The 2010 MLB Season Thread

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by article

If the Dodgers had protested the game, there is a chance the protest would have been upheld and the game replayed. The Dodgers did not protest the game.

Yeah, a snowball's chance in hell. I'm pretty sure we wouldn't be getting a replay on that technicality.

SI

[Logan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

However, Rule 8.06 Comment says: "In a case where a manager has made his first trip to the mound and then returns the second time to the mound in the same inning with the same pitcher in the game and the same batter at bat, after being warned by the umpire that he cannot return to the mound, the manager shall be removed from the game and the pitcher required to pitch to the batter until he is retired or gets on base. After the batter is retired, or becomes a baserunner, then this pitcher must be removed from the game."

Isn't this the important part?

[MizzouRah]

How about them Cardinals?

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Logan

Isn't this the important part?

Well, if you read accounts of what happened, he WAS warned. "You can't do that!"

It's just that they listened to Bruce Bochy and had the pitcher removed immediately, instead of following the rules and having Broxton removed after he had completed facing the batter.

But Mattingly got his warning!

[larrymcg421]

But Mattingly didn't return "after" he was warned. He had already returned by the time the umpire said something.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Gotcha - so when using a rule loophole lets you get your guy on the roster, its "fair" (never mind that as currently used, teams add injured guys to the 40 man on Aug 31, in order to let them replace whoever they would want to in the future - in other words, using it as a loophole. And since its picking 25 man from a 40 man roster, its not like you're short players - ever). When a team you don't particularly care for uses it, its a "shitty way to engineer a win."

I simply don't understand this logic of selective dismay - either there is a rule that is being followed, or not. The rule book is crystal clear on this one. Did Mattingly intend to fuck up? Of course not. Did he? Yes.

KRod was included on the roster in the exact manner the rule intended. Broxton was removed because technically Mattingly was in violation of that rule, although it was clearly not "two visits" by Mattingly. I'm not sure why this is so hard for you to understand. This is apples and oranges.

Guess what? The world ain't black and white. The sooner you learn that, the better off you'll be.

It was a shitty way to win. A legit win, all the way, and kudos to Bochy. But that doesn't mean it's not a shitty way to win.

[Bad-example]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

It was a shitty way to win. A legit win, all the way, and kudos to Bochy. But that doesn't mean it's not a shitty way to win.

Perhaps it would be fairer to say that it was a shitty way to lose. Because, I assure you, it was a genuinely hilarious way to win.

[molson]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Oops
Sources: Umpires erred in forcing Los Angeles Dodgers closer Jonathan Broxton from game on Tuesday - ESPN Los Angeles

Umpires in Tuesday's Dodgers-Giants game erred in forcing Jonathan Broxton from the game, a major league official told ESPN's Tim Kurkjian.

The official said the rule that requires a pitcher to leave the game after two mound visits should have been superseded by an adendum to the rule. Rule 8.06 says if two mound visits occur while the same batter is up, the umpires must eject the manager and the pitcher must face the batter. After the batter, the pitcher should be removed.

Rule 8.06(b) states: "A second trip to the same pitcher in the same inning will cause this pitcher's automatic removal from the game."

However, Rule 8.06 Comment says: "In a case where a manager has made his first trip to the mound and then returns the second time to the mound in the same inning with the same pitcher in the game and the same batter at bat, after being warned by the umpire that he cannot return to the mound, the manager shall be removed from the game and the pitcher required to pitch to the batter until he is retired or gets on base. After the batter is retired, or becomes a baserunner, then this pitcher must be removed from the game."

The mistake was discovered after the game in a rehash with league umpiring evaluators.

If the Dodgers had protested the game, there is a chance the protest would have been upheld and the game replayed. The Dodgers did not protest the game.

I'd think that when there's a conflict between the rule and the comment of the rule, the rule has to win out. Unless there's something else in the rulebook that says that comments supersede rules when there's a conflict.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Bad-example

Perhaps it would be fairer to say that it was a shitty way to lose. Because, I assure you, it was a genuinely hilarious way to win.

Heh...yeah, I can buy into that. It's definitely a memorable way to get it done.

I'm not trying to bag on the Giants for pulling this off. I think it's hilarious, too, and pretty neat. The much maligned Bochy really did a number there.

It just strikes me along the lines of being a sneaky win a bit. The Angels did something earlier this year that could be called that, beating the White Sox in extra innings with a bunt hit with the bases loaded. White Sox complained, too, basically saying what I am saying now, that that's a shitty way to win. But, like me, they were also acknowledging kudos to the Angels for pulling it off.

I myself, I was glad to get the win, but I wasn't trying to make it out to be some great thing by the Angels. They sorta violated one of those unspoken rules of baseball, I guess, and they won because of it. Doesn't make me proud, but it is what it is.

I figure the Giants' win is much the same.

[Logan]

I know you're agreeing that your own team did something "sneaky" or whatever, which is commendable, but allow me to stick up for them...it's pretty simple. A bunt is always an option for a hitter (I have no clue of the situation or if the player is considered a good bunter). Don't respect that option as an infielder and you can play further back. Playing further back allows you a greater chance of fielding a ground ball as you have more time to react and can also cover more ground, thus improving your chances of getting the batter out. Therefore, as a hitter, if you're taking the bunt off the table because of an "unspoken rule" you're reducing your chances of success, even if by a small amount.

So to that I say...bullshit.

[Travis]

Okay, there was a pretty massive love in for Ubaldo not all that long ago, and this will probably act as a huge jinx, but how freaking good is Josh Johnson? I've taken the guy the last couple of years in fantasy baseball as a buy low potential ace for my squad and while I've always thought he had the potential to be dominant, his current stretch is getting ridiculous.

His last 12 starts plus the first 6 innings of today's game have him with the following numbers (some could be a bit off, these were quick calculations):

7-2 (potentially 8-2 after today), 91.0 IP (this is through 6.0 today), 8 ER, 65 Hits, 13 BB, 93 K, 0.93 ERA, 0.86 WHIP

So he's walked 1 batter every 7 innings and that's more often than he's allowed earned runs. That K+ per inning over that stretch isn't too awful either.

It's not like his first 7 starts were anything awful, but I'm obviously drawing a line here to make the numbers look as ridiculous as possible for this "streak".

Also kind of interesting to note that every start he's had this year has ended with an even number of innings pitched, he hasn't left a game with 1 or 2 out in an inning (not sure if he's started any innings only to leave before an out is recorded).

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Logan

I know you're agreeing that your own team did something "sneaky" or whatever, which is commendable, but allow me to stick up for them...it's pretty simple. A bunt is always an option for a hitter (I have no clue of the situation or if the player is considered a good bunter). Don't respect that option as an infielder and you can play further back. Playing further back allows you a greater chance of fielding a ground ball as you have more time to react and can also cover more ground, thus improving your chances of getting the batter out. Therefore, as a hitter, if you're taking the bunt off the table because of an "unspoken rule" you're reducing your chances of success, even if by a small amount.

So to that I say...bullshit.

Oh, yeah, I would tend to agree with all of this. I was fine with what the Angels did. I am more saying I understood why the White Sox would be upset.

Howie Kendrick was the batter, and he's usually swinging away. My memory is fuzzy without looking it up, but I believe there was an out, and the White Sox might have been playing at double play depth. Kendrick didn't do a drop at the feet bunt, but a sharp bunt past the pitcher, to the no man's land between the mound and the middle infielders.

A lot of baseball's "unspoken rules" are about being a man and all that, I have found, FWIW. Bunting isn't really well respected as a strategy in baseball circles, I think.

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by Travis

Okay, there was a pretty massive love in for Ubaldo not all that long ago, and this will probably act as a huge jinx, but how freaking good is Josh Johnson? I've taken the guy the last couple of years in fantasy baseball as a buy low potential ace for my squad and while I've always thought he had the potential to be dominant, his current stretch is getting ridiculous.

His last 12 starts plus the first 6 innings of today's game have him with the following numbers (some could be a bit off, these were quick calculations):

7-2 (potentially 8-2 after today), 91.0 IP (this is through 6.0 today), 8 ER, 65 Hits, 13 BB, 93 K, 0.93 ERA, 0.86 WHIP

So he's walked 1 batter every 7 innings and that's more often than he's allowed earned runs. That K+ per inning over that stretch isn't too awful either.

It's not like his first 7 starts were anything awful, but I'm obviously drawing a line here to make the numbers look as ridiculous as possible for this "streak".

Also kind of interesting to note that every start he's had this year has ended with an even number of innings pitched, he hasn't left a game with 1 or 2 out in an inning (not sure if he's started any innings only to leave before an out is recorded).

He's been the best pitcher in baseball this year no doubt about it.

[Travis]

I find it amazing that he has 3 no decisions and 2 losses in that span. That's nearly half the games started in that streak.

I also see my powers of jinx are in full effect. For the first time this season he'll leave a game with a partial inning pitched (runners on 1st and 3rd, 1 out in the 7th).

[Tasan]

The Rangers, behind Cliff Lee, beat the Angels in game one of a 4 game set. He took down their ace, so hopefully this means the Rangers can grab 3 of 4. I'm going to be in Arlington for the game Saturday night, which unfortunately for me sees Scott Feldman pitch for the Rangers. If they do take 3 of 4, this will be the one they lose.

[Poli]

I'd pee my pants to get Oswalt to St. Louis.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Tasan

The Rangers, behind Cliff Lee, beat the Angels in game one of a 4 game set. He took down their ace, so hopefully this means the Rangers can grab 3 of 4. I'm going to be in Arlington for the game Saturday night, which unfortunately for me sees Scott Feldman pitch for the Rangers. If they do take 3 of 4, this will be the one they lose.

It was a good game for both teams, well played on both sides. Good win for the Rangers to pull this one out. Just as the Rangers have gotten past the Angels' ace, however, so have the Angels gotten past Lee. The drop off from Weaver to three of the Angels' other four starters isn't far. Santana has been excellent most of the year, as has Pineiro. Saunders has recovered from a poor start to pitching back to form of late. Fortunately for the Rangers, Pineiro pitched against the Yanks yesterday, so they will miss him and get the Kazmir spot instead (now likely pitched by Trevor Bell, with Kaz on the DL and O'Sullivan off to the Royals). That means there's a strong likelihood the Rangers take Sunday's game. If we're both right about the Saturday/Sunday games, then tomorrow's game will determine if the Rangers take three of four or the two teams split the series (a result which I think the Angels would take at this point).

[JS19]

If any team has a struggling SP, whether it be your number 1 or some scrub trying to fill out the ass end of the rotation, just wait til he pitches against the Mets, they will probably earn him a pay raise as he will look like Cy Young. The Mets are also good for saving the opposing teams bullpen arms.

[stevew]

I'm so tired of Prince Fielder and the Brewers complaining about getting hit. First of all, Prince is a big dude, so unless he wants to slim down he is going to get hit a bit more than he should. Also, they've toned down being a bunch of cocky assholes, but you can't expect people to forget this type of stuff over night.

And anyways, pitching inside is part of the game. You pitch Prince away and he's going to murder the fuckin baseball. Fielder got hit on Tuesday, I think, and it was obviously a time where you wouldn't want to be hitting someone.

In short, calm down Brew Crew.

[lungs]

It's all stemming from the Braves incident. Dude throws over Fielder's head and then hits him square on the back the next pitch and they have the audacity to claim they weren't trying it on purpose.

And I'm not sure what it is about the Pirates, maybe their pitchers are just shitty enough to have that bad of aim but they always seem to hit the Brewers more than others.

Whatever, it's a free base. If other teams have some macho complex that they feel the need to hit guys and give them a free base so be it. It can come back to bite you in the ass though as almost happened to the Brewers last night for retaliating.

Weeks gets hit all the time but I can almost guarantee you none of them are intentional as he hangs over the plate. Always has and always will get hit by a lot of pitches. Guys head hunting at Prince is another story. There is no excuse for that.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by stevew

I'm so tired of Prince Fielder and the Brewers complaining about getting hit. First of all, Prince is a big dude, so unless he wants to slim down he is going to get hit a bit more than he should. Also, they've toned down being a bunch of cocky assholes, but you can't expect people to forget this type of stuff over night.

He might also try not carrying his bat halfway down the first base line while admiring a home run, that could help.

[lungs]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

He might also try not carrying his bat halfway down the first base line while admiring a home run, that could help.

The pitchers could try not giving up a homer to him.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by lungs

The pitchers could try not giving up a homer to him.

They would but it's impossible to paint the outside corner when Fielder's gravity pulls the ball into his wheelhouse.

[lungs]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

They would but it's impossible to paint the outside corner when Fielder's gravity pulls the ball into his wheelhouse.

There are some advantages to his girth

Won't really matter for me anyway as Prince will be gone in the next few weeks or at the latest this winter.

$185 million for a DH in the National League? Ain't gonna happen. Lock Rickie Weeks down. He's turning himself into one of the best leadoff men in the game.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

They would but it's impossible to paint the outside corner when Fielder's gravity pulls the ball into his wheelhouse.

That's not a moon. It's Prince Fielder.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by lungs

The pitchers could try not giving up a homer to him.

He could try not being a classless assclown, but I don't believe he can help it.

He's a big boy (no pun intended) and he knows how baseball works. If he's going to do those things then he's going to get hit from time to time and he's certainly been around baseball long enough to know that. Do your thing, deal with the consequences, no big deal afaic. Whining about it is where it gets annoying.

[lungs]

Throwing at a guy because you can't get him out is absolute class.

[stevew]

They're throwing at him cause he acts like a fucking buffoon. If he just trots around the bases, he doesn't get thrown at. He might still get hit by pitches because he's an immovable turd, but it wouldn't be intentional.

[lungs]

I guess I don't see the buffoonery in admiring ones work. Plenty of guys do it. I especially love when the Cardinals get their panties in a wad about admiring home runs when they have one of the worst offenders aka Albert Pujols.

The only difference is most guys don't do it nearly as often as Fielder because they can't hit as many home runs as Fielder.

[lungs]

Dola

Nothing will change until MLB does anything. I'd like to see 20 game suspensions for pitchers that throw at guys and at least 5 games for the manager.

This throwing at hitters is just macho bullshit that is going to get somebody seriously hurt someday.

[BishopMVP]

Pitchers who throw at a batter (particularly the head) because he hit a home run = assholes who deserve to be suspended

Batters who lean over the plate wearing protection and then complain when they get hit (or the fans who do) = equally buffoonish

I would support the league cracking down and handing out meaningful suspensions to pitchers who throw at batters as long as umpires stop giving the free base to batters who don't try to get out of the way and actually call a strike if the pitch was going to be one.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

I would support the league cracking down and handing out meaningful suspensions to pitchers who throw at batters as long as umpires stop giving the free base to batters who don't try to get out of the way and actually call a strike if the pitch was going to be one.

This.

I would also like to see the league do a similar crackdown on collisions at home plate - catchers shouldn't be blocking the plate prior to having the ball, and runners shouldn't be trying to plow through catchers. This isn't football.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

This.

I would also like to see the league do a similar crackdown on collisions at home plate - catchers shouldn't be blocking the plate prior to having the ball, and runners shouldn't be trying to plow through catchers. This isn't football.

I've never liked the way home plate calls were made. I never understood why if a catcher gets the ball, applies the tag, but THEN the ball gets knocked loose, the runner is somehow safe. The runner should be out as soon as the catcher tags him with the ball. What happens after that should be meaningless. Call it that way and there's less incentive to crash into home plate.

[BishopMVP]

Why not allow the runner to take out the first baseman too? Or stay on their feet and drop a shoulder into the middle infielder turning a double play? It's called runner interference at any other base (or fielder interference if the player blocks the runner when not holding the ball), why is home plate different?

[Danny]

Because it's for the run and makes for better drama.

[Tasan]

2 for 2 for the Rangers vs the Angels, with the Rangers winning the pitching duels. I'm thinking 3 of 4, if not a sweep. We'll see how tomorrow night goes. I'm really pumped to go to that game.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Tasan

2 for 2 for the Rangers vs the Angels, with the Rangers winning the pitching duels. I'm thinking 3 of 4, if not a sweep. We'll see how tomorrow night goes. I'm really pumped to go to that game.

I would say 3 of 4 has a good chance of happening. I like that you mention sweep, though. I like that sorta over-confidence, since usually karma cames around to take that outtaya.

Poor Saunders. He pitched great tonight. But Wilson was better. And, man, does the Angels' offense suck.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by HiFiRevival

Way to try and pussy-fy the sport. Player doesn't hold on to ball is an out at any base, home plate shouldn't be exempt. Baseball has a problem with hotheads who don't know how to take a hit and keep going instead of throwing a fit. Lean over the plate and risk getting hit. Show up a pitcher and expect them to drill you in the ribs and then take your base. Position yourself in front of the plate for a bang/bang play and expect to get bowled over.

That's baseball. The preening, home run watching, clear the benches because your an ass who deserved to get hit but can't take it garbage has got to go.

Barreling over the catcher should be an automatic out. There isn't another base you can do that at and it doesn't make sense in baseball.

Pitchers hitting guys for leaning over the plate or "showing the pitcher up" comes from an era where the vast majority of pitchers threw in mid 80s at best.

I also never really got the whole showing a pitcher up thing. When a pitcher shows up a batter does he have a free pass to go out and beat the hell out of them with his bat?

Baseball's biggest problem is traditionalists that can't accept change in the sport. Baseball isn't a contact sport and isn't meant to be.

[JPhillips]

The game is far less physical than it was in the early part of the century.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Baseball's biggest problem is traditionalists that can't accept change in the sport.

Baseball's bigger problem would be trying to fix things that aren't broken just to satisfy a bunch of fuckwits.

[BishopMVP]

Mariners are falling apart. I demand a sweep from our motley collection of replacement players and cast-offs. (PS - any reason it's so bad for Chone Figgins this year? A .595 OPS?)

btw, as fun as it is to see a new warm body appear every night it is past time for the Kevin Cash era (pt. II) to end. .150/.244/.150, and that's actually gone up the last 3 games with a scintillating 3-10 performance.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Mariners are falling apart. I demand a sweep from our motley collection of replacement players and cast-offs. (PS - any reason it's so bad for Chone Figgins this year? A .595 OPS?)

Maybe dawgfan will have some insight. I am mystified. He has never played so poorly. Pressure from a big contract or being a more important piece to the team? I don't know. I hope he turns it around, as from everything I have ever seen or read, Figgy's a really good guy.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Maybe dawgfan will have some insight. I am mystified. He has never played so poorly. Pressure from a big contract or being a more important piece to the team? I don't know. I hope he turns it around, as from everything I have ever seen or read, Figgy's a really good guy.

From an observational standpoint, he just never hits the ball with any authority. I know he's never been anything close to a power hitter, but even line drives seem rare.

From an advanced statistical standpoint, here are some things that stand out:

Career ISO: .091
2010 ISO: .037 (career low)

Career Line Drive %: 23.4
2010 Line Drive %: 20.3 (career low)

Career BABIP (batting average on balls in play): .337
2010 BABIP: .286 (career low)

Career Groundball %: 42.5%
2010 Groundball %: 44.3%

Career Contact %: 86.1%
2010 Contact %: 86.2%

Career O Swing % (pitches swung at outside the strike zone): 16.3%
2010 O Swing %: 18.1%

My conclusion from those numbers corroborates what I've seen - he's just not hitting the ball with much authority compared to his norms. He's still making contact at about the same rate, and he's not far off his norm for chasing pitches outside the zone. Looking at his BABIP numbers, one might conclude he's been unlucky (hitting the ball right at guys), but I think it's more that he's not hitting the ball as hard, allowing fielders more time to make the play.

I'd be curious to hear what scouts say about him - see if they think his bat has slowed. This is an area where Hit F/X, once it's finally established, will be a lot of help.

I don't know how many people caught this last night, but Figgins had a brain cramp and didn't back up a throw from the outfield and was yanked from the game by Wakamatsu, eliciting a heated reaction from Figgins that required multiple teammates stepping in between them to keep Figgins from getting to Wak (and then keeping Branyan from taking a piece out of Figgins).

Delicate situation here for sure. I don't think anyone here thinks Figgy is a bad teammate, but there's been a lot of brain cramps on this team this season and Wak is starting to put his foot down, and presumably Figgins didn't like being made the example. Given his contract, he's essentially stuck here for the next few years, and the M's sure hope there's still some life in his bat and that his defense will pick up when he moves back to 3B.

He's been one of the major disappointments on the season - the "2 leadoff hitters" top of the lineup with him and Ichiro has never really materialized.

[dfisher]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Why not allow the runner to take out the first baseman too? Or stay on their feet and drop a shoulder into the middle infielder turning a double play? It's called runner interference at any other base (or fielder interference if the player blocks the runner when not holding the ball), why is home plate different?

Runners are more than welcome to bowl over the fielders at other bases. They will just look like morons when the fielder just moves out of the way and tags him out after he overruns the base.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by dfisher

Runners are more than welcome to bowl over the fielders at other bases. They will just look like morons when the fielder just moves out of the way and tags him out after he overruns the base.

Re-think this response. Think about all the bang-bang plays at first base where the fielder has to stretch to catch the throw with the runner barreling down the line. A runner could choose to take out the first baseman while he's completely exposed and vulnerable.

[Danny]

Catchers are also the only position with protection. Seriously, this discussion is not even worth having. Things are the way they are and there's no need to change it.

I agree with Jon's assessment of things.

[larrymcg421]

My point is more about logic than protection. If the tag is applied the guy is out. What happens after the tag should be irrelevant.

And if, as was claimed above, you could bowl over a fielder at any other base, then I imagine we would see this on almost every stolen base attempt.

[DeToxRox]

Magglio Ordonez fractures his ankle and is out 6-8 weeks. Tigs were going to fade down the stretch anyway but this should speed up the process. On the plus side though, he won't be able to meet the requirements that would vest his option.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Brooks F'n Conrad baby