dinosaur jesus

Sure, but that's a hell of a difference in just one season.

Is it possible the story is kind of true, in that Lindor was trying to diffuse the tension by being funny and McNeil wasn't having it?

Frayed Knot wrote: Wade Miley, Cincinnati Reds, no-hitter vs Cleveland. 4th ML no-no of this young season and that does Not include the Bumgarner 7-inning version. Fourteen of the twenty complete games pitched this year have been shutouts. Four of the fourteen shutouts have been no-hitters. Last year, in about twice as many games as have been played this year, there were twelve complete game shutouts and two no-hitters. In 2019, in over five times as many games as have been played this year, there were twenty-six complete game shutouts and two complete game no-hitters. What is going on here?

Somehow it annoys me that that he's continued to play every day for the past five or six lousy years. He's in denial, and the Angels are afraid to offend him. It crosses the line from pride--which you understand from one of the best hitters any of us will ever see--to massive stupid ego. It makes me not like the guy and wish he would just go away. Willie Mays gets grief sometimes for hanging on too long. But it was one year too long--he was still a good player when he came to the Mets--and it ended in a World Series. But my god could Pujols hit. He was in that Willie Mays Ted Williams Mike Trout position where everybody knew he was the real MVP but they had to give it to someone else once in a while just to make it look like a competition.

Frayed Knot wrote: dinosaur jesus wrote: Protesting a game is mostly symbolic, isn't it? It doesn't change anything, George Brett and the Royals might disagree. Yeah, there's that. But name another successful protest.

Protesting a game is mostly symbolic, isn't it? It doesn't change anything, but it's a way of venting, of telling the world that someone screwed up and you're not happy about it. And taking away the right to protest seems symbolic too: it's the commissioner's office saying that everything is great and there's nothing to complain about. It's Rob Manfred being a supercilious dick again.

That was kind of tough to read, but I'm glad I did. Thanks. Duffy Dyer is a handsome son of a bitch, isn't he?

This ties the team record for strikeouts in three straight games, right? Gooden had that run in 1984 where he struck out 11, 16, and 16. That might still be the National League record, too.

He was harmed by that nasty high fastball too, and that completely unfair low breaking ball. Ban 'em all. Idiots.

I'm a little embarrassed to get that call upheld. Nimmo was out.

When two of these stupid rules come together, can't they just waive one of them? I don't even care how this game turns out.

Gooden and Young had a good chance, but it never happened. As it happens, Roadblock Jones and Al Jackson did start both ends of a doubleheader: April 29, 1962. Jackson shut out the Phillies in the opener, while Jackson pitched into the fifth in the nightcap, giving up six runs in a 10-2 loss. It was his last major league start. On August 17, 1980, Ray Burris and Roy Lee Jackson did it, as the Mets were swept by the Phillies. That may be it. If so, the only three times it's happened have been against the Phillies. We've been swept and split. It's time for a sweep of our own.

Should have played on Friday.

John Henry Williams: https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=willia012johhttps://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=willia012joh

Edgy MD wrote: As shitty ways to walkoff go, it probably still beats the extra-inning win featuring a fake runner on second. That was my thought too. It also never makes me unhappy to see Mattingly unhappy.

To this point, pitching against each other, Corbin Burnes and Jose Berrios have combined to pitch 11 hitless innings, with 21 strikeouts. That's got to be at least as rare as a no-hitter. But in a few innings it's almost certainly going to be just another game.

=batmagadanleadoff post_id=58783 time=1616875666 user_id=68] =batmagadanleadoff post_id=58781 time=1616873912 user_id=68] If it was up to me, pitchers would win the MVP way more often than not and way more often than they actually do. Starting pitchers who make almost all of their starts face 800, 900 batters a season. That's a coupl'a hundred more than the number of plate appearances everyday position players get in a season.

Oh geez. His one year in the big leagues didn't go well, but he always seemed this close to figuring it out. It was strange how he could be in the rotation for a whole season, then never heard from again. I remember seeing him featured in an ad for an insurance company. I've just found it; you can look it up if you're curious. It shows Randy jogging, and the text reads: Randy Tate, 23. Promising young pitcher working hard to make it big in the National League. Randy and his wife, Carolyn, have one child. Randy's covered by Life of Virginia. When Randy was 23, he was back in Tidewater, pitching to a 6.20 ERA. His National League career was over.

Do switch hitters count if they hit more than 23 from the left side?

I agree with him. I don't hate those uniforms--they did still look like the Mets--but the racing stripe looked dumb. At least they never wore baby blue road uniforms, like half the teams in baseball in the seventies.

One mitzvah ball per game, mixed in randomly with the other balls. If the batter hits it, it bursts into a bright shower of glitter, bestowing blessings on everyone the glitter lands on. If it lands in the catcher's mitt, he keeps it as a secret token of grace for him and his descendants.

"Koosman" (German, from Kussmann) = Kiss Man "Espinosa" (Spanish) = Prickly "Brach" (Middle French) = Bitch "Strawberry" (English) = The juicy edible usually red fruit of any of several low-growing temperate herbs (genus Fragaria) of the rose family that is technically an enlarged pulpy receptacle bearing numerous achenes on its surface

In every game, each team gets to choose one player from the opposing team to switch sides and play for them. Players wear personalized uniforms with the emblem of their totem animal. The first Sunday of every month is Opposites Day, when first base and first base are switched, righthanders have to throw with their left hands and vice versa, the innings run in reverse order, and balls are called strikes and strikes are called balls, except they're still actually regular balls and strikes. The number of outs in an inning can be any number from one to five, at the defensive team's discretion, as long as they add up to twenty-seven. On Armed Forces Day, teams wear uniforms based on soldiers' gear in battles from history--redcoats versus patriots, Saxons versus Normans, Romans versus Carthaginians, Cro Magnons versus Neanderthals, Ohioans versus Michiganders in the Toledo War of 1835.

Breakout: .330, 35, 120. I remember his father, a backup linebacker who came up big in one particular defensive series against Maryland in 1977, and I've believed in the kid ever since. Even though he wouldn't be born for another 16 years.

dinosaur jesus wrote: The problem with these ideas isn't that you shouldn't be messing with the game. There's been messing all along, often much more radical than anything that's being proposed here.... And the one proposal that seems to stand up for baseball tradition, banning extreme shifts, is the dumbest of all. Shifts are completely within the logic of the game; they exploit something that's been there all along but rarely utilized. They're fun as hell to watch. And they work, which turns out to be the real problem with them. What's wrong with these people? Screed over. I've highlighed the beginning and end of your post. On the one hand, I tend to agree with both excerpted points, very much so. But then I wonder if those points contradict each other. Why are shifts completely within the logic of the game? And why does shift equal baseball tradition? Isn't that mainly arbitrary? What if defenders were barred ever since the beginning of baseball - by official rule - from straying from their designated fielding areas? What if defensive shifts were prohibited ever since the beginning of baseball? Wouldn't we now be attacking new proposed rules permitting defensive shifts as some radical and uncalled for tinkering -- a gimmick? Yeah, I'm probably not being completely logical here. If they'd banned shifts from the beginning, I'm sure I wouldn't think twice about it. But I don't think they would have; I doubt it would have occurred to anyone to do that. And there is a sort of precedent in baseball history. When second basemen started playing halfway to first, and shortstops halfway to third, it's possible there was some grumbling from the traditionalists. But I imagine most people thought it was just a smart way to deploy your fielders, placing them where the ball was most likely to be hit. And that's all a shift does. That's what I mean by the logic of the game--the hitter tries to hit 'em where they ain't, the fielders try to be where the ball is most likely to go. The thought that shifts are unfair comes from the idea that there's such a thing as a third baseman or a second baseman. There isn't. Those are only conventional names. I just don't see the logic of saying that because someone usually plays near third base, and you call him a third basemen, he can't be allowed to move to the other side of second once in a while.