Here’s the division leaders and bottom dwellers with the number of players on the DL.
**
Division lead**
Toronto/4
Kansas City/4
Houston/3
NYM/11
StL/7
LAD/7
Division cellar
Boston/6
Cleveland/5
Oakland/4
Philadelphia/6
Cincinnati/8
Colorado/10
Amusingly, the teams the Pirates and Cubs have beaten up on aren’t the ones you’d expect. The teams they’ve clobbered this year are in the category of “Good teams outside their own division.”
Other than themselves and the Cardinals, Pittsburgh and Chicago have played four teams with records more than a game or two above .500: the Dodgers, the Mets, the Giants, and the Royals.
In games against those teams, the Cubs are 14-3.
In games against those teams, the Pirates are 16-3.
A combined 30 wins and 6 losses.
I doubt it means anything, but it’s certainly counterintuitive to see how successful these two teams’ve been against these playoff contenders. (Of course, the Dodgers won just one game against the Mets in 1988 and then beat them in the playoffs anyway, so the predictive value of this is a little…uncertain…)
Ulf the Unwashed:
And the Royals swept the Giants in their interleague series last year - including one Bumgarner game. Didn’t help them much in the World Series.
Five years prior, precisely the opposite thing happened to the Dodgers; they went 11-1 against the Phillies, and then met them in the NLCS and were clobbered. You never know.
A 72-51 record would be good enough for first place in 4 out of the 6 divisions. But it’s only good enough for third in the NL Central (sorry, Cubs). I know everyone here knows that. But I keep looking at that and just being kind of amazed.
The funny thing is if you look back to the old two-division format, those teams were all in the Eastern Division, for some reason. Pirates and Cubs fans would be in despair, while the Dodgers and Giants would still be duking it out for the West.
Last night, Jacob DeGrom, the team’s best pitcher, had the worst night of his career, giving up seven runs in three innings and leaving with the team losing 7-2. From that point on, the Mets scored 14 unanswered runs, including seven home runs. David Wright, in his first at bat since going on the disabled list in April, had already his a homer in his first at bat. All the starters had homers except for shortstop Ruben Tejada as the team set a record for HRs in the game.
The Phillies hit 3 homers, so the total ties the NL record for both teams in a game.
Final score: 16-7
And now the Red Sox have shoved their play-by-play guy, Don Orsillo, out the door for no valid reason whatsoever that I can discern. He’s reportedly “crushed.” Add him to the ever-growing list of people who deserved better from the stuffed shirts on Yawkey Way.
I already actively disliked Lucchino and lost respect for Henry after what happened with Epstein and Francona, so heck, might as well give me a reason not to like Tom Werner, either.
Yes, NESN has bad ratings. I assume it’s occurred to the powers that be that maybe this is the product of having a really crappy on-field product and has nothing to do with the announcers?
That sucks - was he good? Did the Sox fans like him?
Frank White is my favorite Royal from growing up, and I really enjoyed his color commentary. He had the gall to suggest several years back that the team’s acquisitions of Yuniesky Betancourt and Co. didn’t provide much on-field product, and was summarily booted. He’d been a part of the organization since he was a teenager working construction ON Kauffman Stadium, and was a lifetime Royal. It was a souring moment for me.
The article on the website announcing the move is full of vitriolic comments and threats to cancel, their Twitter is being bombarded with criticism, and someone has set up a petition. It doesn’t seem to be going over well.
Orsillo wasn’t exactly Vin Scully but I’ve watched plenty of baseball and as far as local network play-by-play guys go, he was pretty good. Called things like they were and didn’t fall into provincial homerism. He had invites from TBS and ESPN to do some postseason games nationally the last few seasons, so he was no slouch.
A single animated Gif showing all the MLB logos over the years
Pretty cool. I knew Cleveland was kind of phasing out Chief Wahoo but I didn’t realize he is no longer their official logo.
Munch:
I thought he was booted because he suggested racism in the front office and vocally felt he was owed the manager’s job after a few years managing the Royals’ AA team. Still somewhat petty, but definitely more of a problem for management than merely criticizing the team on the field honestly.
Speaking of announcers/commentators being booted, Curt Schilling has been removed from the LLWS games, because of a tweet comparing Muslims to Nazis.
Racist-caricature Chief Wahoo is now replaced, with the blocky red C, as the primary logo for some contexts, most notably the MLB website. He assuredly remains a major official logo, appearing on two of the four uniform caps, as a shoulder patch for all four uniform jerseys, in some prominent ballpark signs, and on some official mailings.
I have to think it’s part of gently urging his best friend, Jerry Remy, to retire. Fairly or not, the Remdawg’s family issues have become an embarrassment to the organization, and his miedical issues have also kept him away from the booth for quite a bit. Without Orsillo there to pal around with, he might not see much reason to keep going to the booth. But Remy’s too much of an icon to fire directly, so Orsillo gets it first. How’s that for a CT?
Yes, he’s very good, even with other partners, and will not be out of a job any longer than he wants to be.
Superdude:
Unless there was another tweet that I missed seeing, it didn’t seem to me like it was comparing Muslims and Nazis. It was still understandably offensive to Muslims, but not in that way. And, in your linked article, some guy from the New England ADL also said it was offensive to Jews? WTF? Schilling didn’t even mention Jews.
Elvis, your link doesn’t show me anything I didn’t already see, so I guess what I got is accurate. It didn’t mention Jews once. As for the actual Muslim-Nazi thing, he wasn’t saying Muslims are like Nazis, he was saying that it’s small comfort that only 5-10% of Muslims are extremists, as that’s still a high enough number to do significant damage, using the Nazi analogy to make the point that raw numbers are more important than percentages when it comes to danger.
It was not saying “Muslims are like Nazis”. Maybe he feels that way personally, but the tweet in no way means that.
Who said it did? Not everything is about the Jews.
No, he was agreeing that Muslims are like Germans in the Nazi era. Was that not clear?