The 2010 MLB Season Thread

[Vince, Pt. II]

Originally Posted by Scoobz0202

The Toronto Sun has an article on Scott Rolen. Happy as hell to have him as a Red, and as a mentor to Joey Votto.

hxxp://www.torontosun.com/sports/baseball/2010/07/18/14752831.html

That's an awesome story, thanks for sharing.

[stevew]

Fuck Scott Rolen up his stupid cunt.


(someone has to be an ugly Phillies fan, and the usual suspects are slipping.)

[stevew]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Except that it wouldn't be the same, it'd be worse. Check out the two guys getting the playing time most of the year in AAA, they make Kendall look downright spiffy. It does look as those they might have a guy ready by next year (Manuel Pina) but that's now, not later.

Should Brayan Pena get one start a week? Yeah, probably so, if only from a physical & mental wear and tear standpoint.

I find it nearly impossible to imagine anyone being much worse than Kendall. He's been LOLBAD for the past 3-4 seasons. He's slugging .318 for christ sakes. I know maybe the Royals don't have a better option in house, but I'm pretty sure there are numerous AAAA type catchers that could equal Kendall's production levels at the plate.

[lungs]

I had to sit through two years of Jason Kendall demanding to play every day before this year. Horrible. Absolutely horrible. Why this guy has a major league job is beyond me.

Not only did the Royals sign him, but they signed him for TWO YEARS! And they are paying him $3 million a year! That is the epitomy of stupidity. There were other catchers on the market this past winter. Any team that starts Jason Kendall has what is coming to them.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Except that it wouldn't be the same, it'd be worse. Check out the two guys getting the playing time most of the year in AAA, they make Kendall look downright spiffy. It does look as those they might have a guy ready by next year (Manuel Pina) but that's now, not later.

Should Brayan Pena get one start a week? Yeah, probably so, if only from a physical & mental wear and tear standpoint.

You're not taking a step back and getting the bigger picture - Kendall doesn't deserve to start 55 games, let alone 155. And it's on management to not only have a better (or at least younger, potentially better) starter catcher in the majors, but have a decent back-up and a couple of worthwhile options in the minors, too. That all goes to the broader point of - this team has misplaced priorities, and on top of that, no real alternatives to fix their mistakes.

[Lathum]

In hindsight I may have been wrong about Pelfrey.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by Lathum

In hindsight I may have been wrong about Pelfrey.

Wait, you mean the 5.5 K/9 and 1.6 K/BB ratio is not the all-star Mets fans were falling in love with?

[stevew]

Pedro Alvarez is raking.

[BishopMVP]

ESPN front-page story - "Alex Rodriguez approaching 600 Home Runs. Why does nobody seem to care?" I'm sure the article spends paragraphs on the steroid rumors, the cheapening of big numbers by the past 15 years, maybe even anti-Yankee bias, (and if they're honest, anti-ESPN backlash from focusing on celebrity athletes at the expense of the games) but why can't it be as simple as 600 is an arbitrary number? Just because it ends in 00 doesn't make it mean anymore than #'s 599/601, and certainly doesn't warrant round the clock coverage of the chase.

[stevew]

I swear if I see one more Red Sox closing in on Chris Ianetta story on MLBTR I'm going to blow up the internet.

[lungs]

Glad I didn't turn off the Pirates-Brewers when it was 9-0 Bucs after the first....

10-9 Bucs in the 6th

[stevew]

yeah...it is a barnburner.

we've got our good relievers reafy for the last 3. We better win this one

[rowech]

Reds seem to be set to add Isringhausen. Not at all sure what this means.

[molson]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

ESPN front-page story - "Alex Rodriguez approaching 600 Home Runs. Why does nobody seem to care?" I'm sure the article spends paragraphs on the steroid rumors, the cheapening of big numbers by the past 15 years, maybe even anti-Yankee bias, (and if they're honest, anti-ESPN backlash from focusing on celebrity athletes at the expense of the games) but why can't it be as simple as 600 is an arbitrary number? Just because it ends in 00 doesn't make it mean anymore than #'s 599/601, and certainly doesn't warrant round the clock coverage of the chase.

It's all of those things, and also that this wasn't really in doubt since very early in A-Rod's career. It seemed like the real question is whether he'd get 800.

Same with Griffey. 630 seems kind of disappointing the way he started out.

It was Ruth alone with that number, then it was Ruth and Aaron and Mays. Now that you have Sammy Sosa, Griffey after a injury-plagued career, and Bonds after he mutated into some kind of futuristic cyborg, and it's even in reach for Jim Thome, who non-baseball fans probably never heard of. it's not that big a deal anymore.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by rowech

Reds seem to be set to add Isringhausen. Not at all sure what this means.

Walt said the trade market was bare for relievers, so he's looking at experienced guys like Izzy and Springer. I don't expect much, but at least Walt's trying to do something.

[rowech]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Walt said the trade market was bare for relievers, so he's looking at experienced guys like Izzy and Springer. I don't expect much, but at least Walt's trying to do something.

If they can do the job, it's cool but I can't imagine they're going to be able to do much. Hope I'm wrong. I'd like to see them grab another OFer. Someone who ideally could play all three outfield positions decently and CF especially well. Just in case...

[JPhillips]

That guy's already on the team, but Heisey doesn't get to play enough.

[Vince, Pt. II]

Holy freaking hell, what an end to the Giants/Dodger game.

After Kershaw, Torre AND their bench coach have been ejected, the Dodgers are down to Mattingly managing the team. In the top of the ninth, ahead 5-4, the Dodgers and Jonathan Broxton are facing a 1 out, bases loaded situation when Mattingly goes to the mound to talk to Broxton. He takes one step away from the mound, and someone from the conference (the whole infield is there) says something. Mattingly turns around, takes a step back onto the mound, they resolve it, and he leaves the mound.

Bochy immediately leaves the dugout and calls the home plate umpire over. The home plate umpire convenes all the umps, and after a brief conference, they call Mattingly back out onto the field. They then require Mattingly to remove Broxton - because he made two trips to the mound in the same inning.

On the second pitch, Andres Torres laces a double to the wall, the Giants take the lead and end up winning 7-5. Amazing.

[Crapshoot]

That was the greatest Giants Dodgers game I've ever seen. At 5-1 with Lincecum getting whacked around, I was sure it was over.

PS - 1st time every Bochy outsmarted someone?

PPS - LOL DODGERS LOT MATTINGLY

[sooner333]

That was pretty awesome! I'd say it's definitely up there. The best was watching Brian Johnson hit the HR to clinch the division in '97 though...got to see the HR of that day game at a friend's house after school.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

That was the greatest Giants Dodgers game I've ever seen. At 5-1 with Lincecum getting whacked around, I was sure it was over.

PS - 1st time every Bochy outsmarted someone?

PPS - LOL DODGERS LOT MATTINGLY

IMO, that's a pretty shitball way to win. But, hey, whatever works.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

IMO, that's a pretty shitball way to win. But, hey, whatever works.

Shitball? Bases loaded, 1 out - run expectancy favors the Giants anyway.

Rules are the Rules - did I see you complaining when F-Rod made the 2002 post-season roster through a back channel move (he wasn't on it as of the deadline, but they used the injury loophole)?

[MrBug708]

It's nice to see all the Giants fans out of the woodwork again. (Not here perse, just in general)

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by sooner333

That was pretty awesome! I'd say it's definitely up there. The best was watching Brian Johnson hit the HR to clinch the division in '97 though...got to see the HR of that day game at a friend's house after school.

Oh shit, I can't believe I forgot that - but of course, that wins. Still, this was the best Giants game of the year IMO.

[Crapshoot]

Dola,
apparently Bochy has done to a previous Dodger manager as well - Grady Little, with regards to Brad Penny (back when Bochy was managing the Padres).

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Shitball? Bases loaded, 1 out - run expectancy favors the Giants anyway.

Rules are the Rules - did I see you complaining when F-Rod made the 2002 post-season roster through a back channel move (he wasn't on it as of the deadline, but they used the injury loophole)?

If it favors them anyway, why not let Broxton pitch?

The injury rule is in place so a team can field a full roster for the playoffs. That's a fair rule to have in place. A month is a lot of baseball games between the deadline and when you have to submit a postseason roster.

The two visit rule is in place to stop managers from abusing their privileges with respect to advising and calming their pitchers, who are supposed to be pitching on their own, not with a coach standing right behind them. In no way can you say Mattingly was trying to take advantage of anything.

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with this with respect to the rules. I also think it's a pretty damn clever move on Bochy's part, so kudos to him using the rules to his advantage. That doesn't mean it's not a shitty way engineer a win.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

If it favors them anyway, why not let Broxton pitch?

The injury rule is in place so a team can field a full roster for the playoffs. That's a fair rule to have in place. A month is a lot of baseball games between the deadline and when you have to submit a postseason roster.

The two visit rule is in place to stop managers from abusing their privileges with respect to advising and calming their pitchers, who are supposed to be pitching on their own, not with a coach standing right behind them. In no way can you say Mattingly was trying to take advantage of anything.

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with this with respect to the rules. I also think it's a pretty damn clever move on Bochy's part, so kudos to him using the rules to his advantage. That doesn't mean it's not a shitty way engineer a win.

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.

[SackAttack]

The second clause of Rule 8.06(d):
A manager or coach is considered to have concluded his visit to the mound when he leaves the 18-foot circle surrounding the pitcher’s rubber.

I guess from context, that means if the manager visits the pitcher, and he wants to avoid running afoul of this rule, he has to stay on the dirt mound during his time on the field.

I can't find video of what happened, so I don't know if Mattingly stayed on the grass, at which point his visit could legally have been considered concluded if he so much as turned 90 degrees left or right, or what.

But it sounds like if he wasn't on the dirt mound, or left the dirt mound (even if it was only a step or two), that the letter of the law was followed.

[Ksyrup]

Holy crap! We won a 10U softball game the EXACT same way about 2 months ago.

Bottom of the 5th (last inning due to time), score tied 4-4, with 1 out we get runners on 2nd and 3rd. Our #3 hitter is coming up, so the other coach goes out to the mound to tell the pitcher to intentionally walk the batter. She does. My daughter's up next. Other coach goes back to the mound to tell the defense what to do (ordinarily you tell them to take the easiest out, but here you've obviously got to make a play at the plate because double plays are pretty much non-existent at this level). Our coach realizes he's just made his second visit to the mound, and the umps require him to pull the pitcher. She's basically their only pitcher, and a great one at that. Replacement comes in, and Caitlin laces a bases-clearing triple to win the game.

I mean - that's almost exactly the same freaking situation and result! BIZARRE.

I assume this is going to do wonders for Mattingly's chances at becoming the new manager...

[Ksyrup]

I just emailed our coach a snippet from the recap of the game with the lead-in - "Bruce Bochy pulled a Brian Webb last night." lol

[Bad-example]

Awesome game. There are few things in the world more entertaining than watching the bums implode.

Also, very funny to hear any whining about the double visit to the mound. The rules are clear. Why complain about them being enforced as intended?

[rowech]

Originally Posted by Bad-example

Awesome game. There are few things in the world more entertaining than watching the bums implode.

Also, very funny to hear any whining about the double visit to the mound. The rules are clear. Why complain about them being enforced as intended?

Wait until the rash of managers who never go onto the mound to make their visit. If one never makes it to the mount it must not count as a visit unless the rules for defining the start of the visit are different than those that define it's end. I'd just hold my meetings at the foul line.

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Holy crap! We won a 10U softball game the EXACT same way about 2 months ago.

Bottom of the 5th (last inning due to time), score tied 4-4, with 1 out we get runners on 2nd and 3rd. Our #3 hitter is coming up, so the other coach goes out to the mound to tell the pitcher to intentionally walk the batter. She does. My daughter's up next. Other coach goes back to the mound to tell the defense what to do (ordinarily you tell them to take the easiest out, but here you've obviously got to make a play at the plate because double plays are pretty much non-existent at this level). Our coach realizes he's just made his second visit to the mound, and the umps require him to pull the pitcher. She's basically their only pitcher, and a great one at that. Replacement comes in, and Caitlin laces a bases-clearing triple to win the game.

I mean - that's almost exactly the same freaking situation and result! BIZARRE.

I assume this is going to do wonders for Mattingly's chances at becoming the new manager...

The umpires may have made a mistake in your daughter's under 10 year old softball game. The Rules of baseball (not sure about the rules of softball, so don't shoot me) state that the mound rule "shall apply to any professional league." This leads me to believe that any other league must put language regarding mound visits explicitly in its rules in order to be effective. So, if it wasn't in your daughter's softball league rules, the umpire might have just made up a rule.

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

I can't find video of what happened, so I don't know if Mattingly stayed on the grass, at which point his visit could legally have been considered concluded if he so much as turned 90 degrees left or right, or what.

Mattingly visited the mound (in the dirt circue). He turned and walked away, putting both feet in the grass. Immediately after placing his second foot on the grass, he turned around and put both feet back in the dirt circle (the umpire shouted "No, no, no--you can't do that, but it was too late to save Mattingly). Then he left again.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by sooner333

The umpires may have made a mistake in your daughter's under 10 year old softball game. The Rules of baseball (not sure about the rules of softball, so don't shoot me) state that the mound rule "shall apply to any professional league." This leads me to believe that any other league must put language regarding mound visits explicitly in its rules in order to be effective. So, if it wasn't in your daughter's softball league rules, the umpire might have just made up a rule.

Depends on the league, often as not in my experience there's some catch-all rule mentioned in youth leagues that says something to the effect that "the standard rules of baseball shall apply in the absence of exceptions detailed here".

[Ksyrup]

No, all these leagues have a very complex set of rules. This was an NSA game. I haven't seen the exact rule, but the umps talked it over and agreed that it was a violation.

Our coach said he felt shitty for doing it, but it gave us a huge advantage and the other coach agreed that he screwed up and would have called us on it, too.

[Vince, Pt. II]

So regardless of the "loophole"/"shady" argument, does anyone remember that Broxton was pitching like crap? I think the Giants' chances improved dramatically once Sherril was put into the game, but I wasn't exactly intimidated by Broxton after he loaded the bases and only managed an out on a sacrifice.

[Ksyrup]

Here's the rule from the NSA rulebook:

There shall be only one charged conference between the manager and other team representative from the dugout with each and every pitcher in an inning. The second charged conference shall result in the removal of the pitcher from the pitching position for the remainder of the game. If the pitcher is removed from the pitching position as the result of a second charged conference, the pitcher can remain in the game in any other position excluding the pitching position for the remainder of the game.

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Depends on the league, often as not in my experience there's some catch-all rule mentioned in youth leagues that says something to the effect that "the standard rules of baseball shall apply in the absence of exceptions detailed here".

This is true, but the standard rules of baseball have it as an optional rule for non-professional leagues. I would argue that because it is not a "shall" rule for non-professional leagues, it is an optional rule and does not exist in absence of a league-specific rule.

But, as KSyrup mentioned, the rule was enumerated in the NSA rulebook, thus, my speculation was incorrect insofar as the situation presented.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by Vince, Pt. II

So regardless of the "loophole"/"shady" argument, does anyone remember that Broxton was pitching like crap? I think the Giants' chances improved dramatically once Sherril was put into the game, but I wasn't exactly intimidated by Broxton after he loaded the bases and only managed an out on a sacrifice.

If anything, this is just a payback for them getting screwed on Sunday afternoon.

[Ksyrup]

Not to take this too far off-track, but one rule all youth leagues (boys and girls) need is a delay rule. Nearly all youth games are timed, and what we've seen is coaches delaying the ends of games they are winning so the other team can't come back. We've had the "runner on 1st base unties her shoes so she can spend 3 minutes tying them" ploy, the "I better go talk to my pitcher and infield about what flavor ice cream they want after the game" ploy, and my personal favorite, the "I think someone batted out of order...[5 minutes later, after purposely confusing the umps and other team]...oh sorry, my bad, I see where I messed up now" ploy. Had that last 1 twice this year so far.

There should be a rule that any timeouts, conferences, or delays of any kind in the lasat 5 minutes of a game stops the clock.

/End Rant

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by sooner333

Mattingly visited the mound (in the dirt circue). He turned and walked away, putting both feet in the grass. Immediately after placing his second foot on the grass, he turned around and put both feet back in the dirt circle (the umpire shouted "No, no, no--you can't do that, but it was too late to save Mattingly). Then he left again.

Yeah, if that's what happened, that's proper enforcement of the rule.

It's one of those unfortunate situations, too. On the one hand, common sense would make you go "Come on, now." On the other, the rule is there to prevent the manager from wasting time so his reliever can get warmed up. There's only so much you can really do to balance common sense with shenanigan prevention.

[stevew]

Hey look....that Jason Kendall guy got a day off and the Royals won!

[stevew]

Oh, and since it was funny.

Pena-2009 16 extra base hits in 165 at bats
Kendal-2010 15 extra base hits in 323 at bats

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Not to take this too far off-track, but one rule all youth leagues (boys and girls) need is a delay rule. Nearly all youth games are timed, and what we've seen is coaches delaying the ends of games they are winning so the other team can't come back. We've had the "runner on 1st base unties her shoes so she can spend 3 minutes tying them" ploy, the "I better go talk to my pitcher and infield about what flavor ice cream they want after the game" ploy, and my personal favorite, the "I think someone batted out of order...[5 minutes later, after purposely confusing the umps and other team]...oh sorry, my bad, I see where I messed up now" ploy. Had that last 1 twice this year so far.

There should be a rule that any timeouts, conferences, or delays of any kind in the lasat 5 minutes of a game stops the clock.

/End Rant

The umpire generally has control over the game clock, and at least in the PONY league I used to umpire, had some leeway as far as extending the game beyond its allotted time.

It really comes down to how much of a dick the umpire is willing to be to get the coaches to knuckle under. He has the discretion to refuse to grant time out, and if the batter is excessively delaying the game, the rulebook generally permits him to assess a strike against the batter. I had to do that once or twice.

The biggest foot-dragging I usually saw wasn't things like the shoe-tying ploy. Usually, it revolved around warmup tosses. Since the kids whose games I ran were typically at the younger age groups, there weren't a lot of instances of the child throwing his warmup tosses to another child. They'd run a coach out there.

When they wanted to drag things out, however, either the coach would send his pitcher out as late as possible with the expectation that the pitcher would get his full slate of warmup tosses, or the coach who was supposed to warm up the pitcher would wait until the last second to go out there.

The rulebook had a between-innings time limit and a minimum warmup toss limit in there specifically to combat that, and the managers always seemed mystified when I'd enforce it. But I only had to do it once in any given game, and they got the point.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by stevew

Hey look....that Jason Kendall guy got a day off and the Royals won!

Hey, Brayan got to play today! Huzzah

SI

[stevew]

baseballs need to take out a restraining order vs Pedro Alvarez this month. Love ya Lungs but it is so nice to watch the Brewers eat shit for a change.

[Swaggs]

Vote for Pedro!

[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.