2011 MLB Thread

[Vince, Pt. II]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Absolutely.

His first & foremost priority was to score the run. What happened to Posey was entirely incidental.

Cousins has said himself that he thought his best chance to score the run was to blow up the catcher. As he ran towards the plate, his thought was "I need to knock the ball out of Posey's mitt." He was NOT trying to touch home plate. He was trying to blow up the catcher. It was only after he knocked Posey over that he attempted to tag home plate.

This is why people are arguing over the incident. While it is perfectly clear that Cousins' intent was to score the run, not simply to run over Posey, the argument here is not what the runner's intentions were. The argument is whether or not the runner should have the right to abandon pursuit of touching the base in an effort to eventually get to said base.

[kingfc22]

Originally Posted by Vince, Pt. II

The argument is whether or not the runner should have the right to abandon pursuit of touching the base in an effort to eventually get to said base.

And we have a winner!

[molson]

Originally Posted by Vince, Pt. II

The argument is whether or not the runner should have the right to abandon pursuit of touching the base in an effort to eventually get to said base.

"abandon" and "eventually" are pretty strong terms. In almost every case, including this one, the guy is touching the base as he goes by, or at least trying to. Most collisions are going to involve a runner doing both at the same time - impacting the catcher and touching home. It still sounds to me what people are looking for is making sliding the only legal way to score at home.

[molson]

Dola - I would try to define a zone/lane that the runner can run through in any manner he wants, and permit him to collide with anything in his way. I don't think you can meaningfully distinguish intent there. It's all the same action. The running is intentional, hitting the catcher is intentional, touching the base is intentional.

[stevew]

I liked this thread a lot better when it was all about the red hot Royals and their stacked farm system.

[molson]

Originally Posted by stevew

I liked this thread a lot better when it was all about the red hot Royals and their stacked farm system.

There are a lot of good future Yankees and Red Sox in the Royals' system.

And how about those Sox - tied for first, could be there all alone after tonight. I don't miss those math games everyone was playing when they were 2-10. As it turned out, they had to play .684 over a mere 38 games to get back to 1st. Really not that surprising or dramatic for a billion dollar team with those expectations.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by stevew

I liked this thread a lot better when it was all about the red hot Royals and their stacked farm system.

The offense may have slowed down some, but there's little question that the Royals have the best farm system in the majors. Hosmer and Duffy have both looked good early on.

Originally Posted by molson

There are a lot of good future Yankees and Red Sox in the Royals' system.

Which in itself is somewhat of a ridiculous comment. VERY few Royals prospects over the past 15-20 years have gone directly to either of those teams. And the Royals have staged their payroll to fully paid these upcoming prospects for some time to come.

[stevew]

The Red Sox Fan suicide meltdown was pretty awesome. The team is frigging stacked(with plenty of Royals farmhands on the way) and it was panic at Fenway!

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

VERY few Royals prospects over the past 15-20 years have gone directly to either of those teams.

Says a lot about the state of the Royals farm system over the past 15-20 years.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Says a lot about the state of the Royals farm system over the past 15-20 years.

There's been plenty roll through, but the myth that the Royals are the farm system of the Yankees and Red Sox just doesn't hold any water.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

There's been plenty roll through, but the myth that the Royals are the farm system of the Yankees and Red Sox just doesn't hold any water.

I think it's a joke to get Royals fans riled up more than anything. Which seems to be working in this case.

The Royals have a great system right now and seem set to actually do something, but let's not pretend they've had plenty of great prospects rolling through over the past 15 years. The team has been bad for almost 2 decades and the lack of plenty of prospects is the main reason for it.

[stevew]

Kevin Correia was a better signing than Cliff Lee. eat it Phils fans.


.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by molson

It still sounds to me what people are looking for is making sliding the only legal way to score at home.

Sabean pretty much alluded to that today actually (check the espn.com article where Posey says he's probably done for the year).

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by Vince, Pt. II

Cousins has said himself that he thought his best chance to score the run was to blow up the catcher. As he ran towards the plate, his thought was "I need to knock the ball out of Posey's mitt." He was NOT trying to touch home plate. He was trying to blow up the catcher. It was only after he knocked Posey over that he attempted to tag home plate.

This is why people are arguing over the incident. While it is perfectly clear that Cousins' intent was to score the run, not simply to run over Posey, the argument here is not what the runner's intentions were. The argument is whether or not the runner should have the right to abandon pursuit of touching the base in an effort to eventually get to said base.

If a catcher can block the plate a runner has every right to knock him on his ass in order to get to that plate. It's not like the runner has any advantage except momentum. The catcher has pads and can brace himself in most cases.

The only way to stop that is to not allow the catcher to block the plate.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Atocep

I think it's a joke to get Royals fans riled up more than anything. Which seems to be working in this case.

I assumed he was attempting to make a legitimate, if totally flawed, argument. I apologize if that wasn't the case. No one's getting riled up. I'm too old for that.

[lungs]

Well, the Giants' new catcher sure didn't shy away from a collision with Prince Fielder last night.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Atocep

I think it's a joke to get Royals fans riled up more than anything. Which seems to be working in this case.

The Royals have a great system right now and seem set to actually do something, but let's not pretend they've had plenty of great prospects rolling through over the past 15 years. The team has been bad for almost 2 decades and the lack of plenty of prospects is the main reason for it.

Ya, it was a joke tied with frustration. I don't like the financial setup in baseball, and I especially don't like how certain teams never commit to winning long term, and how they kind of trick their fanbases with false senses of hope. I'd like to believe that at some point they'll spend the big money to keep the best of these prospects together, (i.e., at least get out of the very bottom of the payroll list when they have a chance to win) but I'll believe it when I see it. I mean, how long can some of these franchises keep talking about prospects and the future? 50 years?

[Vince, Pt. II]

Originally Posted by molson

"abandon" and "eventually" are pretty strong terms. In almost every case, including this one, the guy is touching the base as he goes by, or at least trying to. Most collisions are going to involve a runner doing both at the same time - impacting the catcher and touching home. It still sounds to me what people are looking for is making sliding the only legal way to score at home.

"including this one" is where I disagree with your statement. If you watch the video, the runner leaves the ground leading with his shoulder at the catcher. Especially in light of the lane he had to the outside, Cousins was making absolutely no effort to touch the plate via that action. Sure, he wanted to touch the plate - and he even did so after the collision. But it was not until after the collision that he attempted to touch the plate. If Posey had been camped out, blocking any attempt at the base other than through him, it's a completely different story.

Originally Posted by EagleFan

If a catcher can block the plate a runner has every right to knock him on his ass in order to get to that plate. It's not like the runner has any advantage except momentum. The catcher has pads and can brace himself in most cases.

The only way to stop that is to not allow the catcher to block the plate.

And the reason this discussion has any legs at all is that Posey was not blocking the plate. He was standing on the fair territory side of the dish, and there was a clear lane to the plate towards foul territory that the runner intentionally ignored.

Is it fair to force a runner to make a judgement call like that on the fly? I don't know. If that ball gets there any faster, Posey comes to bear much quicker and can effectively block the plate. I think the reason this is such a debate is that the runner made the decision to level the catcher well before the catcher even had the ball. Watching the play, Posey was not attempting to block the plate, he was attempting to make a sweeping tag. If he had gotten the ball quicker, would he have blocked the plate? Probably. As it stands, however, he was utterly defenseless and was brutally injured in the process.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Does Cousins route take him directly over home plate? Yep.

End of story.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Vince, Pt. II

"including this one" is where I disagree with your statement. If you watch the video, the runner leaves the ground leading with his shoulder at the catcher. Especially in light of the lane he had to the outside, Cousins was making absolutely no effort to touch the plate via that action. Sure, he wanted to touch the plate - and he even did so after the collision. But it was not until after the collision that he attempted to touch the plate. If Posey had been camped out, blocking any attempt at the base other than through him, it's a completely different story.

Ya, it was close, I'd have to see different angles. But from the gif in this thread - it also looks like had the runner gone straight - he would have just collided with Posey's left shoulder instead. I wouldn't have a huge problem with a rule change that would have called him out there if that collision took place outside the baseline - but I really don't want to tell runners they can't intend to hit the catcher and must exclusively target the base (by sliding, I guess), which is some of the sentiment out there now.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Does Cousins route take him directly over home plate? Yep.

End of story.

I actually disagree with this. He only goes directly over home plate because he careens off Posey into the plate. His route actually has him lunging over perhaps a couple of square inches of the far corner of home plate. If Posey isn't there and Cousins takes the same route and same action, I don't think he touches home plate. Hell, he'd actually hurdle a few feet past it.

[lungs]

Originally Posted by molson

Ya, it was a joke tied with frustration. I don't like the financial setup in baseball, and I especially don't like how certain teams never commit to winning long term, and how they kind of trick their fanbases with false senses of hope. I'd like to believe that at some point they'll spend the big money to keep the best of these prospects together, (i.e., at least get out of the very bottom of the payroll list when they have a chance to win) but I'll believe it when I see it. I mean, how long can some of these franchises keep talking about prospects and the future? 50 years?

I know I'm a homer, but what about the Brewers? Ryan Braun is a Brewer for the next ten years. Rickie Weeks is locked down for four more years after this. Yovani Gallardo gave up a few free agency years to stay around.

The only guy that the Brewers haven't locked down long-term is Prince Fielder. And honestly, would the Brewers be wise to lock him down long-term with his body type?

As a fan of a small market club like the Brewers, at least I haven't felt absolutely hopeless the last few years. It's a matter of not paying guys like Jeff Suppan $12 million/year.

[stevew]

Hopefully the Pirate bats can gain competence. A lot of our guys are well below expectations. Even if the pitching regresses, I think it is heading in the right direction.

[lungs]

Originally Posted by stevew

Hopefully the Pirate bats can gain competence. A lot of our guys are well below expectations. Even if the pitching regresses, I think it is heading in the right direction.

Looking at the numbers, get Alvarez going and they might have a halfway decent offense besides the black hole at first base.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by Vince, Pt. II

And the reason this discussion has any legs at all is that Posey was not blocking the plate. He was standing on the fair territory side of the dish, and there was a clear lane to the plate towards foul territory that the runner intentionally ignored.

Is it fair to force a runner to make a judgement call like that on the fly? I don't know. If that ball gets there any faster, Posey comes to bear much quicker and can effectively block the plate. I think the reason this is such a debate is that the runner made the decision to level the catcher well before the catcher even had the ball. Watching the play, Posey was not attempting to block the plate, he was attempting to make a sweeping tag. If he had gotten the ball quicker, would he have blocked the plate? Probably. As it stands, however, he was utterly defenseless and was brutally injured in the process.

Not agreeing or disagreeing but since the rules of the game allow the catcher to block the plate the runner has to go into the play expecting it. If the runner makes a normal slide and the catcher blocks the plate which then leads to the runner breaking his leg (or blowing out his knee) everyone would be saying the runner was at fault for being stupid.

[EagleFan]

dola: oh, and you've gotta love that Mets bullpen...

[GrantDawg]

God bless Dusty Baker.

[SackAttack]

My take on the Cousins/Posey thing is pretty much in line with Vince (and this may be the only time you see a Dodger fan and Giants fan on the same side of anything).

But what I would add to that is, if Cousins' decision was 'I've got to bowl him over to score,' and he's got that lane to the outside, if the catcher comes across the lane to block the plate, he *still* essentially has to rely on momentum to carry him through. That part of the calculus doesn't change.

What he did was go out of the baseline to clobber Posey in the hopes of knocking the ball free so he could score, and that was unnecessary.

The decision he has to make whether to slide or go in with a full head of steam doesn't change in the split second he has to make the call. The change in question is his vector - and *that* is where I think a rule application is probably necessary.

In the umpire's judgment, he left the baseline to initiate contact? Out at home, ejected from the game.

Contact happens as the runner is making an attempt within the baseline to score? Any injury within the context of that would be unfortunate, but the play should still be legal.

[Vince, Pt. II]

Originally Posted by Pumpy Tudors

I actually disagree with this. He only goes directly over home plate because he careens off Posey into the plate. His route actually has him lunging over perhaps a couple of square inches of the far corner of home plate. If Posey isn't there and Cousins takes the same route and same action, I don't think he touches home plate. Hell, he'd actually hurdle a few feet past it.

This.

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Not agreeing or disagreeing but since the rules of the game allow the catcher to block the plate the runner has to go into the play expecting it. If the runner makes a normal slide and the catcher blocks the plate which then leads to the runner breaking his leg (or blowing out his knee) everyone would be saying the runner was at fault for being stupid.

That's why you don't see me yelling my head off for a rule change. I don't really see anything that is elegant that would alleviate the situation. Slide-only rules not only put the runner at a somewhat significant injury risk, they give the catcher an enormous tactical advantage and bring umpire subjectivity into the equation, which is never a good idea. This is just a flukey, crappy play.

Originally Posted by SackAttack

My take on the Cousins/Posey thing is pretty much in line with Vince (and this may be the only time you see a Dodger fan and Giants fan on the same side of anything).

But what I would add to that is, if Cousins' decision was 'I've got to bowl him over to score,' and he's got that lane to the outside, if the catcher comes across the lane to block the plate, he *still* essentially has to rely on momentum to carry him through. That part of the calculus doesn't change.

What he did was go out of the baseline to clobber Posey in the hopes of knocking the ball free so he could score, and that was unnecessary.

The decision he has to make whether to slide or go in with a full head of steam doesn't change in the split second he has to make the call. The change in question is his vector - and *that* is where I think a rule application is probably necessary.

In the umpire's judgment, he left the baseline to initiate contact? Out at home, ejected from the game.

Contact happens as the runner is making an attempt within the baseline to score? Any injury within the context of that would be unfortunate, but the play should still be legal.

Stop this, I feel dirty now. Not a bad solution though...I just hate bringing subjectivity into the game any more than necessary.

[molson]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

The decision he has to make whether to slide or go in with a full head of steam doesn't change in the split second he has to make the call. The change in question is his vector - and *that* is where I think a rule application is probably necessary.

Right, the vector is key I think - if you get into intent (i.e. the runner has to be directly intending to touch the base and not intending to hit the catcher), that's just silliness, IMO, and mandates sliding as the only way to score.

And another thing, many injuries are actually prevented by the runner bracing himself (or in other words, "intending" to hit the catcher.). When one guy is running, properly bracing himself, and the catcher is expecting it at a certain point, and is also properly bracing himself, injuries are much more rare. If you tell the runner what some people in the thread seem to want to tell him - "OK, you have to focus on the base, don't think about the catcher, don't intend to hit the catcher, but if you happen to collide with him, then that's OK", I think would lead to far more awkward collisions and far more injuries.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Pumpy Tudors

I actually disagree with this. He only goes directly over home plate because he careens off Posey into the plate. His route actually has him lunging over perhaps a couple of square inches of the far corner of home plate. If Posey isn't there and Cousins takes the same route and same action, I don't think he touches home plate. Hell, he'd actually hurdle a few feet past it.

So he worked out the geometry perfectly

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Vince, Pt. II

Stop this, I feel dirty now. Not a bad solution though...I just hate bringing subjectivity into the game any more than necessary.

Not half as dirty as I felt typing it in the first place.

But, really, looked at from the proper angle, baseball *is* subjective. Yeah, the rules define what the strike zone is, but the umpire makes a subjective call as to whether the pitch is within the strike zone.

The rules define what constitutes a ball "in play," but the umpire makes a subjective call as to whether the ball lands in fair or foul territory.

Hell, virtually all of the rules governing the runner rely on subjective interpretation, with a couple exceptions.

About the only rules I can think of which don't involve subjectivity in any way are those governing player substitution and batting order. Even the infield fly rule, if I recall my training, isn't 100% objective. It's close, but there's some wiggle room.

Virtually everything else is applied subjectively; worrying about introducing subjectivity into the sport is very much a case of shutting the door on an empty barn.

[SirFozzie]

Not quite MLB, but.. remember those old YOU make the call videos? Here's a baseball one:

http://deadspin.com/5806214/just-you...+8-double-play

Minor League Baseball? Or Chinese Fire Drill.... YOU MAKE THE CALL!

edit: Found a version with sound

[Scoobz0202]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

God bless Dusty Baker.

Really is crazy how I go from loving this team more than anything last season to almost hatred this season. It's the same exact team.

[rowech]

Originally Posted by Scoobz0202

Really is crazy how I go from loving this team more than anything last season to almost hatred this season. It's the same exact team.

Doesn't have the same feel to them though. The pitching is in shambles and I'm not sure it's going to work out well in the end. Gomes is useless in every way and a platoon of Heisey and Lewis just isn't going to strike a lot of fear. Rolen's not the same either.

[Scoobz0202]

Oh, the same feel isn't there for sure. Outside of a few players, everybody else from last year is just falling off. Still a bunch of young guys, though.

They are just finding ways to lose that just fucking make me want to run through walls.

[Scoobz0202]

and another one run loss for the reds. :sadface:

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Scoobz0202

and another one run loss for the reds. :sadface:

One run loss for the umps. The catcher never even came close to making that tag. Simply terrible call there.

[Scoobz0202]

A bad call on Rolen last night, a bad call on a stolen base by phillips I believe last night, an absolutely horrible call on a ball in the dirt that was about a foot from Vottos check swing that was called a foul tip. All in the final 2/3's of the game.

[rowech]

Originally Posted by Scoobz0202

A bad call on Rolen last night, a bad call on a stolen base by phillips I believe last night, an absolutely horrible call on a ball in the dirt that was about a foot from Vottos check swing that was called a foul tip. All in the final 2/3's of the game.

Yes...butchered calls all weekend long.

[GrantDawg]

Happy Memorial day! Great day to head down to the Ted and watch some Braves.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Man, Dayton Moore is looking like a genius right now with the Soria contract. If he continues to falter, Moore can buy out the remaining years on that contract for $750K a year. Now everyone can see why the players union was so irritated when Soria signed that contract.

There's an awfully good chance that Aaron Crow may end up being the Royals All-Star representative at this point.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

2012 will be guaranteed for Soria soon, barring a looooong DL stint.

[Ksyrup]

He would have been a true genius if he could have both saved the money AND gotten top value for him. A closer on a losing team is pretty useless, even if he's great. Should have dealt him last year, or during the off-season.

[Vince, Pt. II]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

Not half as dirty as I felt typing it in the first place.

But, really, looked at from the proper angle, baseball *is* subjective. Yeah, the rules define what the strike zone is, but the umpire makes a subjective call as to whether the pitch is within the strike zone.

The rules define what constitutes a ball "in play," but the umpire makes a subjective call as to whether the ball lands in fair or foul territory.

Hell, virtually all of the rules governing the runner rely on subjective interpretation, with a couple exceptions.

About the only rules I can think of which don't involve subjectivity in any way are those governing player substitution and batting order. Even the infield fly rule, if I recall my training, isn't 100% objective. It's close, but there's some wiggle room.

Virtually everything else is applied subjectively; worrying about introducing subjectivity into the sport is very much a case of shutting the door on an empty barn.

Well, you can say that a three pointer in basketball is subjective too by that logic. The only "real" subjective calls in baseball are the strike zone (because there is no clearly defined zone, it varies from hitter to hitter) and a check swing.

Edit: Infield fly rule can also be subjective, good point.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

2012 will be guaranteed for Soria soon, barring a looooong DL stint.

Which is possible at this point. Either way, that three year extension has likely become a one year extension at worst now. Given all the poor contract decisions we've seen by the Royals, this one was a very good one.

[Logan]

As intended, this Joe Pos article on intentional walks sufficiently convinced me to listen to his podcast with Bill James about it.

Joe Posnanski » Posts How To End The Intentional Walk «

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Vince, Pt. II

Well, you can say that a three pointer in basketball is subjective too by that logic. The only "real" subjective calls in baseball are the strike zone (because there is no clearly defined zone, it varies from hitter to hitter) and a check swing.

Edit: Infield fly rule can also be subjective, good point.

Rule 2.00 -

The STRIKE ZONE is that area over home plate the upper limit of which is a horizontal line at the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the uniform pants, and the lower level is a line at the hollow beneath the kneecap. The Strike Zone shall be determined from the batter's stance as the batter is prepared to swing at a pitched ball.

Letters to the knees, essentially, is what the strike zone is *supposed* to be. You and I know it doesn't get called that way, but that's what it's supposed to be. I've read where, in the past, some umpires have gotten a bug up their butt to call the strike zone according to the definition in Rule 2.00 and the league office has come down and said "Well...let's not get hasty, now" or words to that effect.

But I'm kind of meandering away from my point, which is that getting uneasy about introducing subjectivity into something like "did the runner leave the baseline to initiate contact" while ignoring all of the other ways that an umpire's job involves subjectivity is kind of selective blindness.

Judgment calls are, by their very definition, subjective calls. Many, if not most, of the rules by which the game is governed involve, in one way or another, subjective interpretation.

[molson]

There's a different between normal judgment call and trying to define and articulate what's going on in a runner's head in a 2-second period. "Did the runner leave the baseline to initiate contact" I think is completely reasonable and a normal kind of call but that's different than "the runner has to be trying to touch the base but not trying to impact the catcher and he has to take what he reasonably believes is the most direct/safest path to the plate depending on the positioning of the catcher and where the throw is", etc. (though that sentiment from a few pages ago may have died down).

[Logan]

I don't believe I've seen it mentioned here (not sure how much carry it's getting outside of the New York area) but news came out yesterday that Gary Carter's brain cancer is inoperable and he'll be undergoing aggressive chemo and radiation treatments. I absolutely LOVED Gary Carter as a little kid and was devastated when they let him go in '89. My first time going to Shea was September 1, 1990, and my dad got those tickets because the Giants were coming to town. I remember cheering for Carter when he came up as a pinch hitter.

Hoping for a remarkable recovery.