Frayed Knot

You find it hard to believe that base coaches or 'defensive captains' will stall while waiting for a signal from the dugout via their man upstairs just like the manager now does? I find that hard to believe. Edgy MD wrote: We don't waste time with the farce of a fat old guy climbing out of the dugout and crossing the field slowly while pretending like he's scuttling, which is the biggest stalling tactic of them all. Somebody on the field wants to ask for an appeal, he can, but his time is limited to a specific length and then he's cut dead. Easy. Peazy. Hey, if they're going to set up a time limit for appeals then it hardly matters who does the challenging. But I think MLB would be wary of doing that without also increasing the number of challenges per game since teams will be less sure about the ultimate outcome if they have to challenge prior to receiving guidance from upstairs. And, sure, wireless technology would at least solve the problem of looking like MLB is behind the times ... although maybe they feel they need the bigger, noise-cancelling types to hear what NYC is telling them.

Edgy MD wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: And then if you're not going to do it via manager challenges, then how? Base coaches, already on the scene, can approach the ump and ask for an appeal, following signals from the manager in the dugout, if necessary. If the defensive team wants to challenge, their designated defensive captain can make the appeal. Easy peazy. How does any of that do away with the stalling tactics? Whether it's the manager stalling while waiting for the guy on the phone, or the base coach/defensive captain stalling for a signal from the manager who's waiting for the go-ahead from the guys on the phone, I don't see how we're getting anywhere.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Reducing the amount of time between innings is also a good idea. Entertainment shows have been challenged to come up with ways to advertise even though people fast-forward through commercials. Sports events, more likely to be watched live, don't have to worry about that, but they can maximize their in-game spots. ("This foul ball sponsored by Toyota.") I know this kind of thing is awful and annoying, but if it leads to shorter commercial breaks and games ending earlier, I'd be willing to put up with it. (I've pretty much learned how to tune out that noise by now anyway.) The thing is, they're not even reducing the time between innings (Heck, we'd all like to reduce commercial time but we know that's not going to happen) merely taking steps to ensure that the game is ready to go as soon as the allowed time is up. Nothing more annoying then waiting out the allotted commercial time* only to have it be another 20-30 seconds before the first pitch is thrown. If they stick to their guns on this one (a REAL big IF) then the batter is going to be in the box when the station break ends. Then, as soon as the ump gets the signal that break time is over, he simply points to the pitcher and they're ready to go. * 2:05 for most games, 2:25 for GotW, 2:55 for post-season

Some would argue that the waiting for the signal from the dugout time is simply replacing the dirt-kicking, hat-throwing, tantrum time that managers used to have instead, so, in effect, little time is lost or gained. And then if you're not going to do it via manager challenges, then how? Where a time limit needs to be imposed is in the review itself, where if the folks back in NYC haven't found enough evidence to overturn after 'X' amount of time then the call stands. That always leaves open the possibility that a percentage of wrong calls won't get reversed but when most replay proponents envisioned how it would work I highly doubt they were all up in arms over the split-millimeter type of calls where someone needs a magnifying glass up against an 80-inch hi-def screen to determine whether the ball actually settled into the 1st baseman's glove before the runner's spikes hit the pillow or the other way around. Those, I'm sure, are the time-consuming ones since you and I could do the obvious calls from our couches without needing 14 angles and a room full of consultants. But when the stated purpose is "to get it right" then it becomes tough to keep down the number and type of plays that can't be reviewed and we wind up constantly chasing the idealistic goal of; 'oh replay would be perfect if we just do it this way ...'.

They got Bumgarner'ed

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: That Tiger-love just ain't for us. We crave a different kind of buzz. I already like this better than 'Eye of the Tiger' Also, how many 61 year olds are looking as good as George Brett these days? I bet he can still hit.

Edgy MD wrote: I'm surprised they didn't do anything with trimming time off of replay challenges. Since replay was first argued for and proposed in football* some 30 years ago, the big selling point from its proponents has been that it'll only cover a limited scope of plays ("heavens no, it'll never be used for ball spotting") and that it'll have a time limit. And yet 30 some years later they continue to grow the number of things it covers and it only gets longer and longer. Yes better technology could shave a few seconds here or there, but the whole 'limited' replay concept remains an exercise in trying to stay only somewhat pregnant. If you're going to use it it's going to take time. * actually in one of the rival leagues first, not in the NFL who demeaned it as a gimmick unworthy of their time. They did that with a lot of rule changes (goalposts in the back of the end zone, radios in helmets, moved kickoffs, 2-point conversions, etc.) and yet somehow get credit for being an innovative league

Recommendations from the 'Pace of Game Initiative' committee will get a test run during Arizona Fall Lg games. Among the rules in effect: * A hitter must keep one foot inside the batter's box throughout his plate appearance. Exceptions include a foul ball or a foul tip, a pitch forcing the batter out of the batter's box, a request for time out being granted, a wild pitch or a passed ball and several others. --- This will be an obvious improvement. Plus the biggest thing here is simply to stop the players from getting into their wandering habits in the first place. * Intentional walks will no longer include the pitcher lobbing four balls outside the strike zone. Instead, the manager will signal to the home-plate umpire and the batter will take first base. --- This has been a longtime complaint of some folks but I think it's small potatoes. I like forcing pitchers to actually throw the ball (ya never know what might happen!) and the time saved is really minimal. * There will be a maximum break of two minutes and five seconds between innings, with hitters required to be in the batter's box by the one minute and 45 seconds mark. If a hitter doesn't comply, the umpire will call a strike. If the hitter is ready but the pitcher doesn't deliver a pitch by two minutes and five seconds, the umpire will call a ball. --- This is the other prime culprit and another one where there's long been a proscribed limit that's been ignored. Having the batter actually in the box when the station comes back from commercial, as opposed to still swinging bats in the on-deck circle listening to his personal walk-up music, will be a pleasure. * There will be a maximum of two minutes and 30 seconds allowed for pitching changes, including those that occur during an inning break. The clock starts when the reliever enters the playing field. The penalty will be that the umpire calls a ball. --- Fine, but I don't know why they need 2-1/2 minutes. Eliminating (or at least cutting down from eight) the warmup pitches on the mound for a reliever (a tradition that dates back to when bullpen mounds weren't on a par with the field mound) could easily cut this down to 90 seconds or less. * Each team will be permitted three "timeout" conferences covering any meeting involving pitchers and catchers, managers, coaches and batters. Timeouts during pitching changes and those that result from an injury or other emergency will not be counted toward the limit. --- I can just hear Jorge Posada saying; "That's three trips per batter, right?" * Additionally, at one of the AFL parks they're going to experiment with visible pitch clocks, operated independently of the umpiring crew, which will require the pitcher to pitch within 20 seconds of the batter stepping in the box. --- I've long been wary of a 'shot-clock' type of solution, but the league has put themselves into situation where it might be the best answer. Now if only they had started this stuff maybe two decades ago.

The larger roster problem I had in 2006 is that they did not allow roster adjustments after the game 1 rainout, despite eliminating the travel day between games 2 and 3, meaning there'd be games in five consecutive days. I don't remember the specific pitcher who may have been let off that I would have liked added (maybe it was El Duque) but it did bother me at the time. Then Cliff re-aggravated his ankle early in game one and we didn't see him again till the ninth inning of game 7, so we played basically the whole series a player short. Yes, that was the El Duque injury I was speaking of a few posts ago. He injured himself jogging after Game 1 was called off and would have been replaced if allowed. But because the roster cut-off time had passed in advance of the scheduled Game 1 time, they weren't allowed to replace him even though it was 24 hours or so before the series got going. The Cliff thing is a bit different as the series (the next series) had already started and that was the way things always were: substitutions between series only, not during them. But now they've thrown even that out the window and allow replacements with only limited restrictions. And now with the play-in game, they're treating that game as if its own separate round so, as GWreck points out, teams can "deactivate" all their spare starters in favor of all sorts of role players and the whole thing becomes a different game. Like I said, one extreme to the other.

The problem with Yost's decision last night (Ignoring the whole 'Why pull Shields in the first place?' question) for his first reliever wasn't that he went for a starter despite having a deep pen, but maybe that he went to a 23 y/o rookie who had thrown 78 pitches just two days earlier.

Gwreck wrote: Allowing the teams to make roster adjustments between the Wild Card Game and the Division Series seems...strange. Not sure they should be allowed to leave out those other three starting pitchers for the extra relievers/pinch runners. Yeah, it seems like MLB went from one extreme, where no changes were permitted once rosters were set*, to the other, where this one play-in game is treated as if its own separate round and now changes can be made within a series itself. Supposedly in-series swaps can only be made for legit injuries (and on a pitcher-for-pitcher/hitter-for-hitter basis) but that leaves the door open to all kinds of chicanery. * the technicality that cost us the ability to replace El Duque and quite possibly the series even though it was an injury which occurred before the series ever started

Well the results are in and there's no debating the conclusion. Seven stolen bases + four Sac Bunts + one Sac Fly by the least HR-hitting team in the league beats the team clinging to its two multi-RBI HR strategy, proving once and for all that Billy Beane is a fraud and that decision-making by computer printout (that's how they do it, right?) does nothing more than put you on a fast road to failure. It's just simply not the way you win in the post-season. As a result, all copies of 'Moneyball' have been pulled from shelves (time and locations of book burnings have yet to be announced) and we can expect both a public apology and then a public suicide from Bill James before the week is out.

Also, Hamilton, for all his SB prowess (56 steals) didn't succeed at a very good rate (23 caught). A few years back that poor a pct (63%) might not have counted against him so much, but these days I think it will.

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: How about a little love for Motown and the Detroit Tigers! The Mets won a World Series more recently, with Tigers not winning a World Series since the Bless You Boys team of 1984. It's our turn!! Now all they need is a closer and a SS

Keef

Ron Swoboda

I think the Nats are the clear best team. Of course the race doesn't always go to the swiftest or the battle to the strongest ... but that's usually a good way to bet. Best starters, good pen, no real superstar on offense but a lineup that goes 8 deep and an improved bench. And, although momentum probably fails as often as it succeeds, they're also peaking at the right time (17-5 to end the season). Just check out their last trip through the rotation for their probable playoff starters Gio Gonzalez - 7 innings, 0 Runs, 1 hit (vs Mets) Doug Fister - 9 innings, 0 Runs, 3 hits Strasburg - 5 innings, 0 Run, 2 hits Zimmermann - 9 innings, 0 Runs, 0 Hits Who comes out of the AL? ... I have no freakin' idea. Seems like everyone has several holes in various places. Maybe a better shot on this end of one of the WC teams sneaking through.

BA's Top 20 Prospect List for NY-Penn League: #1 - Marcus Molina - RHP, Brooklyn Cyclones #3 - Amed Rosario - SS, Brooklyn Cyclones #7 - Michael Conforto - LF, Brooklyn Cyclones #10 - Jhoan Urena - 3B, Brooklyn Cyclones

On the hitting coach front, Mets Blog (citing various sources) lists candidates under consideration to include Abreu, Edgardo Alfonzo, Savannah hitting coach Val Pascucci, LV hitting coach George Greer, and roving instructor Jack Voigt. Lamar Johnson is expected to be reassigned within the org.

Colon - 3.0 Duda - 3.0 Torres - 0.4 Familia - 0.4 Tejada - 1.4 den Dekker - 0.9 Flores - 0.9

A 15 minute film on Mackey Sasser http://espn.go.com/30for30/film?page=fieldsoffear

And we have the first vacancy filled of the off-season as Houston wastes no time in naming A.J. Hinch to run their dugout. Hinch managed the DBacks for just over a year back in 2009-10 to no particular distinction (89-123). Most recently he was a VP with San Diego. The Houston GM Jeff Luhnow is known to be a SABRE-type guy so one would guess that Hinch impressed him in that field someway. TEAMMANAGERSIGNED THRUSTATUSMETSTerry Collins2015 + option for '16BRAVESFredi Gonzalez2015PHILLIESRyne Sandberg2016 + option for '17NATIONALSMatt Williams2015 + options for �16 + �17MARLINSMike Redmond2015CARDINALSMike Matheny2017PIRATESClint Hurdle2017 + option for �18CUBSRick Renteria2016 + options for �17 + �18REDSBryan Price2016BREWERSRon Roenicke2015 + option for �16DODGERSDon Mattingly2016GIANTSBruce Bochy2016PADRESBud Black2015DBACKSKirk Gibson2014Fired Sept �14ROCKIESWalt Weiss2016RED SOXJohn Farrell2016YANKEESJoe Girardi2017ORIOLESBuck Showalter2018BLUE JAYSJohn Gibbons2015 + option for �16RAYSJoe Maddon2015TIGERSBrad Ausmus2016 + option for �17INDIANSTerry Francona2016ROYALSNed Yost2015TWINSRon Gardenhire2015Fired Sept �14WHITE SOXRobin Ventura2014ANGELSMike Scioscia2018RANGERSRon Washington2014Resigned Sept 2014MARINERSLloyd McClendon201?ASTROSBo PorterFired Sept 2014AJ Hinch - Hired Sept 2014ATHLETICSBob Melvin2016

TEAMMANAGERSIGNED THRUSTATUSMETSTerry Collins2015 + option for '16BRAVESFredi Gonzalez2015PHILLIESRyne Sandberg2016 + option for '17NATIONALSMatt Williams2015 + options for �16 + �17MARLINSMike Redmond2015CARDINALSMike Matheny2017PIRATESClint Hurdle2017 + option for �18CUBSRick Renteria2016 + options for �17 + �18REDSBryan Price2016BREWERSRon Roenicke2015 +option for �16DODGERSDon Mattingly2016GIANTSBruce Bochy2016PADRESBud Black2015DBACKSKirk Gibson2014Fired Sept �14ROCKIESWalt Weiss2016RED SOXJohn Farrell2016YANKEESJoe Girardi2017ORIOLESBuck Showalter2018BLUE JAYSJohn Gibbons2015 + option for �16RAYSJoe Maddon2015TIGERSBrad Ausmus2016 + option for �17INDIANSTerry Francona2016ROYALSNed Yost2015TWINSRon Gardenhire2015Fired Sept �14WHITE SOXRobin Ventura2014ANGELSMike Scioscia2018RANGERSRon Washington2014Resigned Sept 2014MARINERSLloyd McClendon201?ASTROSBo Porter�-Fired Spet 2014ATHLETICSBob Melvin2016

Except that the Nationals are a MUCH better team right now so that's a huge bridge. Their biggest decision next year is Adam LaRoche. I think the plan all along was to move Zimmerman and his throwing problems over to 1B, but losing LaRoche will be a loss for them and losing Zimmerman isn't an option. They'll also need to figure out 2B. Asdrubal Cabrera was a stop-gap and it's clear they have no faith in Danny Espinosa. But Rendon's a future MVP candidate (hell, he's a current one), Harper was still the youngest regular in the majors, Span turned into the leadoff/CF they needed, and that pitching staff is awesome, young, and all under control.

The biggest problem with Gardenhire is that he was like 6-134 vs the Yanx during his time with the Twins ... OK that record might not be entirely accurate but it seems to be the case and it only got worse during playoff match ups. My personal opinion on the guy is that you don't last that long without being at least decent and that he probably relates well to players. But whenever I'd watch games with him at the helm I'd find myself scratching my head at some of his moves. Can't remember what specifically I didn't like and the SSS caveat has to be considered since I obviously don't sit around watching that many Minnesota games - but if I'm Sandy I'm certainly not altering my 2015 plans just because Gardy is suddenly available.