MLB: August 2012

[Asimovian]

Just watched a hell of a take out of an umpire in the Indians-Angels game (home plate umpire took a Torii Hunter spiked foot to the head on a slide). I've seen occasions before where umpires worked as a three-man crew. Has there ever been an occasion where two umpires were lost? What do the rules say about that? Can they work as two, or would they have to suspend the game?

[diku]

So the Reds are 7 up on both the Cards and Bucs. I was concerned about tonight after both the huge emotional win last night and going against Dickey.

So I think I had a question answered for me during the game tonight, but I'm not sure. Do they still allow the catcher a larger glove for the knuckleball? I heard the Red's broadcasters talking about the Met's catcher have a bigger mitt than normal, but is that something the Reds could've made a big deal about?

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

Originally Posted by diku

So the Reds are 7 up on both the Cards and Bucs. I was concerned about tonight after both the huge emotional win last night and going against Dickey.

So I think I had a question answered for me during the game tonight, but I'm not sure. Do they still allow the catcher a larger glove for the knuckleball? I heard the Red's broadcasters talking about the Met's catcher have a bigger mitt than normal, but is that something the Reds could've made a big deal about?

I hadn't heard about that. But I am glad the Reds have reeled off five in a row now...after losing five in a row. Break out the brooms for tonight!

[Asimovian]

Originally Posted by Asimovian

Just watched a hell of a take out of an umpire in the Indians-Angels game (home plate umpire took a Torii Hunter spiked foot to the head on a slide). I've seen occasions before where umpires worked as a three-man crew. Has there ever been an occasion where two umpires were lost? What do the rules say about that? Can they work as two, or would they have to suspend the game?

Apparently, the answer to my own question is that you can have only one umpire.

Rule 9.03
a. If there is only one umpire, he shall have complete jurisdiction in administering the rules. He may take any position on the playing field which will enable him to discharge his duties (usually) behind the catcher, but sometimes behind the pitcher if there are runners).

b. If there are two or more umpires, one shall be designated umpire-in-chief and the others field umpires.

[jsc1953]

Originally Posted by Asimovian

Apparently, the answer to my own question is that you can have only one umpire.

Rule 9.03
a. If there is only one umpire, he shall have complete jurisdiction in administering the rules. He may take any position on the playing field which will enable him to discharge his duties (usually) behind the catcher, but sometimes behind the pitcher if there are runners).

b. If there are two or more umpires, one shall be designated umpire-in-chief and the others field umpires.

As I understand it, 2-umpire crews are the norm in the low minors. You only see 4-man crews in the bigs.

(I've done games on a 90 foot diamond solo...not a desirable situation, especially on steals of 2B. 2-man is not bad, and for 90% of plays you've got an ump in good position.)

[Asimovian]

Originally Posted by jsc1953

As I understand it, 2-umpire crews are the norm in the low minors. You only see 4-man crews in the bigs.

(I've done games on a 90 foot diamond solo...not a desirable situation, especially on steals of 2B. 2-man is not bad, and for 90% of plays you've got an ump in good position.)

I'm just wondering whether or not there has been on occasion where they've had to go 2-man (or less!) in the majors. Any idea?

I used to go to a number of A-ball games when I lived closer to Rancho Cucamonga. I guess I never paid attention to the umpires!

[jsc1953]

Originally Posted by Asimovian

I'm just wondering whether or not there has been on occasion where they've had to go 2-man (or less!) in the majors. Any idea?

I used to go to a number of A-ball games when I lived closer to Rancho Cucamonga. I guess I never paid attention to the umpires!

Nope, never heard of an emergency 2-man. And I'm usually paying attention, so I doubt it's happened in living memory.

You don't pay attention to umpires??? Gasp! You're missing half the fun!

F'rinstance...Tuesday nights' Giants-Nationals game, Brandon Belt lined one off the LF wall, driving in a runner from 1B, but Belt got thrown out at 3B. The call was made by the plate umpire, because the 3B umpire went out to rule on the catch/no-catch/home run call. While the plate umpire was hustling up to 3B, you could see (on replay) the 1B umpire sprinting to the plate to make the call there, if needed. (That's the holy grail of umpire geekiness: being the 1B umpire and banging somebody out at the plate.)

[Asimovian]

Originally Posted by jsc1953

You don't pay attention to umpires??? Gasp! You're missing half the fun!

I admit it; they usually fade into the background for me unless they are doing something notably good or bad. Except when I'm actually at a game, when my wife and I like to note how often the home plate umpire succeeds or fails when rolling the ball onto the mound in between innings.

[silenus]

Come on. The umps at The Epicenter are right there. If you spring for the SuperBox seats ($12) they can hear every disparaging comment you make about the crew. That is why a) they cut off beer sales in the 7th, b) my wife sits behind me after about 3 innings, and c) I am familiar with the rule that says an ump can eject a fan from the park.

[Asimovian]

Is anyone actually watching the Dodgers-Pirates game this afternoon? I'm listening on the radio, and it seems like every inning, someone's getting thrown out for arguing with the rookie umpire behind the plate. Is he really that bad, or are the Dodgers just that twitchy today?

[silenus]

50/50. He's erratic and they're twitchy. The Dodgers were hoping for a sweep, but that looks doubtful.

[Southern Yankee]

Yanks lose today, but take 3 of 4 from the Rangers. Unfortunately, the scrappy Orioles have been keeping pace and a victory over the dysfunctional Red Sox tonight would allow them to stay 5 back.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

Originally Posted by Asimovian

I admit it; they usually fade into the background for me unless they are doing something notably good or bad. Except when I'm actually at a game, when my wife and I like to note how often the home plate umpire succeeds or fails when rolling the ball onto the mound in between innings.

That's a drinking game called mound ball!



I like watching the home plate umpires get into their strike and strikeout calls. I want them to yell out "STRIKE!" and emphatically gesture to their right. Some umps just kinda point their finger to the right. I need full arm usage! And I absolutely love the two-fisted arm motion that accompanies a strikeout.

[jsc1953]

Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil

And I absolutely love the two-fisted arm motion that accompanies a strikeout.

Then you'll like this.

[Southern Yankee]

Last night Derek Jeter joined Willie Mays as the the only players with 3,000 hits, 250 homers, 300 steals and 1,200 RBIs.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

Originally Posted by jsc1953

Then you'll like this.

Holy Shit!

"Also, it's weird to put a guy named "Jim Joyce" under a literalist label -- the dude practically invented Modernist umpiring -- but at least he gets a little weird with his, doing a floaty, smooth martial-arts thing that's reminiscent of a briefs-clad Martin Sheen in a Saigon hotel room."



That's awesome...thanks!

[RTFirefly]

Originally Posted by Southern Yankee

Last night Derek Jeter joined Willie Mays as the the only players with 3,000 hits, 250 homers, 300 steals and 1,200 RBIs.

The big difference being that Mays had 660 HRs and over 1,900 RBIs.

Bill James used to write about how you could tailor one of those 'clubs' for anyone that made it look like their peer group was a cut or two above what it really was.

Derek Jeter's had a great career, has had his ticket to Cooperstown punched for some time now, so there's no need to gild the lily like this.

[RickJay]

Originally Posted by RTFirefly

The big difference being that Mays had 660 HRs and over 1,900 RBIs.

Bill James used to write about how you could tailor one of those 'clubs' for anyone that made it look like their peer group was a cut or two above what it really was.

A good comp here would be Paul Molitor. Molitor is a much closer match to Jeter; 3319 hits, 234 homers, 1307 RBI, 506 steals. But he's not in the same defined group here as Jeter is, though he is obviously a much closer comparison to Jeter. Robin Yount is also similar; 3142 hits, 251 homers, 271 steals, 1406 RBI. Or Craig Biggio (the only player with 3000 hits and 250 homers who doesn't meet the 1200 RBI category - by just 25 RBI.)

[Southern Yankee]

Originally Posted by RTFirefly

The big difference being that Mays had 660 HRs and over 1,900 RBIs.

Bill James used to write about how you could tailor one of those 'clubs' for anyone that made it look like their peer group was a cut or two above what it really was.

Derek Jeter's had a great career, has had his ticket to Cooperstown punched for some time now, so there's no need to gild the lily like this.

I'm not claiming Jeter is the offensive equal of Mays. However, in a career that's currently 4 years shorter than Mays', Jeter has 35 less hits and 8 more stolen bases. He is, of course, far short in HR and RBI. They are different types of players, Jeter leading off or hitting 2nd most of his career.

[RTFirefly]

The Nats are in their longest sustained hot streak of the season, having won 21 of their last 27.

They've needed it, too, just to stay ahead - the Braves have won 18 of their last 23, and 28 of their last 38.

Meanwhile, the Reds, having won 6 of their last 7, have won 28 of their last 37, even with that 5-game losing streak in there.

[jsc1953]

Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil

Holy Shit!

"Also, it's weird to put a guy named "Jim Joyce" under a literalist label -- the dude practically invented Modernist umpiring -- but at least he gets a little weird with his, doing a floaty, smooth martial-arts thing that's reminiscent of a briefs-clad Martin Sheen in a Saigon hotel room."



That's awesome...thanks!

I personally like "Gwyneth Paltrow's Head in a Box".

[RTFirefly]

Originally Posted by RTFirefly

The Nats are in their longest sustained hot streak of the season, having won 21 of their last 27.

They've needed it, too, just to stay ahead - the Braves have won 18 of their last 23, and 28 of their last 38.

Meanwhile, the Reds, having won 6 of their last 7, have won 28 of their last 37, even with that 5-game losing streak in there.

Make that 7 of 8 and 29 of 38 for the Reds, since they won the day game of their day-night doubleheader.

I'm rooting for the Reds to be even hotter than the Nats, and edge them out for best record in the NL in the end. This is because of MLB's new playoff structure, which has fixed some problems from the old structure, but hardly all of them.

What it's fixed: it takes away the 'ho hum, we've got the wildcard clinched, who cares if we finished second in the division' thing from past years. That one-game playoff with the other wildcard means that your entry into the 'real' postseason of 5- and 7-game series is up for grabs in a one-game playoff where anything can happen. You really don't want to finish second in your division if first is within reach.

What it hasn't fixed: there's little difference between being the second- and third- best division winner, since they're guaranteed to play each other. Worse, the incentives may as often as not be backwards in terms of whether you'd want to be the best division winner, or the second-best one.

We've got a laboratory of 34 league-seasons since MLB went to three divisions in each league, and instituted the wildcard. In 21 of those league-seasons, the wildcard team had a better record than the third-best division winner. And in 10 of those seasons, the wild-card runnerup (which would be the second wildcard under the new structure) had a better record than the third-best division winner.

And that's the sort of reality we're contending with, this season. If you're the Reds or Nats, would you rather play the Braves, or the West winner, in the first round of the playoffs? That's easy: if the Braves keep playing like they've been How about the Pirates or the West winner? That's a closer call, but the Pirates still have a better record than the West teams.

If I were the Nats, I'd want to finish behind the Reds and ahead of the Braves. And if I were the Reds, I'd want to finish ahead of the Pirates, but behind the Nats. Because if the Braves win that one-game playoff, I want to play only one of the other two hottest teams in baseball in the postseason, not both of them.

Proponents of the new system say that the wildcard winner will have probably messed up its rotation by throwing its best pitcher into the wildcard game. I doubt it - they'll probably get to choose between two pitchers that will have four days' rest, and will pick the better one, but that's as far as it goes. And since they'll still have just one game, and two off days, between the end of the regular season and their first game in their five-game series against the team with the best record, the wildcard game isn't going to throw them very far out of whack.

I really think they should have designed this system so that the team with the best record could have played the team of the final four with the worst record, but that's not the way they did it. That's MLB - capable of doing a half-assed job with even a pretty good idea.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

Interesting take. What I really want for the Reds is very simple: to not flame out in the last month (which there is a chance of that happening...despite their relatively easy schedule they still have a series against the Cardinals, two against the Phillies and Pirates, and another against the Brewers, whom always seem to give them trouble...I am also concerned about the starting pitching getting fatigued. The innings are piling up, and its still the same five guys, with the exception of tonight when they put Redmond on the mound due to the doubleheader rule where they can bring up an extra player for the game...same five guys all season long! Its pretty remarkable.) and to win a playoff series.

I literally can't wait for Votto to come back and I hope he will provide that surge we need at the end of the season to avoid a meltdown and propel them into the playoffs as the divisional winner.

This is uncharted waters for the Reds since 1990. Even in the smattering of playoff appearances since, they are easily on pace to win 100 games or more this season. It makes me nervous! That's the aura surrounding Cincinnati sports teams lately...waiting for the other shoe to drop!

[RTFirefly]

Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil

I am also concerned about the starting pitching getting fatigued. The innings are piling up, and its still the same five guys, with the exception of tonight when they put Redmond on the mound due to the doubleheader rule where they can bring up an extra player for the game...same five guys all season long! Its pretty remarkable.) and to win a playoff series.

I obviously don't know the Reds' pitching staff very well, but just looking at the stats, it looks like everyone except Cueto is going to come in around 200 innings or a little less, for the regular season. Cueto seems to be headed for ~225 innings, which is ~40 more than his previous high, so that's somewhat concerning, especially if the Reds go as far as the NLCS.

This is uncharted waters for the Reds since 1990. Even in the smattering of playoff appearances since, they are easily on pace to win 100 games or more this season. It makes me nervous! That's the aura surrounding Cincinnati sports teams lately...waiting for the other shoe to drop!

It's hard for me to believe that a team could play .750 ball for nearly 40 games without having come together as a genuinely good team. It's not to say there won't still be downs as well as ups, but I can't see them falling apart.

See you in the NLCS, with any luck.

[dalej42]

Any reason Oakland/Tampa Bay don't play next Sunday, Aug 26? The Republican convention doesn't start unti lAug 27. I can't remember a team getting a scheduled Sunday off during the summer in a MLB season.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

Reds win again. The no-names are up to their old hijinks. Tied 4-4 with the woeful Cubs in the 9th, unknown Xavier Paul hits a leadoff triple, followed by a walkoff single by catcher Ryan Hanigan to ice the game 5-4. These Reds just keep finding a way...a different hero every night. I love that about this team. The are a true team. Also, Johnny Cueto became the first 15 game winner yesterday. Here's hoping he gets 20 wins this season.

[etv78]

Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil

Reds win again. The no-names are up to their old hijinks. Tied 4-4 with the woeful Cubs in the 9th, unknown Xavier Paul hits a leadoff triple, followed by a walkoff single by catcher Ryan Hanigan to ice the game 5-4. These Reds just keep finding a way...a different hero every night. I love that about this team. The are a true team. Also, Johnny Cueto became the first 15 game winner yesterday. Here's hoping he gets 20 wins this season.

They've also done all this without Joey Votto. When is he back? (if he isn't already)

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

A side question: can a reliever win the Cy Young award? I think Eric Gagne or Trevor Hoffman won it one year...can't remember, although I don't think Mariano Rivera ever did. If they can, then Aroldis Chapman deserves serious consideration for the award. His numbers are sick!

In 59 innings pitched he's 5-4 with 29 saves, a 1.37 ERA, allowed only 27 hits and 9 earned runs, has issued only 15 walks and struck out 108 (!!!!!!) batters. That's pretty fucking good. Is anyone else besides the greedy Yankees paying attention to this guy?

Also: Johnny Cueto has to be in the conversation too. He's on track for 20 wins and stands at 16-6 in 170 innings with 135 strikeouts, 46 earned runs, 37 BB and a 2.44 ERA. Who else in the National League besides maybe Dickey is putting up stats like that?

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

Originally Posted by etv78

They've also done all this without Joey Votto. When is he back? (if he isn't already)

I think the timetable still isn't clear. After his original procedure on his knee the prognosis was 3-4 weeks, but then he needed an additional procedure after some baserunning practice recently that included him sliding legs-first. I'm guessing he had some floaters in there that needed scoped out. If I were to guess I'd say within two weeks....which, if the Reds keep playing like they are without him, would be a HUGE lift right before playoff time.

[Acsenray]

Wow, Reds! I haven't felt like this since I was 7 years old.

[RTFirefly]

Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil

A side question: can a reliever win the Cy Young award? I think Eric Gagne or Trevor Hoffman won it one year...can't remember, although I don't think Mariano Rivera ever did.

Here's the past winners. Gagne won it once, as have Rollie Fingers, Bruce Sutter, and Sparky Lyle. So relievers can and have won the Cy.

[mhendo]

The Orioles overcame a 5-run first-inning deficit to beat the Tigers 7-5 and take the series 2-1. I've been quite impressed this year by their ability to come back, both early and late in games; it's something that they haven't done very well in recent years.

Has anyone seen this article about the Melky Cabrera steroid issue?

It seems that Cabrera, or someone close to him:

created a fictitious website and a nonexistent product designed to prove he inadvertently took the banned substance that caused a positive test under Major League Baseball’s drug program.

<snip>

The scheme began unfolding in July as Cabrera and his representatives scrambled to explain a spike in the former Yankee’s testosterone levels. Cabrera associate Juan Nunez, described by the player’s agents, Seth and Sam Levinson, as a “paid consultant” of their firm but not an “employee,” is alleged to have paid $10,000 to acquire the phony website. The idea, apparently, was to lay a trail of digital breadcrumbs suggesting Cabrera had ordered a supplement that ended up causing the positive test, and to rely on a clause in the collectively bargained drug program that allows a player who has tested positive to attempt to prove he ingested a banned substance through no fault of his own.

Wow! If true, that's quite an elaborate scheme.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

Originally Posted by Acsenray

Wow, Reds! I haven't felt like this since I was 7 years old.

I'm guessing you are re-visiting the mid to late 1970's?

Originally Posted by RTFirefly

Here's the past winners. Gagne won it once, as have Rollie Fingers, Bruce Sutter, and Sparky Lyle. So relievers can and have won the Cy.

I would love for a Red to win that award this year, hopefully on top of a playoff series win.

[RTFirefly]

Nats win, Braves lose, Nats now up by 5 going into a 3-game series between the two clubs. Go Nats!!

[RickJay]

Originally Posted by RTFirefly

Here's the past winners. Gagne won it once, as have Rollie Fingers, Bruce Sutter, and Sparky Lyle. So relievers can and have won the Cy.

Also Dennis Eckersley, Steve Bedrosian, Willie Hernandez, Mike Marshall, and Mark Davis, just going by memory. There may be others.

In 1950, before they invented the Cy Young Award, relief pitcher Jim Konstanty won the MVP Award.

[Acsenray]

Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil

I'm guessing you are re-visiting the mid to late 1970's?

You got it.

[Mister Rik]

Mariners beat the Twins to complete their seventh series sweep of the year and their fifth win in a row; they're 22-13 since the All-Star break. Things are really starting to look up in Seattle.

Also, Astros have the worst record in the Majors?

*ahem*

"As a Seattle Mariners fan, I hereby extend the hand of friendship and a warm welcome to the Houston Astros as they join the American League West next season."

Originally Posted by mhendo

Has anyone seen this article about the Melky Cabrera steroid issue?

It seems that Cabrera, or someone close to him:Wow! If true, that's quite an elaborate scheme.

And one that would only hold up, I would think, as long as MLB didn't ask Cabrera and/or his people to produce the physical product ...

[Tom Scud]

Originally Posted by RickJay

Also Dennis Eckersley, Steve Bedrosian, Willie Hernandez, Mike Marshall, and Mark Davis, just going by memory. There may be others.

In 1950, before they invented the Cy Young Award, relief pitcher Jim Konstanty won the MVP Award.

Generally speaking, for a reliever to win there has to be no starter having an obvious standout year. I wouldn't expect any relief pitcher to get the nod over Cueto this year, for instance (unless he craters).

[ElvisL1ves]

The Dead Sox have officially surrendered. Carl Crawford was trying to contribute with his bum elbow as long as they had a chance. But now the focus is on being healthy for 2013. The Tommy John is tomorrow. And the soap opera plots are blossoming in the meanwhile.

If only they had a reasonably MLB-ready starter or two in AAA, they could bench the worse-than-useless Beckett. But they're stuck with him. He can't even go to the bullpen, since he takes all day to warm up.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

Originally Posted by RickJay

In 1950, before they invented the Cy Young Award, relief pitcher Jim Konstanty won the MVP Award.

So he was winning it all the time?

[bup]

Say, RTFirefly, if you have access to Nats' playoff tix when the time comes, and you buy an extra one for your buddy bup, I'd appreciate it.

-Nats fan in Chicago

[Asimovian]

Those of us in the NL West will have eyes on a couple of series this week. The Dodgers and the Cabrera-less Giants play each other in LA through Wednesday of this week while the ever-lurking Diamondbacks are at home against Miami hoping to benefit from the mayhem. Should be a fun time. I have the pleasure of attending tomorrow night's Dodger game to collect my Fernando Valenzuela bobbleheads.

[madmonk28]

I'm going to the Nats/Braves tonight and tomorrow! I bought tix for tomorrow and a friend just called with an extra ticket for tonight.

[RickJay]

Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves

The Dead Sox have officially surrendered. Carl Crawford was trying to contribute with his bum elbow as long as they had a chance. But now the focus is on being healthy for 2013. The Tommy John is tomorrow.

I thought it took about a year tocome back from that. Would a position player be ready earlier?

[ElvisL1ves]

A year for a pitcher, 6-9 months for a position player, so they tell us. Carl may be ready for Opening Day.

The guy's taken a lot of criticism for underperforming, which he has. But in his case it isn't from laziness. He's wound pretty tight, and tried probably too hard last year. Unfortunately, hitting is an area where the harder you try, the worse you do. He tried his damnedest again this year, including playing with a serious injury, and playing well, too. But he's not part of the problem despite the results to date.

[Acsenray]

Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves

The guy's taken a lot of criticism for underperforming, which he has. But in his case it isn't from laziness.

Laziness? Why would that even enter into it? Who gets to the highest level of competitive athletics and goes out in front of the world and fails because of laziness?

[etv78]

Carl's problems last year were largely because he was trying to justify the contract.

[ElvisL1ves]

Originally Posted by Acsenray

Laziness? Why would that even enter into it? Who gets to the highest level of competitive athletics and goes out in front of the world and fails because of laziness?

Way too many guys get complacent, and then yes, lazy, after they score a big guaranteed contract. Josh Beckett and John Lackey are great examples from that same team.

[Asimovian]

Clemens returns to baseball. Write your own bylines.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

Originally Posted by Asimovian

Clemens returns to baseball. Write your own bylines.

Wow, he's 50? I didn't realize he was quite that old. I would have guessed like 46 or something.