh that Theriot made a throwing error. I’m going to be expected to comment on that later (Theriot is well-known to be my least favorite player), and I don’t know if I can.

Colin, not sure if your Z comment was in general or directed at my #34. I wasn’t saying that Z was off, but just that it was a better explanation than some voodoo magic provided by Manny. I just found it absurd that the color analyst ignored all the possible reasons other than the guy standing in the on-deck circle.

Lou’s going to get roasted for leaving Fukudome in the game. Not saying he did the wrong thing, but Cubs fans are very disappointed in Dome this year.

And why is he “driver” in the Captain Morgan commercial annoyed when he gets the text message?

1) Why did Lou let Zambrano hit in the bottom of the 6th?  He’d made 98 pitches, it was 6-0.  You need baserunners.  I realize he had a good year with the bat, but his lifetime OBA is .246.

2) Why did Ozzie use Brian Anderson to hit for DeWayne Wise?  Has he decided that he hates Nick Swisher (my favorite player, incidentally) so much that he’s even behind Anderson on a list of pinch-hitting candidates?

MGL - Because his friends take a picture with hot girls, acting as if the bar is the place to be. He gets there and it’s dead and the girls were just on a poster. He was going to have a good time, they called him to drive them home.

I think I watch too much TV.

Patriot - I’m not saying it’s right, but Anderson is at least decent against lefties and I believe Swisher has been especially bad (or especially unlucky, I haven’t looked it up) from the right side of the plate this year. I’m sure that’d be Ozzie’s answer if you asked him. Is it satisfactory? Probably not.

JD, no, when he gets the text message that says “O’Reilleys, Girls” he acts annoyed.  I know why he is annoyed when he gets there.

After getting a headache listening to almost 3 hours of Harold Reynolds, please give me Buck Martinez!  Reynolds!  Is!  Horrible!

In the same vein as Joe Morgan.  He never stops talking but there is very little signal and a whole lot of noise.  I forgot how nice it was while he was gone.

watching Kevin Youk. at the plate you would think it’s raining. I never seen a guy sweat so much!!

The guy who announced the game with (can’t remember his name) H. Reynolds is also really annoyed too with him. He eventually stopped talking after 2nd inning because Reynolds couldn’t stop ranting about every little darn thing. I think Reynolds is trying really hard to get his job back.

Torii Hunter: funniest thing of the postseason thus far.

He had a good beef.  I think it was at least a tie.  Not sure though.

Why does Buck Martinez keep telling us what great command Dice-K has with his pitches?

Buck, why do you think he has 174 walks this season?  174! Granted, he likes to nibble and he doesn’t like to throw pitches down the middle when behind in the count, and thus intentionally sacrifices some control, but NO ONE with 174 walks has great command or control.

Also, when a pitcher has a 3-run lead in the 5th and walks the first 2 guys, there is a good chance that he does not have great control.

Buck, DICE-K HAS A LOT OT THINGS GOING FOR HIM.  GREAT COMMAND IS NOT ONE OF THEM.

That would be 174 walks over two seasons.

Matsuzaka had a lower strike rate this year than Oliver Perez and Barry Zito.

Either Buck or Caray said “Dice-K is starting to lose his command.”

.....as if he ever had any.

And Dice-K better not come out in the 6th.

Why would Tito allow Okajima to stay and face Vladdy?

And I would have had Papelbon start the 8th inning.

Why does Francona suddenly believe Masterson is superior to Delcarmen? Delcarmen has much better predictive stats both this year and last. And I agree with the above post: Papelbon should have started the eighth.

Why would Tito allow Okajima to stay and face Vladdy?

Because managers like to think that they have to do something unconventional to prove that they are geniuses.  Of course Masterson is the right move there.  It’s not even close.

And I would have had Papelbon start the 8th inning.

Yes, of course he should have.  He could have used him for 2 innings or if the Sox scored 3 or more in the 9th, he could bring someone else in the 9th.  These is the frickin post-season and managers should be well prepared to use their best pitchers for 2 innings (or the 7th or 8th only) if necessary.

Why do people get so easily impressed with any play that involves reaching for something?  Anyone with moderately decent hand-eye coordination could have made the catch that Youkilis just did.

Is any pitcher ever going to throw Howie Kendrick a strike again?

He is a guy that had very good MLE’s in 05 and 06 and has been a mediocre batter (about average for a 2B) the last 2 years.

He was supposed to be an eventual “batting champion,” no?

I have not seen him much in the majors (in fact, I don’t recall any of his AB), but he looked as bad as anyone could look tonight.

Rally?

These is the frickin post-season and managers should be well prepared to use their best pitchers for 2 innings (or the 7th or 8th only) if necessary.

It’s not just that - it’s that Papelbon was not “his guy” before the triple, but magically was after it?  I understand needing Papelbon in that situation, where the value of a strikeout is so high, but if he was prepared to use Papelbon with a man on third and nobody out, he should have been ready to use Papelbon at the start of the inning.

Howie looked as bad as possible the last 2 nights.  He’s had stretches like this before, usually when he just comes off the DL and has no timing and/or is overanxious.  There’s no reason to throw him a strike right now.

Eventually his approach improves, he takes enough pitches to make the pitcher throw at least close to the strike zone, and Howie runs off 15 hits in 25 at bats or so.  Then he pulls a hamstring, sits out a month, and comes back looking clueless again.  Give him 5-10 more games and his timing will be back, but if he doesn’t start hitting tomorrow it’s a moot point.

Funny thing was that I though he had his best chance against Papelbon, who rarely throws sliders and doesn’t have a curve ball.  Then he (Kendrick) goes and swings at a fastball at his shoulders (actually Paps did throw him 2 sliders).

While I am on the “commercials which make no sense” kick, they show someone holding an iphone playing video games.  The graphic at the end is “the funniest iphone ever.” Why is it “funny?” “Fun” maybe, but funniest makes no sense.

And I still want to know why the guy is annoyed when he gets the text message that his friends are in a bar with girls.  If he was busy and so annoyed, why did he go?

The graphic at the end is “the funniest iphone ever.”

i think it says, “The funnest iPod ever.”

iPod, iPhone, what is “funny” about it?

d00d, it’s, like, totally hip. Everyone has one. It makes you, like, cool and different. Don’t you grog?

It’s not funny.  It’s fun.  In fact, it’s the funnest (not funniest) iPod ever.

The iphone is friggin’ garbage. Don’t get one.

i think it says, “The funnest iPod ever.”

Now, I get it.  I misread “funnest” for “funniest.”

Now we are left with the guy annoyed when he gets the text message and Cal, off-camera, saying, “Really?” with an intonation that makes no sense to me.

MGL:  Regarding H. Reynolds and Joe Morgan--I totally agree.  They are both SO bad that I refuse to listen to them.  I’ve discovered a wonderful alternative--it’s called the Mute Button.  I press it once, and they are silent!!  You really should try it.  The silence is marvelous, and who needs those chumps to tell us what’s going on?

Yeah, the mute button is good.  It gets a little boring after a while, but it may be better than listening to those drones.  In the old days, a lot of people listened to the radio while watching the game on TV.  Radio announcers are usually much better than TV ones.  I don’t know that people do that much anymore. I’m not sure why.

I would love to see, just once, a manager start the 9th with his lefty reliever (with a lefty or two batter coming up of course) and THEN bring in his closer, especially when that closer is not dominant, like Torres.

People do - they’ll even use their TiVos to sync the game broadcast up with the radio.

There’s often a delay on either the TV or the radio broadcast, and it results in a really annoying offset.

And of course, if any of the announcers had ever actually played baseball, as opposed to sabermetricians, they would know that it makes virtually no difference whether that the run scored or the runners were sent back to second and third.  The only difference is that if the next batter wallks there is now a force at any base (as opposed to if the run scores and there is a runner on third only and the next batter walks, there is only a force at second).  In fact, if I were the Brewers, I’d probably trade the meaningless run for not having a runner on second to possibly steal the signs or distract the pitcher.

Maybe I’m crazy here, but Stockton just said that Ramirez got a ball on “a very close pitch,” and I’m thinking to myself, “If it was close the catcher wouldn’t have set up behind the left-handed batter’s box.”

Now the announcers just talked about how Harden would love to get a double play. With two outs in the inning. Seriously?

Not that it matters - Harden gives up a double.

And Stockton now thinks that Edmonds, Cubs CF, grounded out to Mike Fontenot, Cubs 2B.

Geez.

What the heck is the purpose of throwing four pitches during an intentional walk? Anyone?

The game is slow enough as it is. The comissioner sometimes talks about speeding up the game. He can start with the IBB.

Occasionally, the pitcher F’s up during the IBB and something interesting happens.  I’ve seen a few wild pitches on IBB’s, and I think I remember Miguel Cabrera actually hitting a HR off one before a couple years back.

Which should be an immediate banishment to the minors, really.

Thoroughly enjoyed that. Fun for the whole family. Bring the kids.

I think I’m pulling for the Rays from here on out. (The postseason, I mean.)

Now everyone is gonna be saying Joe Torre is some sort of genuis. BS in my opinion. Nonetheless it was fun to watch the Cubs go down in a such an embarrassment.

You and I obviously have very different definitions of fun.

different is good! that’s what makes us, humans, unique IMO.

In high school I think, you don’t have to throw 4 balls for an IBB.  Just tell the umpire. Of course there is always the “mouth pass” where you go to your mouth 4 times while on the mound, although I think the umpire can toss a pitcher for repeated violation of that rule.

I agree that one small way to speed up the game is to get rid of the 4 ball IBB. I don’t think that the fact that the a pitcher occasionally F’s up is a good reason not to get rid of it.  It’s not like we hold our breaths while a pitcher issues the IBB, just waiting for a WP or a pitch in the zone.

BTW, I forgot who it was - I think it was Johnny Bench - but on a 3-2 count, the manager called for the fake IBB and the pitchers threw the ball over the plate for strike 3.  I think that ever since then, every batter is on his toes for a pitcher in the zone. Kind of a waste of energy.

Another thing they should do to speed up the game, is to have a quick replay from camera booth about the close calls at 1st base. They can do it within 5 to 10 sec.

Intstead having the coach run out there and dispute it for over 2 min. Kinda like tennis the get something like 2 challenges and if they lose the call the lose a challange.

One MLB ump. once said (didn’t give his name) that “using cameras for things like that would slow the game down.” WHAT!

If that’s what he really said, then he is probably afraid of losing his job down the road to a camera.  I doubt that would happen.

Regarding the fake intentional walk, I thought I remembered that it was AGAINST Bench, and not with him behind the plate, so I did a Google search and found it in an article about Dick Williams.  Williams was managing the A’s in the 1972 World Series when the A’s struck out Bench on a fake intentional walk.  The article said Gene Tenace was behind the plate (the pitcher may have been Rollie Fingers).

Yes, that’s what I meant - Bench at bat.

Is my memory going or didn’t a mgr in MLB used to be able to “call for” an IBB and the batter just went to first?  I seem to recall that MLB then changed the rule so a pitcher now actually has to throw the four pitches....

Why was Ellsbury awarded a single (where the 3 runs scored) in that goof up? I don’t understand.

It’s generally accepted that when no error is charged when a fielder doesn’t touch the ball.  It’s a dumb policy, but so is the whole concept of the error.

I just turned on the Red Sox game.

“What a job by Francisco Rodriguez—walking the bases loaded and then getting Jed Lowrie to line out to right field.”

Um, that doesn’t sound very impressive!!

Manufacture.

I heard that word 83 times tonight. 72 of those times coming from the mouth of Chip Caray.

Arthur, he was not “awarded” anything.  The ball fell in without anyone attempting to catch it, whether they could or they couldn’t, so it was a hit.  Ellsbury only made it to first, so it was a single.

Yes, one of the silly unwritten rules in baseball is that when a player or player does not go for a ball because they think someone else is going to catch it, it is usually scored as hit.  Obviously that should be an error.  The other scoring decision I don’t like is when an outfielder takes a bad route or gets turned around, the ball falls untouched and the scorer scores it as a hit.

Official scorers seem to be stuck in Little League where the unofficial rule is that if a ball is not touched, even if it goes through a fielder’s legs, a hit is awarded to the batter.

Harvey, I am pretty sure (99.9%) that there was never an automatic IBB in baseball.  Certainly not in my lifetime.

#88, you know how it is, no matter what a pitcher does, if no runs score, “He did a great job.” He could let up 2 screaming singles, a 4-pitch walk and a 429-foot fly ball to the warning track, and he “did a great job.” For some reasons, announcers will never admit when a pitcher pitches like crap and gets out of an inning by the skin of his teeth through sheer luck.

And how many times do we have to listen to Buck Martinez tell us what pitch the pitcher is going to throw and then be wrong 50% of the time?  I said this before, but as a catcher for 15 years or so, doesn’t he realize that if he could tell us what pitch the pitcher is going to throw, so could the batter?

I am not sure who was left in the pen, and Byrd is an awfully bad pitcher, but bringing in Lopez to face 2 righties to start the 12th seemed like an awfully bad decision. I was also surprised that he threw so many fastballs to those righty hitters, especially with 2 strikes.

Of course, Martinez was telling us that he wasn’t just one of those mid 80’s lefty pitchers - that he had an “overpowering fastball (direct quote from Buck).” Lopez then proceeded to throw 86-88 from what I can recall, hardly overpowering.

I love to see stupid trends (and misconceptions) go down in flames:

1) The Cubs and Dempster can’t lose at home.

2) Beckett is a big game post-season pitcher - never loses a post-season game.

3) Suppan is a veteran presence that you want in your post-season rotation.

BTW, does anyone know why all of a sudden, only in Firefox, when I go to the comments section (all of them) of this blog, the font is so small?  It just started the other day.  The initial page is fine and everything else in my browser is fine.  If I change the font on this page (the comments page) to look normal, all the fonts on every other page are too large.

Any help?

The most annoying stuff that Caray said in this postseason was how everything was coming from 2 outs (singles, doubles, runs etc...) I mean he really beat this trend to a bloody poll. He went as far is to say “that double came with 2 outs and 2 STRIKES in the inning, that’s amazing!” That guy is a square. He sounds like a really nice guy; nonetheless he is a square!

Mick is right, they really do talk about some stupid trends, and way to often. I wonder many years from now, like 20, if this sillyness still exists.

BTW, did you guys see what they did in the Cubs dugout before game 2 started. “They” (Lou or whoever) brought in a priest to go around with a censer. I might have become a beliver if they didn’t lose that night. Just kidding.

1. Show of hands please: who sticks with the game through commercials with mid-inning relief changes?  That’s my cue to watch 2 minutes of House.  That guy is a funny f-ck.

2. Are those TBS graphics the worst graphics in the last 30 years?  At first, I thought, good, we will see the boxscore for the guy’s at bat showing what happened, where the ball landed, who fielded it, what the pitch count was, where the runner finished the inning.  You know, a standard boxscore that you would fill out if you were really into scoring.  What do we get?  What I would fill out the very first day in my life I learned how to score a game.  That is the least amount of information per amount of graphic ever conceived. 

The graphics at the top showing the game state (score, runners, out, inning, count) are perfect, and exactly what I need when I need to explain what is going on with my wife, the few times she is too tired to leave the couch.  She can actually follow along.

She also made a point that while she doesn’t like most baseball movies, her pick for best baseball movie was… Naked Gun.  I can’t disagree with her there.

I expected to see some praise for the Phillies manager for pinch-hitting for Moyer in the top of the fifth with a man on first and one out.

I wasn’t watching that game, but if that’s what he did, then good job.

1. Show of hands please: who sticks with the game through commercials with mid-inning relief changes?  That’s my cue to watch 2 minutes of House.  That guy is a funny f-ck.

Not I. I definitely get a snack, use the bathroom, check my email, get some work done, etc.  Apparently, the target demographic for these games are fifty year old men (Viva! Viagra, Cialis, Flomax, Charles Schwab) who need to be reminded over and over again that erections lasting more than four hours require immediate medical attention.

Speaking of target demographics...what makes me sad is that, in a few years when my son is old enough to enjoy watching games (IF he enjoys watching games), he’ll have to go to bed before all the good stuff.  I don’t think I could justify having him stay up late for a month straight.  Any tips from people with older kids?

Anyone else think it was weird that K-Rod only pitched one inning last night?

I’m a little behind, but I generally don’t visit here on the weekend.  I was at Saturday’s Phil. @ Mil. game and a few things really bugged me:

1. Letting Villanueva bat in the 6th instead of using another pitcher in the 7th or double-switching (probably Gwynn for Hart) in the top of the 6th when they brought in V.

2. Letting Gagne face Utley (bottom 8) and then Torres face Howard (top 9) instead of bringing in Shouse to face them both.  I don’t think Shouse even warmed up in that game. Screw the save!

3. Fans bitching about taking out Bush in the 6th because “he was pitching well” or “he only had 85 pitches” when Howard was at bat and the pitcher’s spot was coming up in the 7th.

4. Double switching Eyre in so he can face Fielder was fine, but then leaving him in to face Hardy and Hart was stupid in a close game.  Then, MIL pinch hits (lefty) Brad Nelson when noone is warming up in PHI’s bullpen.

Just terrible in-game strategy.

K-Rod threw 33 pitches in that inning, and just barely scraped his way out of it.  I was happy to see Weaver come in, because at that point I didn’t think K-Rod had much more to give.

If I was managing at that point, I would have had Weaver treat it like a start in case the extra innings continued, have him pitch 7-8 innings if need be.  He’s well rested, hadn’t pitched in about a week.

33 pitches ties his season high.  Good news is last time he threw that many pitches, he came back the next day to pitch a scoreless inning and a save.  So if the Angels can get him the ball tonight, he should be ready.  Shields will have no problem, and while I’m not sure about Arredondo’s recovery ability given the situation they’ll have to push him.

I doubt Weaver will pitch again, he’s never tried pitching back to back days before.  Another extra inning game and I bet we would see Garland instead.

I’m a little behind, but I generally don’t visit here on the weekend.  I was at Saturday’s Phil. @ Mil. game and a few things really bugged me:

1. Letting Villanueva bat in the 6th instead of using another pitcher in the 7th or double-switching (probably Gwynn for Hart) in the top of the 6th when they brought in V.

2. Letting Gagne face Utley (bottom 8) and then Torres face Howard (top 9) instead of bringing in Shouse to face them both.  I don’t think Shouse even warmed up in that game. Screw the save!

3. Fans bitching about taking out Bush in the 6th because “he was pitching well” or “he only had 85 pitches” when Howard was at bat and the pitcher’s spot was coming up in the 7th.

4. Double switching Eyre in so he can face Fielder was fine, but then leaving him in to face Hardy and Hart was stupid in a close game.  Then, MIL pinch hits (lefty) Brad Nelson when noone is warming up in PHI’s bullpen.

How about:

5.  Starting Suppan instead of Gallardo?

Starting Suppan over anyone was a poor decision.  As I have said, he is a near replacement level pitcher who has benefited from some good w/l records, good ERA’s, good defense when with STL, a good post-season and WS with STL, and just some general overall undeserved over-evaluation over the years. a 33-yo pitcher with a lifetime ERA of 4.63 and a career K rate of 5 per 9 IP (4.8 the last 3 years) just ain’t a good pitcher.  You don’t throw someone like that in a post-season elimination game unless you absolutely have to.

But....but...he’s a big game pitcher!

"Garret Anderson, usually a very patient hitter, swinging at the first pitch against Lester.”

I hate baseball announcers so freaking much…

Buck says, “by walking of the mound like (on a 2-2 to Tex.)Lester is NOT going to get that call, if he tries to throw in that area” On the next pitch Lester throws a pitch almost in same spot gets the K. Nice call Buck!

MGL/89:  I think the Firefox problem must be in your cmptr.  I use Firefox and haven’t noticed anything.  Tried a reboot?

Has there been any work done on whether there’s a penalty to a switch hitter for an at-bat when he has to switch in the middle of a game?

For instance, let’s say Teixeira is a better left handed hitter (I’m not sure that he is, but pretend). Given that Lester has now thrown 109 pitches, is there an advantage to switching Teix from right to left in the middle of a game?

I have seen Coco Crisp switching sides in a middle of the game. I’m not sure if it was against the same or a different pitcher. Is your question about switching sides against the same pitcher?

Why would Francona use Masterson ahead of Papelbon or even Delcarmen? That’s just awful.

No. I mean if a guy has been batting left handed all game versus a righty, is there a penalty (sort of like the pinch hitter penalty) for bringing a lefty pitcher in and making the guy switch sides.

Nick: I like the idea for a study.

I agree w/MGL on using Lopez last night, and Phil/106 on using Masterson tonight.  Delcarmen should have started the eight inning, and he certainly should have started the ninth.  Two games in a row Tito’s made lousy pitching decisions

Nick I did some research on Google and someone wrote this:

“The only restriction is that the batter cannot switch when the pitcher is on the rubber.

I saw this the other day. The batter started out LH because he wanted to try to drag bunt. After this failed attempt, he went back to his standard RH stance.

The rules also dictate in an ambidextrous pitcher situation that the pitcher may change hands only once during at AB. The rules also state that after the pitcher has changed, the batter is permitted to change only one time.

In the first example, (switching boxes while the P is on the rubber) the batter is out.

However, in my second example (ambixtrous pitcher) there is no penalty for either except that if either continue to switch they would be ejected.

that the only restriction is you can only do it once at-bat switch sides even if they bring in a different pitcher.”

Hope this answers your question.

Tried a reboot?

yes, as I said, it started a few days ago, and it is pissing me off.  Everything else is fine except the comments pages on this blog.

Tito seems to be in love with Masterson.  I assume that Del Carmen is better.  Masterson might be someone you use when you need a ground ball/DP.  With 2 outs runners on 2 and 3, all you need is an out.  Should have used Del Carmen or Paps there.

There is going to be controversy about that tag on the busted squeeze, especially if Boston wins the game.  Many umpires, maybe even most, would have called Willits safe after Tek dropped that ball.

Well, big win for Boston.  Good luck Tampa, the Cinderella team of the post-season.

Hey Mick, did you lay anything down for the Rays to win the ALDS or ALCS this year or just the WS?

The squeeze play: he dropped the ball after hitting the ground.  No controversy.

***

Willits dives for a play, where 90% of the time, it’s an out or inside-the-parker.  The other 10% of the time, it’s a double.  If he doesn’t dive, it’s a double.

With 1 out, the Sox had a 58% chance of winning.  If Willits lets it drop, the Sox go to 70%.  That’s the starting point.  An out sends it back to 53%.  A dive and miss means game over (100%).  So, -17% for Sox if an out, and +30% if HR.  For Willits to dive, he’s got to be almost twice more sure to make the out than not. 

That was a reckless desperate play.  He’s lucky that the ball bounced out of play for a double.

What’s the analysis on the suicide squeeze call?

It was funny because I said “I wonder if Scioscia calls a squeeze?” and then they play was on. Not exactly a surprising move by Mike. Even worse, it looked like a pretty lackadasical attempt by Aybar. I mean, you HAVE to get a bat on the ball. He just sort of looked like “opps...”

Matt

Hey Mick, did you lay anything down for the Rays to win the ALDS or ALCS this year or just the WS?

A few bucks in Vegas on TB for the division, pennant, and WS.  Couldn’t resist.  I think it was 30-1, 50-1 and 100-1.

The suicide squeeze with a good bunter is almost always a good play.  The only reason you can’t do it that often is that it is too easy to defend against (pitchout).  Game theory brings down the correct percentage to something pretty low (10%, 20%?).  Managers probably do it less than they should, because they don’t like risky plays and plays that make them (as opposed to the batter) look bad.

Tango, you can’t assume an inside the parker when the guy makes a decision to dive.  First of all, if it doesn’t bounce in the stands, I think it is 50% a triple and 50% a HR.  From the standpoint of Willits making the decision, I think it is like 20% double, 20% HR, and 70% triple.  Or something like that.  Certainly not 100% HR if he misses it.  Probably still a bad play since the difference between a single (or double) and a triple with 1 out is a lot.

On second thought I agree with the dropped ball thing, I was thinking it was like a catch in the OF, where if the ball drops out of the glove when the fielder hits the ground it is no catch, even if he has control of it in the air or before he hits the ground.  On the other hand, there are definitely some umps that will call that runner safe as soon as he sees that Varitek drops the ball.  In fact, I am not sure at what point the boundary is between safe and out.  If the play is at home and the catcher clearly has the ball in his control, and the runner knocks the ball out of his hand, he is safe, even though he may have had control at the moment of impact.  Trust me, a lot of umpires would have called the runner safe and I don’t think that would have been all that controversial.

I agree with Mick’s, catcher at home plate, analogy:

“If the play is at home and the catcher clearly has the ball in his control, and the runner knocks the ball out of his hand, he is safe, even though he may have had control at the moment of impact.”

I think the ump. had him called out (in his head) before the fact of the dropped ball. Then for whatever reason he choose NOT to reverse the call. If he was “ more open minded” and/or showed more patients( now and then, I see some umps more patient than others before making the judgement call) the call may have went Angeles way. I think it should have. I’m just speculating.

During Game Summary, one announcer gave the American Football analogy. He said something like, “if a football player has possesion of the football then he goes down for whatever reason and his knee(s) hit the ground in fair ground, and the ball pops out of the hands then the play is dead and it’s not considered a fumble.”

I don’t see how this is relevant tonights baseball play, but that’s what was said to justify for what happened to Variteck.

As I said, I think the ump made the right call, but I also think it could have gone the other way with little fanfare or controversy.

That being said, Varitek should have thrown the ball to whomever was covering third base.  Diving after him at the last minute was not a good play.  He barely made the tag and the runner was like 3 feet from the bag.

Mick, do you agree with the umps. call because that’s the correct call in the mlb rule book? (which I dunno myself if it is, or isn’t technically speaking) or because you just agree?

Nevermind Mick, I don’t care anymore. After the game the umpire stated that, Varitek had possesion of the ball in his glove when he applied the tag, so the ball popping out of the glove after hitting the ground doesn’t matter in this case. Next time, I’ll do some snooping around before I ask a question. I also take alomost everything back from post #117.

Arthur, you have a point actually.

Varitek had possesion of the ball in his glove when he applied the tag...

I don’t necessarily buy that argument from the umpire.  Isn’t that also the case when the runner knocks the ball out of the catcher’s mitt in a collision at home plate?  The catcher has possession of the ball when the tag is applied.  But the runner is ruled safe.

The umpire should have said that if the collision knocks the ball out of the glove, then the runner will be ruled safe, but if the ball is knocked out of the glove after the tag is made, for whatever reason, then, the runner is ruled out.

Even that argument does not necessarily work in some cases.  What if the fielder makes the tag while in complete possession of the ball and then immediately drops the ball after the tag?  Not while taking the ball out of the glove but just drops the ball after the tag.  Again, most umpires will rule the runner safe even though the fielder had complete control over the ball when the tag was applied.  So I don’t think the “control when the tag is applied” explanation is a good one.

As I said, I think the ruling was correct and I don’t think it will generate much controversy or disagreement.  On the other hand, if the call went the other way, I don’t think it would have generated much controversy either.  One of those coin flips, like a “tie” between the runner and first baseman at first base.

I don’t think there is anything in the rule book regarding this play.  I think it is one of those things that they go over in umpire’s school or at their meetings, or at least they should.  What happens when a fielder makes a tag on a runner and then drops the ball?  What happens when a fielder dives or falls while tagging a runner and the ball pops out when the fielder or his glove hits the ground?

BTW, I just looked up my current projections for Del Carmen and Masterson.  Manny is much, much, much better than Masterson. In fact, Masterson is not even very good and Del Carmen is closer quality.

There was no excuse for Francona to use Masterson in the 8th rather than Del Carmen.  Other than righty/lefty switches, the clear order of relievers should be Paps, then Okajima or Del Carmen, and then everyone else a distant 3rd.

Toto sure made a lot of basic mistakes this series.  As far as I am concerned, he is no great tactician by any means.  With all the analysts working for his team, how hard is to advise him to use his best relievers in high leverage situations and his worst in low leverage. It is not like the gap between Del Carmen and Masterson is small.  It isn’t.

Also, Francona’s refusal to ever bunt is really bad.  As I have always said, while teams tend to sac too often, being predictable in either direction is really bad.  If the infield does not expect a bunt from you or they are agnostic, then with a decent bunter who is fast, a bunt is really in order, if for nothing else it forces the defense to play closer so that when you don’t bunt, you get more hits.

The perfect bunting strategy is to mix up your bunts and non-bunts randomly.  Being predictable in either direction is really bad baseball.  The best way to do that is to actually mix it up during an AB.  If you don’t do that, then the defense knows exactly what you are going to do after the first pitch.  And the batters who give away the fact that they are bunting by squaring early - well, that is just ridiculous. Of course, most managers believe that a bunt is so important when they do bunt, that they don’t care whether the defense knows it or not.  What they don’t realize is that the knowledge and position of the defense is critical to the overall success of the bunt.  Without those singles and errors, a sac bunt attempt is almost a terrible strategy…

This was what was said “word for word”:

“Manager Mike Scioscia was left to argue that his runner should have been safe at third.

Umpire Tim Welke disagreed, insisting that Varitek held the ball long enough to tag out Willits even though it popped loose when the catcher hit the ground. This was not a case where the ground can’t cause a fumble.

“That’s the NFL,” said Steve Palermo, the Major League supervisor of umpires, after the game. “We don’t have that in baseball. He had possession of the ball when he made the tag.”

What about the other day in Mil. playoff game. The ball was hit to the right field. The right fielder “made” an amazing leaping catch, then he rolled in a funky way with the ball in his glove, and then ball poped out. The Ump. didn’t consider that an out. He held it as long as did Veritek, IMO.

So, it is what it is. I guess the ball lingered long enough in the glove to make that OUT call. I also think the call could have gone either way. Who knows.. Soscia, as a former catcher, ran out there for a reason, right? Maybe, he was just desperate.

Maybe, this is where home field advantages has a role to play. I’m kidding of course, but possible… Maybe or maybe and more maybe’s, that’s life.

I agree using Paps or Del Carmen in before Masterson, BUT consider the following:

1) Francona knew something about his relivers that night that you didn’t. Personally, I think he went of his feeling, as they often do.

2)As for Masterson vs. Del Carmen. Francona went of what have you done for me lately scenerio, I think.

3)Some announcers said he didn’t use Pap. in the 8th because he was used to much already in the series. Last night he was used for 2 inn.

"The umpire should have said that if the collision knocks the ball out of the glove, then the runner will be ruled safe, but if the ball is knocked out of the glove after the tag is made, for whatever reason, then, the runner is ruled out. “

Right.  Varitek had possession of the ball while he was running.  So, that part was not in doubt.  He applied the tag with the ball in his hand.  That was not in doubt.  He tumbled, and at some point (hitting the ground), the ball popped.

This is unlike a play at the plate where upon collision, it’s hard to tell if the ball popped out on collision, or following collision.

As for the catch in the OF, it’s not the same because at no time did the umpire know that the ball was in the glove in terms of complete possession.

MGL, do you have Masterson projected as a starter or reliever?  He began the year starting, wasn’t very good, and finished it up from the pen and has been excellent.  SSS to be sure, but he may very well be someone who improves substantially as a reliever (substantially meaning greater than that .70 ERA, or whatever you guys use for the typical starter-to-reliever improvement).