Reyes vs. Braun & Other Average Troublemakers

[Vic Sage]

holychicken wrote: 77 wins, thank you very much. And there we reveal how much I care about it.

yeah, if it had been 76 wins, i would have won the pre-season predictions thread.
So, if those freakin Mets had just abstained from taking the field at all that last game, or at least pulled a "JOSE" and left the game after 1 AB, i would've won! and youse guys would've been cool with that... cuz my glory is OUR glory!

[metirish]

Edgy DC wrote: Willets has indeed closed his account. Not to talk about him behind his back, but I'm sorry to see him go. Try as I might, I can't see why this disagreement should be so much more distressing than any others. We're certainly not going to agree on everything. No need to make it or take it personal.

I don't get that at all, did we all miss something?

[Edgy MD]

I've been re-reading and wondering too. Before taking it on here, I think he was steamed on Facebook at me and others who didn't like the Reyes move. Certainly seemed so. Before Sage entered the frame, anyhow.

I'm not sure if Baby Point #2 has arrived yet, but if not, it's the homestretch. Who wants to supervise collecting for a baby giftie?

[Benjamin Grimm]

Let's put Vic in charge of that.

[Vic Sage]

heh heh heh.

[Fman99]

I could have dispelled all this bitterness and drama with a well timed cock joke.

[Guest Rockin' Doc]

I thank Jose Reyes for his time as a Met and sincerely hope that he returns to the Mets by signing a new deal this offseason. I congratulate him on a wonderful 2011 season and on winning the NL batting title. Personally, I would have preferred that he play the entire game, rather than getting a hit and removing himself from the game. I think to have played the entire game would have the more honorable thing to do, but it was his decision to make and he is apparently happy with the decision he made.

My feeling regarding this are more in line with those of Edgy and Vic, but it isn't all that big deal in the end. It's just that if I were a similar situation (oh to dream) I believe I would have handled it differently by playing. To each his own, I guess.

[batmagadanleadoff]

There�s no honor in baseball. Baseball�s a win at all costs cutthroat competition. If there was any honor in baseball, the sport wouldn�t need any umpires. Because who in the world is in a better position to call balls and strikes than the catcher squatting behind home plate? Was J.C. Martin dishonorable when he declined to call himself out for running out of the baseline? Did anyone here expect Derek Jeter to void his own home run after Jeffrey Maier deflected the in-play ball over the outfield wall? Did anyone here, in their entire lifetime of watching major league baseball, ever see a middle infielder tell the second base umpire that he blew the stolen base call by mistakenly calling the runner out?

Ryan Braun had no reasonable expectation that Jose Reyes would play the Mets� entire last game. This is what happens when Braun fell that far behind an opponent whose team was already eliminated. If Braun, or anybody else has any gripes, they should be griping at Braun for not getting two or three more hits earlier in the season: because the hits in April count just as much as the hits in September.

[Edgy MD]

One level of honor we still have a right to expect, I think, it's that a man a manager puts in the lineup plays until his manager says otherwise, and that a man who is the announced attraction of the day plays some semblance of the game.

Folks came to give him love, and like Jackson Browne in "Hold Out," he traded love for glory.

[Edgy MD]

"I would have played the whole game. I'm like, 'Hey, I fought this hard to be in this position and I'm going to see it through to the end.' My personality, I'm going to ride it out. I worked this hard to be this good and put up these numbers, I would like to see it all the way to the end." "I don't think it's lack of confidence with Jose Reyes, but that is the way he wanted to do it. For what reason, I don't know. It could have been outside influences. His agent may have told him, 'If you get up there, if you get a hit your first AB, you come out.' " "He did everything he needed to do, and when you see that coming from another player, you see them putting the team first. 'It's not about me. I've got to push the issue for the team. I put myself in position that puts us in position.' In previous years you just didn't get quite that feeling from [Reyes] being in the other dugout. This year you really did. It was like, 'This man is doing everything he can.' " "It (being a free agent the same offseason as Reyes) )makes for great comparisons. [Reyes] had a great year, but with free agency, you take a year and a career all into consideration. Then on top of that, you take the things you don't see on the field -- the intangibles in the clubhouse, leading the team. Is this guy a winning player? How does he impact the team by himself when he's in the lineup and out of the lineup? They are all great things to compare." "Baseball is not only about numbers. You get paid a lot with numbers, but you get people to fall in love with you and want you around and give you a little bit more money when you can do all the other things along with putting up good numbers." --- Jiminy Rollins Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/mets/rollins_rant_Ap9KSTC38AW005vQrS6xAI#ixzz1ZaQwE0vF

[Valadius]

I mean, it would be one thing if there were any meaning to Game 162 this year. There wasn't. This sort of thing has happened with great regularity in baseball going back decades.

[Edgy MD]

There's no meaning in any baseball game except that which you invest in it.

[smg58]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Ryan Braun had no reasonable expectation that Jose Reyes would play the Mets� entire last game.

I was under the impression that most people with a slight lead in the batting race going into the last day don't play at all if the game has no playoff implications.

[Frayed Knot]

It varies.

There was one BA race years ago (although I've forgotten the specific participants by now) where the leader sat out his game only to see the guy in 2nd get a couple of quick hits in his and take over the lead. This prompted a rushed PH appearance by the by-now former leader but an out put him even further behind and he wound up losing the title.



btw, I picked up this 'TransMonk' quote from the IGT of that game: "Francesa says he's now rooting for Braun"
I wonder if Francesa was rooting for Mo Vaughn back in '98 when his beloved 'Bernie Baseball' left after 2 ABs and 2 hits in the final game of his season once his (one and only) BA title was in hand. Vaughn went 2-for-4 that day but lost by 2 points.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Reyes Has No Reason to Apologize for Batting Title Rob Kirkpatrick I'm amazed by the flack New York Mets shortstop Jose Reyes is getting. I'm especially astounded by the comments from those who should know their baseball history better. Reyes went into game number 162 last Wednesday afternoon leading Ryan Braun of the Milwaukee Brewers in the National League batting race, .336 to .335. In his first at-bat, Reyes led off with a bunt single against the Cincinnati Reds' Edison Volquez to raise his average to .337. Mets manager Terry Collins promptly pulled Reyes for a pinch-runner, as he and his star player had agreed in the event Reyes got a hit in his first at-bat. Reyes hadn't exactly clinched the batting title with his single, but he'd taken a commanding lead: Braun would have to go 3 for 3 or 3 for 4 that night in Milwaukee's game with Pittsburgh, a possible-but-improbable occurrence, to overtake Reyes. Since the odds are statistically against a hitter getting a hit in any given at-bat -- Ty Cobb, owner of the highest career batting average, got a hit in less than 37% of his at-bats -- the chances were significantly greater Reyes would have lowered his average by stepping into the batter's box again than the chances Braun would go 3-4. In short, the shortstop was shrewdly playing the odds, something he put himself in the position to do by carrying the league's highest batting average into the final game. After Braun went 0 for 4 that night and saw his average drop to .332, Reyes claimed the NL batting crown. Yet as soon as he trotted off the field on Wednesday, criticism of the Mets shortstop shot across cyberspace. Comparisons were made to Ted Williams, who carried a .400 average into the final day of the 1941 season but played in both games of a season-closing doubleheader. (Technically, his average was .39955 but officially would have been rounded up.) The famously confident hitter, arguably the best ever, got six hits in eight at-bats in the twinbill to finish at .406; no Major Leaguer has broken the .400 mark for a full season since. Ironically, Williams often was criticized in his day for being overly concerned about his batting average. "Critics noted that if there were a man on second and a hit needed, the great Williams would rather take a walk than try for a hit on a pitch off the plate that would drive in a run," noted "Out of Left Field" columnist Stan Isaacs. "Joe DiMaggio, Stan Musial, Jackie Robinson, and the notoriously-bad-ball hitting Yogi Berra would be logical choices over Williams to hit in such a clutch situation." I've rooted for Reyes over the years but have also been critical of him at times. For such an outstanding player, he can make his share of mental mistakes, which (to be fair) often stem from the aggression that comes with playing the game at a higher speed than everyone else. Speaking of bunts, he seems to approach sacrifice situations as if he was bunting for a hit by dragging it down the line -- a lower-percentage play that can roll foul -- rather than simply squaring around and meeting the ball with his bat to put it in play. But in the case of Reyes's early exit on Wednesday, Williams himself would be the only person who would have the right to criticize Reyes. Everyone else is off base. First off, if Braun had gone for 3 for 4 to climb over Reyes in the batting race... are we really to believe Braun would have stayed in the game for a fifth at-bat to needlessly risk yielding the batting crown back to Reyes? (If you think so, you might want to file for tax-exempt status for your Church of Braun.) As anyone who knows baseball history could point out -- David Schoenfield, for one, pointed this out in a piece for ESPN.com -- there is a long-standing precedent of players sitting out at-bats or entire games to preserve batting titles, including Terry Pendleton in 1991, when he won the NL batting race, the NL MVP, and led the Atlanta Braves to the World Series. Still, that didn't stop plenty of people whose job is to know sports from spouting off on Reyes's character. ESPN's Steve Levy, for one, tweeted after an eventful evening that decided postseason berths: "On a night in which we saw everything that is right and great about baseball,we got the oppositte [sic] from jose reyes. Don't want him on my team." I supposed Levy also wouldn't have wanted a winner like Pendleton on his team. Or Bernie Williams, the former Yankees centerfielder who owns four World Series rings. Manager Joe Torre, who's lionized in New York, removed Williams from the final game of the 1998 season to preserve his lead over Boston Red Sox slugger Mo Vaughan. (While managing the Mets in 1977, Torre also substituted for a young Lee Mazzilli when the rookie led off the team's final game with a double, thus raising his average to .250 -- hardly a number to boldface on the back of a baseball card, but one that tells someone you at least had one hit every four at-bats.) Talk show host Jim Rome also ranted against Reyes in tweets that night: "Jose Reyes?! Are you kidding me? I hope Ryan Braun goes 4-4. And Matt Kemp [who was third in the race] goes 15-17. Laying down a bunt single and call it a day is weak"; and later: "I don't know anyone not pulling for Ryan Braun tonight. Too bad he's 0-3 and Jose Reyes is going to back into a batting title. Bush move." Reyes "backed into" the batting title? In his last four games, he struck six singles, a double, and two home runs in 15 at-bats -- for a .600 average and 1.667 OPS over that stretch. I'm guessing Rome also would say a division winner had backed into the playoffs if it had a ten-game winning streak snapped on the last day of the season. As part of the whole controversy, haters have focused also on how Reyes got his last hit in 2011. (Note Rome's calling out the "bunt single.") For Michael Moraitis's piece on Bleacher Report, a photo caption labels it a "cheap bunt single," as if taking a 90-mph pitch off a Major League pitcher and placing it perfectly between the pitcher, catcher, third baseman, and third-base foul line is an easy task -- as if a bunt single is somehow a lesser hit than, say, a ground ball that takes a bad hop or a seeing-eye single that barely trickles past the second baseman. One wonders why leadoff hitters ever swing away if bunting for a hit is so "cheap" and "easy." This sort of macho posturing from sports commentators is nothing new. It's both hollow and unsustainable. Following the same mindset, shall we criticize the manager who has his batter lay down a sacrifice bunt to move the potential winning run into scoring position rather than (in a more manly fashion) swing away for the fences? Is a pitcher "gutless" for wasting a 0-2 curveball in the dirt rather than (in a more manly fashion) throwing a fastball right down the middle and daring the batter to hit it? When a basketball coach has a late lead, is he "cheap" for having his team run out the shot clock rather than (in a more manly fashion) challenging the other team to a reckless exchange of fast breaks? When a football team is up by three points with thirty seconds left, is the coach taking the "easy" way out by having his quarterback take a knee rather than (in a more manly fashion) dropping back to throw a pass and daring the other team to pick it off? Nevertheless, many are calling Reyes gutless and his title tainted. And in the social architecture of today's media, once writers declare something tainted, it becomes a viral meme regardless of merit. But perhaps the most foolish criticism of Reyes came not from professional "experts" but from the segment of fans at CitiField who booed when he came off the field on Wednesday. Forget the fact Reyes had just all but locked up the franchise's first batting title in its 50-year history, that Reyes was the best player in the league until the All-Star break and battled through injuries in the second half, that (hello, Steve Levy) the Mets have had a far better record with Reyes in the lineup than without him. When the contract of your most crucial player has just run out, other teams are lining up to bid obscene amounts of money for his services, and you're hoping he will give your financially strapped organization a hometown discount, I'm not sure how smart it is to send him off the field with a chorus of boos. Fans pay a lot of money at Major League Baseball games, and they want to see their favorite stars play. But teams always play their subs and prospects at the end of the year, and if you buy a ticket to game 162, you don't expect to see the "A" team unless they're involved in a contest that decides postseason berths. The Mets starting lineup on Wednesday featured Willie Harris, Mike Baxter, Nick Evans, and Jason Pridie. Reyes's longtime teammate David Wright started the game and also was pulled for a pinch-runner after singling. Managers take players off the base paths, rather than in between innings, in such situations so fans have a chance to cheer for them one last time. Instead, Reyes heard boos. When asked about this later, he said, "It's kind of tough. I wanted to stay in the game. But [fans] have to understand, too, what's going on. They have to feel happy about it if I win the batting title. I do that for the team, and the fans, too." Fans usually don't like players telling them what they need to understand, but in this case Reyes is right. This wasn't just his batting title but the team's and the fans'. The Mets had their third losing season in a row and the team has never had a pitcher throw a no-hitter, but fans no longer have to hear a Met has never won a batting title. Unfortunately, there's a chance they also might no longer be able to cheer for Reyes in a Mets uniform. I hope the Mets front office finds a way to re-sign him. If not, he would leave a void that would take years to fill. But no matter whom he plays for the rest of his career, he earned the 2011 National League batting title, fair and square.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rob-kirkpatrick/jose-reyes-batting-title_b_990677.html

[Edgy MD]

First off, if Braun had gone for 3 for 4 to climb over Reyes in the batting race... are we really to believe Braun would have stayed in the game for a fifth at-bat to needlessly risk yielding the batting crown back to Reyes? (If you think so, you might want to file for tax-exempt status for your Church of Braun.)

Braun is neither here nor there, Snarky. I root for Reyes to meet the standard I and other Mets fans hold our team to. Braun, Jeter, or Bill Madlock are players for other teams and therefore highly suspicious to begin with.

As anyone who knows baseball history could point out -- David Schoenfield, for one, pointed this out in a piece for ESPN.com -- there is a long-standing precedent of players sitting out at-bats or entire games to preserve batting titles, including Terry Pendleton in 1991, when he won the NL batting race, the NL MVP, and led the Atlanta Braves to the World Series.

It's what I expect of Pendleton. It wasn't I look for from Reyes.

Still, that didn't stop plenty of people whose job is to know sports from spouting off on Reyes's character. ESPN's Steve Levy, for one, tweeted after an eventful evening that decided postseason berths: "On a night in which we saw everything that is right and great about baseball,we got the oppositte [sic] from jose reyes. Don't want him on my team."

Yeah, outside criticism was over the top. I think criticism from within Met fan circles is what matters. And most of it has been fair with a reasonable amount of perspective. I certainly don't want to be thrown in with Levy. Or Jim Rome.

Reyes "backed into" the batting title?

No, Rome is wrong. Reyes won the title on his ass.

As part of the whole controversy, haters have focused also on how Reyes got his last hit in 2011.

The bunt is a non-issue (I wish he'd bunt for hits more) and shouldn't be part of the story.

But perhaps the most foolish criticism of Reyes came not from professional "experts" but from the segment of fans at CitiField who booed when he came off the field on Wednesday.

Few are more anti-boo than me. But this isn't elevating a physical failure to a moral one as most home-player booing is. This was experessing disappointment for the star on the marquee exiting in the first inning of his last game when they came to cheer him on one last time. This was about a broken understanding. This was about disagreeing with a choice. And it was relatively modest.

But teams always play their subs and prospects at the end of the year, and if you buy a ticket to game 162, you don't expect to see the "A" team unless they're involved in a contest that decides postseason berths.

Yeah, it gets frequently argued that the last game is about looking at prospects. Look at the facts. He was pulled for Justin Turner --- ultimately one of the team's leaders in plate appearances --- not Reese Havens or Jordany Valdespin. Stop it. It was understood publicly that this was to be Reyes' last game. The manager publicly expressed disappointment that Reyes wanted to come out. So this isn't about his manager placing a higher priority on looking at fresh blood.

Fans usually don't like players telling them what they need to understand, but in this case Reyes is right. This wasn't just his batting title but the team's and the fans'. The Mets had their third losing season in a row and the team has never had a pitcher throw a no-hitter, but fans no longer have to hear a Met has never won a batting title.

No, they have to hear something else. The fans can set their own standards about what they want to hear.

Unfortunately, there's a chance they also might no longer be able to cheer for Reyes in a Mets uniform. I hope the Mets front office finds a way to re-sign him. If not, he would leave a void that would take years to fill.

And due to a deliberated choice, that void began about six innings before anybody was ready for it.

[Vic Sage]

regarding Edgy's comments above, ditto.

Plus:

This sort of macho posturing from sports commentators is nothing new. It's both hollow and unsustainable. Following the same mindset, shall we criticize the manager who has his batter lay down a sacrifice bunt to move the potential winning run into scoring position rather than (in a more manly fashion) swing away for the fences? Is a pitcher "gutless" for wasting a 0-2 curveball in the dirt rather than (in a more manly fashion) throwing a fastball right down the middle and daring the batter to hit it? When a basketball coach has a late lead, is he "cheap" for having his team run out the shot clock rather than (in a more manly fashion) challenging the other team to a reckless exchange of fast breaks? When a football team is up by three points with thirty seconds left, is the coach taking the "easy" way out by having his quarterback take a knee rather than (in a more manly fashion) dropping back to throw a pass and daring the other team to pick it off? Nevertheless, many are calling Reyes gutless and his title tainted. And in the social architecture of today's media, once writers declare something tainted, it becomes a viral meme regardless of merit.

These are all examples of strategies to increase a team's chances of winning a game. But what Reyes did was to strategize to win a personal accolade. the author conflates the 2 distinct ideas again here:

Fans usually don't like players telling them what they need to understand, but in this case Reyes is right. This wasn't just his batting title but the team's and the fans'. The Mets had their third losing season in a row and the team has never had a pitcher throw a no-hitter, but fans no longer have to hear a Met has never won a batting title.

I'm a life-long Mets fan, over 50 years of age, and i've got to tell you i was unaware that a Met had never won a batting title. I'm aware we've never pitched a no-hitter, but the batting title thing? nope. Because its an INDIVIDUAL ACCOMPLISHMENT that may or may not have helped the team win (in this case, NOT so much of that either). But a No-Hitter is invariably a win, and so its a confluence of individual achievement with team success. and when it happens in a playoff race, or post-season game, it takes on mythic proportions.

While a batting title, or HR title, or rbi title or ERA title, etc, are all very well, and i'm happy when a Met accomplishes it, they are outcomes that should be applauded retroactively, not goals to be schemed for prospectively. When a player does that, it indicates to me a guy with his priorities askew.

The fact that it's often done (reiterated in this article like its a mantra from holy scripture) doesn't mean shit to me. Alot of crappy things are often done. they don't deserve applause for being common. I agree that the bunt should not be controversial, because its a perfectly appropriate form of hit (and frankly should be used more by Reyes, not less), and that the whole affair has been overinflated by outsiders with an anti-met agenda.

But just think for a moment how proud you would have been, even if Reyes lost the title, if he had said afterwards, "I'm paid to play baseball. Fans came to see me play baseball. I already missed a quarter of the season this year, and i don't yet know if i'll be back next year, or ever. So I owed it to the fans, to my teammates, to the organization and to myself to go out and play every game, every AB, like its my last, and to come back with my shield or on it. If i win a batting title that way, great. If not, not. I don't play for awards."

If he had said and done that, i would have started up a collection for the Wilpons to resign him at any price. If you feel similarly, measure his actual accomplishment against that theoretical position and see how far short it falls. Now, that he failed to be heroic doesn't mark him as a villain, nor deserve branding with the mark of Cain. But it was a missed opportunity and made me sad when i should have been proud.

[dgwphotography]

I say this a lot, and I'll say this again: What Vic said.

[Guest Rockin' Doc]

To Edgy and Vic....Yup�

A batting title is a nice individual achievement for Reyes. It apparently means a great deal to him, particularly going into free agency, but it means little to me as a fan. I truthfully would have preferred Reyes hit .250 for the year and the Mets have made the post-season, than for him to win a batting title while the Mets finish sub-500 and in 4th place behind the Washington Nationals.

[G-Fafif]

May that awful rat bastard who hit .337 for the Mets before taking off two at-bats atone for his sins this Yom Kippur.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I didn't know Jose Reyes was Jewish!

[Guest themetfairy]

He would have to have had the best Bar Mitzvah reception ever....

[Edgy MD]

Mayor of Bridgeton expands on this thoughts.

[metirish]

Edgy DC wrote: Mayor of Bridgeton expands on this thoughts.

Oh, it's the bullshit generational/Ted Williams thing again.....yawn

I suppose my point is this, people don�t finish well today and they rarely finish with honor. Assuming a certain age, our parents or grandparents knew how to finish. They finished careers, raising children, fighting a war, and everything in between. Today, we don�t finish school, careers, marriages, projects or much of anything else. And when we do, many times we don�t do it with honor.

please

[Ceetar]

sure, back in the revolutionary war soldiers used to fight with real honor and just stand there on the line waiting to take a bullet. None of these pansy hiding and strategery stuff of the later generations.

[Edgy MD]

Oh, I think he's on to to something. He gets some credit for not counting himself as superior, and some discredit for being overbroad.

But I like when folks use a baseball situation to look at how it speaks to bigger issues, without resorting to "Jose Reyes is exactly what's wrong with America today --- with the braids and tattoos and whatnot." He does touch in that direction, certainly.

[Ceetar]

Edgy DC wrote: Oh, I think he's on to to something. He gets some credit for not counting himself as superior, and some discredit for being overbroad. But I like when folks use a baseball situation to look at how it speaks to bigger issues, without resorting to "Jose Reyes is exactly what's wrong with America today --- with the braids and tattoos and whatnot." He does touch in that direction, certainly.

I disagree. I don't think he's on to anything but complaining about how much better things were when he was young. He even starts it with "I don't understand their music and movies either"

Throws in a bible reference (at least, I assume that's what he meant by Paul?)

implies that he doesn't even have email, which is a big red flag of "I'm not really with it", especially as a public figure.

And how doesn't he come off as superior? He basically cites no examples of this 'not finishing' thing, besides Reyes. or what constitutes 'honor' as if we should all know exactly what the definition of that is.

[Edgy MD]

None of those things diminish the point.

Ceetar wrote: I disagree. I don't think he's on to anything but complaining about how much better things were when he was young. He even starts it with "I don't understand their music and movies either"

Some things are better. Some things aren't. He clearly --- clearly --- frames this as something more.

Ceetar wrote: Throws in a bible reference (at least, I assume that's what he meant by Paul?)

And that's definitively bad why?

implies that he doesn't even have email, which is a big red flag of "I'm not really with it", especially as a public figure.

These statements come with a confessional tone.

Ceetar wrote: TAnd how doesn't he come off as superior? He basically cites no examples of this 'not finishing' thing, besides Reyes. or what constitutes 'honor' as if we should all know exactly what the definition of that is.

Sure he does.

...careers, raising children, fighting a war, and everything in between. Today, we don�t finish school, careers, marriages, projects or much of anything else. And when we do, many times we don�t do it with honor.

I don't know why there's should be any controversy about what "honor" means.

[metirish]

I think we need Tom Brokaw to tell us how it is.

[Ceetar]

Edgy DC wrote: Ceetar wrote: TAnd how doesn't he come off as superior? He basically cites no examples of this 'not finishing' thing, besides Reyes. or what constitutes 'honor' as if we should all know exactly what the definition of that is. ...careers, raising children, fighting a war, and everything in between. Today, we don�t finish school, careers, marriages, projects or much of anything else. And when we do, many times we don�t do it with honor. I don't know why there's should be any controversy about what "honor" means.

I'm pretty sure people differ on what they think is honorable. And it's heavily rooted in personal belief.

he throws out topics that he thinks people don't finish, but not examples. And he's probably wrong. I think we finished this Iraq war better than say Vietnam. Aren't mroe people finishing school and getting degrees, particularly college degrees, than say 30 years ago? I'm not sure what careers or projects he's talking about.

Sure, the divorce rate is probably worse, but i doubt the "happily married" rate is better. He'd probably argue that committing to your unhappy marriage and your vows is honorable.