Frayed Knot

Ceetar wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: Yes, he wasn't as hostile to them as he generally has been in individual cases. I sometimes think it's stats people he dislikes more than stats themselves. well to be fair, there are plenty of frustrating stats people. There's a lot of a little knowledge is a dangerous thing aspect to it where people parrot researched theories as fact without really understanding the reasoning behind them or how it fits into baseball as a whole. (i.e. ALL BUNTING IS BAD, STOP BUNTING) And there are probably even more frustrating anti-stats people like those who insist that if the stat wasn't in general use prior to 1960 then it's a useless piece o' shit invented by pointy-headed geeks who, because they don't sweat for a living, couldn't possibly know what they're talking about.

So does Wright get an error on that play? I figure he does since the batter technically reached 1st safely.

Another leadoff hit gets followed by another three batters failing to get the ball out of the infield.

Meanwhile, another no-out double gets stranded.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: Asking Gary to comment on Sabermetrics is like asking Nancy Pelosi to comment on the Tea Party He has generally seemed to give "advanced stats" something of a fairer shake so far this year, and was pretty magnanimous this go-round. Yes, he wasn't as hostile to them as he generally has been in individual cases. I sometimes think it's stats people he dislikes more than stats themselves. And, yeah, the discussion of the weaknesses of BABiP should include the mention that, if it truly were dependent on individual skill, then it should be more predictable.

Asking Gary to comment on Sabermetrics is like asking Nancy Pelosi to comment on the Tea Party

Well those two innings only take an hour. What's that commercial? not going anywhere for a while ...

It's a start.

I heard a spot with national baseball writer Richard Justice this morning talking about, among other things, the troubles out west in Angel-land. The upshot of the whole deal are rumors that Mike Scoscia's canning could be coming sooner rather than later despite his long tenure, despite the fact that half his pitching staff is on the DL, that neither Pujols or Hamilton is hitting, plus that minor condition about him being under contract [u:r99819u7]until 2018[/u:r99819u7]. Justice says that even Scoscia himself believes he's on the way out. The team is under-achieving (barely out-pacing Houston), Scoscia reportedly doesn't get along with GM Jerry DiPoto (who didn't hire him) and pre-dates just about everyone above him in the ownership realm as well so he's probably no longer anyone's 'boy'. The fun part is that the one thing that might be keeping him from already being jettisoned is that Angel brass is afraid that he'll be unemployed for about an hour and a half at which point he'd be snapped up by ... the cross-town Dodgers!! The boys in blue are doing almost as poorly, manager Mattingly is not only in his first job but is signed for just this season, and of course Scoscia's LAD roots go back a long time. Don't think anyone would have put him high up on the pre-season guesses for first-guy-canned but it's starting to look like that may be the case. Should be fun to watch.

Ceetar wrote: I don't like Jordany as an infielder Neither do I full-time, but no one is asking him to be full-time there. and I don't like Turner as the 4-position backup either. As long as he's hitting .350 (.378 actually) I like my Turner anywhere I can get him. Five positions, btw, including LF the other night. Satin is hitting, but sure, grab a lefty. Brown was hitting when we called him up too, as was Lagares.

Have no idea whether this 'D' portion of the rule is new or not, but it certainly does NOT apply to last night's situation. If it is new it might explain a bit where Porter (and maybe even the umps) got the idea in his/their head(s) that last night's stunt was legal - although it still doesn't excuse it. What it probably DOES do is give strength to Bobby' V's case that the rule book needs some kind of overhaul/reorganization/culling as new amendments sometimes seem either redundant to previous ones or in contradiction to them and that the whole thing can be simplified. He would probably be a good guy to put in charge of such a project too although I can't see that happening.

Porter: "I was fortunate enough last year to sit in with [Nationals manager] Davey [Johnson] when they changed the rule of a pitcher having to face a batter". Say what?!? I'd like to hear Davey's version of this. And Joe Torre's since this stuff seems to be under his command these days. Either Porter knows about some rule change that apparently no one else knows or he doesn't know a rule that I've known about since I was like six years old. I'm not sure which explanation is worse. And then why Culbreth & brethren allowed it to happen demands an even bigger explanation. As that Hardball Talk piece says, this IS worse than the judgment call HR from the night before.

Rule 3.05 (a) The pitcher named in the batting order handed the umpire-in-chief, as provided in Rules 4.01 (a) and 4.01 (, shall pitch to the first batter or any substitute batter until such batter is put out or reaches first base, unless the pitcher sustains injury or illness which, in the judgment of the umpire-in-chief, incapacitates him from pitching. ( If the pitcher is replaced, the substitute pitcher shall pitch to the batter then at bat, or any substitute batter, until such batter is put out or reaches first base, or until the offensive team is put out, unless the substitute pitcher sustains injury or illness which, in the umpire-in-chief�s judgment, incapacitates him for further play as a pitcher. © If an improper substitution is made for the pitcher, the umpire shall direct the proper pitcher to return to the game until the provisions of this rule are fulfilled. If the improper pitcher is permitted to pitch, any play that results is legal. The improper pitcher becomes the proper pitcher as soon as he makes his first pitch to the batter, or as soon as any runner is put out. Rule 3.05© Comment: If a manager attempts to remove a pitcher in violation of Rule 3.05 © the umpire shall notify the manager of the offending club that it cannot be done. If, by chance, the umpire-in-chief has, through oversight, announced the incoming improper pitcher, he should still cor- rect the situation before the improper pitcher pitches. Once the improper pitcher delivers a pitch he becomes the proper pitcher.

Edgy MD wrote: Edgy MD as McCutcheon Came to the Plate in the Ninth wrote: Plate appearance of the night here. Turned out to be the glove appearance of the night too. We have, among other things, been getting 'out-gloved' lately, particularly in the OF

Last night's (new) controversy involving the men in blue occurred in Houston where the Angels played the game under protest although later withdrew the claim when they came back in the late innings to win the game. The situation: Two on, two outs, Angels trailing, 5-3, top seven - Astros manager Bo Porter replaces RHP Paul Clemens with LHP Wesley Wright, with left-handed hitter J.B. Shuck due to bat. - After Wright threw his warm-up pitches and Porter saw the right-handed-hitting Luis Jimenez on deck to pinch-hit, Porter made another pitching change, going to RHP Hector Ambriz before Wright faced a hitter, which isn't allowed unless there's an injury. - At this point, a furious Scioscia informed the umpires that the Angels would play the rest of the game under protest -- "I think the rule's pretty clear," Scioscia said. Porter had a different understanding. "Technically, Wesley came in to pitch the batter that was scheduled to hit, but he pinch-hit for the batter that was scheduled to hit -- which, from my understanding of the rule, you can bring in another pitcher to face the pinch-hitter," said Porter. Crew chief Fieldin Culbreth allowed the change and did not comment afterward saying only that "all matters concerning protests are handled through the league office." So I've been watching this game for a long time now and the comments by Astros manager Porter and, by extension, the actions of Culbreth are the first time I've ever heard of this rule being even subject to interpretation. As far as I've even known, a pitcher who's brought in must face at least one batter or get one out (such as, say, a pick-off) before he can then be swapped out for another. I'm stunned that Porter and apparently Culbreth feel otherwise and in a way wish that Houston had held on to the lead just to see the protest go through since, unlike the judgement call from the night before, this sort of rules interpretation is exactly the sort of thing that the protest route is built to redress.

Baxter's so good I'm going to have a drink in his honor. Or maybe two. Or m ...

OK, I'll admit to NOT wanting to PH Baxter for Lagares there ... but the pull-shift they had on him is what got that hit through.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: Well, the deep OF giveth, and the deep OF taketh away. Was grumbling to myself a little when the leadoff single dropped in front of him. WAS. As was I Don't mind the 'no doubles' idea in concept but, like Ronnie said, sometimes teams over-do it.

Well, the deep OF giveth, and the deep OF taketh away.

My first memory of Mark Malancon was from back when he was a Yanqui farmhand and Suzyn Waldman was telling everyone how great he was going to be. She of course knew that because the Yanquis had told her so even though she was passing it off as if it was her independent opinion. That was like 8 years and 4 organizations ago.

Now the only problem is that NYM hitters have practically a tabula rasa against this Locke guy

Had a feeling coming in to this inning that it wasn't going to end well. That the Noffense is leaving the hurlers with no margin for error isn't helping things.

Sort of more of the same low-OBP with promise of power types that we have now - plus I'm assuming that much of that power promise is not nearly as promising as it was several years ago. Good glove, GREAT arm, but then, as you said, lefty-swinging.

And I'm leavin' my family, leavin' all my friends My body's at home but my heart's in the wind Where the clouds are like headlines upon a new front page sky And shiver me timbers 'Cause I'm a-sailin' away

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: We're going to do this... righthanded. So much for Terry saying (or at least implying) that Ike was going to get the starts against all these LHPs (3 of the next 4 games I believe) to see how he fared.