Friday Rockpile: Razing Arizona
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 7:00 AM MDT
in Rockpile
Email
PrintTonight the Rockies begin their final series of NL West play until after interleague play is completed at the end of the month. This will be their first visit to Arizona this season, and their third series against the Diamondbacks so far this year, the previous one having been the first sweep of the year for the Rockies early last week. With the Rockies having gone 6 of 9 over the past three series against the division, Arizona has been razed to the ground for the time being, sitting now tied with the Houston Astros for the worst record in the league. Dontrelle Willis better be a master carpenter. Of course, I doubt anyone expects him to be any sort of fix for the team, and I don't fault them for making the move. I just assume they're thinking forward here and hoping they can use the rest of this year to turn help him around. Willis is scheduled to make his Diamondbacks debut against the Rockies tomorrow, the 5th.
The news on the Rockies is a little slow today, after coming off of an off day (now officially tabbed "Crestfallen Days"), and also because everyone in the media is more interested in opining about Jim Joyce's tragic thievery of Detroit Tigers stater Armando Galarraga's perfect game on Wednesday. A quick look at the Denver Post Rockies homepage shows more storied about this issue than about the Rockies (though that may have changed by the time this article is posted).
I'll touch around some links on that fiasco after the jump, but first, the Rockies news.
Steve Foster at Inside the Rockies informed us Wednesday that Huston Street will be headed to the Sky Sox today to begin his second attempt at rehabbing. Manuel Corpas has been an adequate replacement so far in the 9th inning role, but we all miss Street. Once Street is ready to return, the bullpen is going to start looking a lot different.
MLB.com's Thomas Harding takes a look in summation of some of the Rockies recent draft choices. The First-Year Player (Rule 4) Draft is taking place next week, Monday-Wednesday. Though the article doesn't suggest any likely pick for the Rockies organization, he does offer this intriguing quote on drafting philosophy.
"We're taking the best player available. It's not anything any more complicated than that. We have holes, but if you go into the Draft trying to fill those holes, then you're trying to predict what's going to happen four or five years down the road. None of us are that good. So many things change. We've learned a lot of lessons over the years, and that's one of them." - Dan O'Dowd.
Some of us believe it would be advantageous to consider drafting a position player this year, helping to fill out a couple lower levels with more depth. The Rockies have not selected a position player with their first pick since 2005, when Troy Tulowitzki was taken. The Rockies did select outfielder Tim Wheeler in the first round last season, but Tyler Matzek was their first overall. This quote suggests that we shouldn't be jumping to any conclusions here, and we may be in line for another pitching prospect in Round 1. The Rockies have to wait until pick #26 to make a selection this year. They also have pick #47 in the unusually full supplemental round, compensation for losing Jason Marquis.
As far as I know, PR will probably have a Draft thread like last season for live discussion of the event. Here's a full draft order of the first three rounds, thanks to My MLB Draft.
Transactions notes and umpire insanity after the jump.
This week in minor league transactions from Baseball America's Matt Eddy, no real surprises. It's hard to believe any of our regular readers missed the signing of Kazuo Matsui or the release of Paul Lo Duca. Also, in case you missed it, Shane Lindsay was claimed off waivers for the second time in as many weeks, this time by the Cleveland Indians. As has already been pointed out by several, Cleveland represents a more likely opportunity for Lindsay to make the majors than do the Rockies or Yankees.
Beyond the Boxscore put up a very interesting article on umpire bias Wednesday. Author Jeff Zimmerman highlights some of the differences between various umpires in certain situations, with an emphasis on the differences between lefty and righty batters. Just the other day I was talking with someone about how it seemed left handed batters ad a couple more inches on the outside part of the zone than the righties do, and these graphs seem to support that observation. A good read.
Speaking of umpires, the Joyce/Galarraga imperfect perfect game scenario has divided the community in half, especially now that Bud Selig has agreed to uphold Joyce's original erroneous safe call with two outs in the bottom of the ninth. Denver Post writer Patrick Saunders would have preferred Selig gave Galarraga the perfect game, and provides a lengthy argument in favor of such a decision. Saunders' Post comrade Troy Renck disagrees via Twitter.
"Selig made right decision not to overturn call. It sets terrible precedent for past and future blown calls. But should lead to more replay" - Troy Renck
Saunders argues that this particular situations would be different than, say, asking to overturn something like the Matt Holliday call in Game 163 of 2007, since there were no irreversible consequences to doing so (well, except a few ticks off of Jason Donald's batting average). I am, however, inclined to agree with Renck here. The precedent scares me, and I probably would have made the same call in Selig's shoes. This argument got heated between Rowbots yesterday morning, so to ensure a positive transition out of the Rockpile text and into the comments section, I leave you with the video of Jim Joyce meeting with Armando Galarraga at the mound before Thursday's game. It should make everyone feel a lot better about the situation.
428 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I get to see Huston Street AND Dexter Fowler this weekend?
IZ HAPPY
Just an average guy with exceptional hair. Nothing more, nothing less.
Bear Naked - My thoughts on sports, music, and life.
by Bryan Kilpatrick on Jun 4, 2010 7:25 AM MDT reply actions 2 recs
Hahahaha
Just an average guy with exceptional hair. Nothing more, nothing less.
Bear Naked - My thoughts on sports, music, and life.
by Bryan Kilpatrick on Jun 4, 2010 8:28 AM MDT up reply actions
Is that dog high?
"No Mission Too Difficult, No Sacrifice Too Great—Duty First" - 1st Infantry Division Motto
Purple Row - Covering all your Rockies needs!
Diplomatic and Military History Book Review - My other blog where I go all historical on you.
I would like to think so.
Just an average guy with exceptional hair. Nothing more, nothing less.
Bear Naked - My thoughts on sports, music, and life.
by Bryan Kilpatrick on Jun 4, 2010 8:28 AM MDT up reply actions
It's Tim Lincecum's dog.
its a contact high
Ubaldomania.
by The Lodo Magic Man on Jun 4, 2010 10:39 AM MDT up reply actions
So Lincecum pitches to contact highs...cool
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
What has been seen
Cannot be unseen!
User name pronounced Air-Ah-Miss Originally from my days in the SCA, became a gamer and forum tag because it is odd and it is a name I like
dude that dog is so high
every time I look at it it gets a little higher.
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 3:00 PM MDT up reply actions
I prefer to think of it
As the Perfect Game/Imperfect Umpire scenario.
by Yokel on Jun 4, 2010 8:00 AM MDT reply actions 1 recs
Game Ending Replay
I don’t know if this (in particular) was discussed yesterday, but now I understand why there were 500+ comments in the Rockpile. I understand using replay for home run calls, and to a certain degree fair or foul (the circumstances that would necessitate a fair/foul replay – line drive down the line or fly into a corner – would lend themselves to a ground rule double).
The next obvious situation for using replay would be game-ending calls. Any close play (non-balls, strikes, check swing) that results in the conclusion of a game can be subjected to a 30 second review by a booth umpire. That shouldn’t take anything away from the integrity of the game, and in many cases (unlike when the NHL takes 2 minutes to review a goal in the middle of the game) it could heighten the intensity of the moment.
Everything besides fair/foul, home runs and game-ending plays is left to the humans on the field. Mark it down Selig.
To paraphrase Spike Lee
“Do the Right Thing, Bud…..for the player(s), the umpire(s) the fan(s) and the integrity of the game.”
I think most baseball fans understand this is a one-off scenario and it doesn’t have to set a precedence. It can be worded in such a way to say, because of this particular game and the egregrious nature of the error. I really seriously doubt any manager, FO personnel, or the ultimate baseball purist would oppose this decision.
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Daley has been freed!
Quitter's People United Member #4
The problem with imposing one new rule (or exception to a rule) post facto is that it never ends. Once you create an exception, no matter how extraordinary the circumstance it never stops. Particularly if a win is at stake. In the greater scheme of baseball, one win could be a lot more important to a team than a distinction within a game whose outcome was already decided.
Imagine this happened in May, 2007, and Selig reverses the call and grants Galarraga a perfect game. What do Bud Black and Kevin Towers do after Game 163?
The call was unfair, but so is life. The best that can be done is to learn going forward and create a sensible rule.
It absolutely can end. You say its one time in this case, the end.
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
yeah that'll never, ever work
you can’t make an exception for one injustice and ignore the rest.
I’d personally like that Atlanta game back.
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 9:46 AM MDT up reply actions
Of course you can!
You (meaning baseball) can do whatever you want. Laws of physics do not have exceptions. Everything else does.
Awarding a pitcher the honour of a perfect game does not set any precedents for, say, changing the score after the fact. It just doesn’t. It may be human nature to think in these absolute terms – hell, I do it – but we don’t have to. The commissioner HAS THE POWER to make decisions “for the good of the game” or whatever, and this is an almost textbook example of why.
In 140 years of baseball, has a perfect game ever been denied on a 100% clear umpire mistake on the 27th out? It’s hardly dangerous setting this particular precedent.
I guess I'm baffled how you don't see this snowballing
you know how childish people are.
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 10:15 AM MDT up reply actions
I know there'd be a lot of whining about "well you changed x so why can't you change y"
At which point the leadership mans up and says “we’re not going to”.
Why this need to pigeonhole?
The Tigers didn’t benefit in any case, other than the (deserved) reflected glory of the achievement.
Once again, IT’S NOT ABOUT THEW RESULTS CHANGING.
and I think they brought that glory back upon themselves with their (eventual) postgame reactions
and by that I mean Jim Leyland, Galarraga, and Laird (who admitted he went way overboard)
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 10:32 AM MDT up reply actions
shoulda woulda coulda
or shouldn’ta wouldn’ta couldn’ta
point is they did
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 10:38 AM MDT up reply actions
it doesnt have to snowball
this isnt the Supreme Court where precedence pretty much has to be followed. It could easily be a one time thing and I think most managers and players would totally understand ESPECIALLY since nothing in that game would be impacted except for removing 1 hit and 1 AB
dude you could swap out most of the baseball bigwigs and with congressmen
and vice versa, and I doubt I’d be able to see a difference
not trying to start a debate about congress or politics, it’s more drawing the parallel between the actual men/women who are in these positions, their lifestyles, when they grew up, etc.
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 10:23 AM MDT up reply actions
Human nature
You expect one exception to be made against long-standing rules, and men not to behave like men?
the comisioner of baseball has the authority
to make decisions for the good of the game. that to me says its a case by case basis and he could easily say no to any future requests
sure, he could
I sincerely doubt he would.
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 10:50 AM MDT up reply actions
but maybe the good of the game is best served by not doing anything
If it leads to a true review and expansion of high quality non-invasive instant replay and getting future calls right then I think it will have been great for the game. Sucks for Gallaraga but what happened happened. You can’t change the past and if you do, our sci-fi fans here know, the future consequences can be disastrous.
by cocainelips99 on Jun 4, 2010 11:53 AM MDT up reply actions
But if you are in sidewaysland.....
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
nope, misconception
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
Infuriating misconception....grrrrr
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
nah.........perfect ending to an awesome show
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
Honest question: Would we Rox fans feel the same way if it were Ubaldo this happened to?
Just askin’.
Beating the competition, 4 tacos at a time
Damn good question.
And easy for us purists to say yep, because we don’t have to think about Ubaldo not getting his PG
I would feel exactly the same even if it was
Jon Lester, Tim Lincecum or Esmil Rogers
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
I'm on your side SDCat
I’m asking everyone else to consider the same question if the “shoe were on the other foot” kind of thing
Beating the competition, 4 tacos at a time
Oh I know, I was just saying that
I would feel the same no matter the pitcher…as in give the poor schmuck his PG….even if was Andy Pettite…..(grumbles)…lol
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
at first I would want it changed
because it happened to my team. After about a day of thinking about it, no I wouldn’t want it changed. (Or I think this is how I would respond)
There are three things in my life which I really love: God, my family, and baseball. The only problem - once baseball season starts, I change the order around a bit. ~Al Gallagher, 1971
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings. ~Earl Wilson
JFK
I don't want to get back into this...
but here I go…
Aside from SDCat’s position, which is reasonable…What is wrong with it “never ending?” If end-game calls are wrong and fixable, what is wrong with fixing them? The opposition here seems to be focused on the inane notion that any attempt to improve the system that falls short of pure perfection, answering any plausible scenario, be damned. Incremental improvements are still improvements.
And re your example…if the evidence was conclusive that Holliday was out in 2007 (which, unlike here, it was not) than the Rockies should not have advanced to the playoffs (on that play, anyway). And a procedure to prevent teams from getting wins that they flatly do not deserve, regardless of playoff implications, seems legit to me.
Oh well, that’s it for me. Nothing like days and days of bitter, divisive argument to follow what was “almost” a historic, feel-great moment. Great for baseball. Bring replay.
I honestly don't really disagree with what you're saying here
but it has to be going forward. In the example we’re using here, we CAN’T go back and call Holliday out. You’d have to replay the entire 2007 postseason.
I know it’s one example, and a weird one at that. But say we go back to our loss v Atlanta that I keep bringing up. We call Glaus out, we win the game, and then we have to take a hit away from Heyward, etc etc etc.
Going FORWARD, however, I’m totally on board. It’ll take a lot of review…to see what to review.
Probably have to test it in AAA first.
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 9:52 AM MDT up reply actions
True enough
The Holliday point is really an inapt example here, because (as I recall) he was never actually tagged out so its sort of impossible for the commish to award an out there. Sort of like an inadvertent whistle scenario. Too much chaos. Here, I’m sure it is used purely for emotional appeal, i.e., Rox fans unlikely to support any rule that takes away the best play in team history.
Not sure they can test this in AAA though, can they? I’m not much of a minor league expert, but I suspect they don’t have a lot of camera angles and whatnot to develop the type of evidence necessary to really test this.
I expect some sort of system like what Jayson Stark proposed for replay: all boundary calls automatic, and one “manager’s challenge” for safe/out calls, no dice for balls/strikes, and no appeal process…
technology WILL be a limiting factor
but you know as well as I do that they’re gonna need to give this some SERIOUS testing before they implement it in MLB. I hope that the league that had $8B in revenue can send some grace to the PCL and install some extra cameras just for this purpose.
I mean hell, what else are the minor league for, if not getting things ready for MLB?
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 10:04 AM MDT up reply actions
Here is where the Holliday example and the idea of “never-ending appeals” collide:
It’s October 2, 2007, the Padres are appealing and furious, and there still is no word from the commissioner’s office on whether the call was legitimate. Much like Bush v. Gore and the future of the presidency, the future of the 2007 playoffs is unclear.
Selig rules that there is no evidence that Holliday touched the plate. Along the same vein as what Teek said, once Selig makes that decision there is chaos. There’s no ruling left to stand or overturn, and the 13th inning must be replayed.
Is that where we want baseball to be? It’s not an emotional appeal; I’m sure people can divorce themselves from Rocktober for a second and think about it objectively.
That’s just one circumstance where changing the rules (although I agree with the idea of reviewing close game-ending plays going forward) creates scheduling and image problems for MLB. It probably pisses off the umpires union, as well as a great deal of Orioles fans.
This wouldn't happen and no-one's suggesting it should.
What would happen is a 2-minute study of TV replays, followed by a judgement. Game continues/ends as applicable.
I get that
but the discussion is about applying a new rule post-facto.
In the non-Perfect Game, Joyce and the other umpires presumably don’t want to look at video replay because it’s not in the rules for safe/out calls. If Selig overruled and declared Perfecto, in terms of the logistics, it’s a clear cut end.
Apply those rules (the way the game actually ended with the umps not looking at replay bc it’s against the rules + Selig overturning), and the Holliday example becomes incredibly murky. It means that it would be the next day before a decision is reached, and an inning (or more, depending on the Rockies scoring) would have to be replayed causing the adverse consequences mentioned above.
I really want to shout this from the rooftops
SELIG CHANGING THIS CALL DOES NOT SET A PRECEDENT FOR ANYTHING!
You’re the ones who are deciding it does. It doesn’t. There is no natural law that states precedents need to be universal otherwise the world will explode. They don’t.
Really?
That’s a bit naive. You don’t think there won’t be outcries of “well you changed THAT call…”
It definitely sets a precedent.
As I said above, I do think there will be outcries
And I do think the commish can and should say STFU to almost all of them.
pretty much like he is doing to the outcries right now.
It ain’t gonna change and it really shouldn’t. Imperfection is an historical part of baseball.
by cocainelips99 on Jun 4, 2010 11:56 AM MDT up reply actions
the only precedent it sets are if there is a blatently blown call on the 27th out of a perfect game...
and the 28th batter of the game easily grounds out then it can be changed
That's what the precedent SHOULD be.
The problem is that, in a competitive arena such as a professional sport, people will undoubtedly take it as a potential opening for further review. Not because they SHOULD, just because they CAN. This is just how people work.
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 10:40 AM MDT up reply actions
How do you know that? What if he falls subject to the same error?
Plus, even if he did reject them, doesn’t the issue still become a problem, getting several new requests a week for overturning umpire’s calls? (Of course, that’s the worst case scenario.)
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 10:44 AM MDT up reply actions
You were right the first time.
Ignorance of the American League is a sign of good moral character.
"Cheap tacos are rightous!"-My Daughter
i already stated what the precedent is
if those claims come forth that match that precedent fine. if they don’t, they’re denied and pretty soon after a few denials it would lead to no more requests
Exactly
We’re soon going to have a referendum about electoral reform. But why stop there? Why not have a referendum on immigration, or on taxes, or on declaring Friday part of the weekend? But the public don’t actually have the power to make this happen (that’s not how democracy works, thank the lord). And they can make requests until they’re blue in the face but if they’re not exceptional, they will be ignored. Ditto baseball.
Again, assumptions.
We don’t KNOW if that’s the case. I’m not saying it won’t be. I’m just saying that it very easily could be ignored altogether.
A teacher gives one student an extra cupcake. I would absolutely agree with you that there is no natural precedent that mandates the teacher get more cupcakes for everyone else. But maybe they’ll feel bad and go buy more. It doesn’t make sense, but it’s an action that one can more than envision a human being taking. Even if it’s just going out and buying a bag of jelly beans for them instead.
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 11:00 AM MDT up reply actions
but what if it was that students BDay and that cupcake was a BDay present
the other students wouldnt get upset and start demanding cupcakes
And if another student revealed actually, it was her birthday too
Then the teacher should go get another cupcake.
If a third student said that he deserved a cupcake because student 4 broke hi pen
Then the teacher may feel this isn’t cupcake-worthy
sorry i shouldnt have used bday because then everyone else would expect one on their bday
lets say its a cupcake for getting a 100% on the test. everyone knows that they didnt score a 100% so they dont get a cupcake
The selfish kids amongst them would still probably cry "no fair".
If the teacher had standards, they’d say ‘go score higher on the text next time’. If they didn’t, they might feel bad and go buy more candy.
It’s like the “everybody wins” conception in kids sports. “Mommy, the team that won got a trophy! I want a trophy too, even though I lost.”
“Okay, honey.”
Mommy complains to the Little League, and next year, everyone gets the same trophies. This DOES happen in a lot of children’s sports.
It doesn’t make SENSE. But it HAPPENED.
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 11:09 AM MDT up reply actions
But what if it wasn't?
I think you’re missing my point here. You’re continuing to assume that there is some logical reason here for performing the action. Throw that out right now. I’m not talking about a human being that makes rational decisions ALL the time.
I feel like I need to clarify my position. If I somehow had any sort of trust that this sort of precedent would be set WHERE IT SHOULD BE (I repeat, WHERE IT SHOULD BE), then I would have no problem at all overturning the perfect game.
What I am talking about here is the fact that people simply don’t do this, particularly when competition is involved.
I am not, in any way, arguing that awarding a missed call in situation A should automatically set precedent for doing so in Situation B. If I haven’t made that clear by now, it should be. I am simply saying that you cannot TRUST people to not do this.
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 11:07 AM MDT up reply actions
So there can be human error in making these changes, agreed
But, just like umps get it right 95% of the time, you can assume that the body charged with evaluating these claims would also have a better than 50/50 chance of getting the “right” result. So, more wrongs will be righted than rights will be wronged.
You know what
Regardless of who’s right and who’s wrong in this argument (and I would suggest we’re ALL right), I am giving my brain a proper workout for the first time in ages and it feels great!
Nobody's being hostile here that I an see.
No need to feel that others may think you are.
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 11:14 AM MDT up reply actions
1) That’s why replay, going forward, should only apply to circumstances where video replay can be conclusive. (So, the Holliday example would end in an NFL-style “not enough evidence to reverse the call.”)
2) Are you saying that human nature is not to seek an exception for the circumstance once one is granted to another person in a similar situation?
People are basically good creatures, but inconsistently applying the rules is an unnatural force applied upon human nature that causes them to seek their own advantage.
Agree with 1 and 2
I just don’t feel it’s a deal breaker. People will whine, and they CAN be ignored.
I simply don't think that can be assumed. At all.
I am willing to bet that at least SOME high ranking people in MLB organizations would immediately, wrongly but still seriously, make a fiasco out of overturning the call had Selig done so, and publicly demanded their missed calls to be corrected too. Maybe Selig would deny them all. I agree it’d be highly doubtful he’d do something apocalyptic and suddenly change them all.
But what happens, again, when down the line, a blown call is made on the 27th out of a key playoff game? Has just as much historical weight as a perfect game. Ideally, we have replay here to prevent that from happening. And as I’ve been saying, I’m not denying at all that they may just do the RIGHT thing and fix it accordingly. But they could also screw it up more.
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 11:13 AM MDT up reply actions
"Ideally, we have replay here to prevent that from happening."
Exactly. The lack of replay is a flaw that needs to be fixed. If it were imposed at the same time as the PG was awarded, it would both right the wrong AND clarify a large chunk of how similar future situations would be dealt with.
BUT
that goes back to leaving as a judgment call of one man, which is what you’re trying to get away from anyway.
Isn't that how the POTUS works?
I can’t believe how unamerican you’re all being :) Hail to the chief!
Nice Try
But that’s not exactly how POTUS works. Contrary to popular belief, he doesn’t have final say.
Then let's have a committee that makes these calls
Fine with me – it’s the principle of one person/entity having the power that I’m pushing.
HA!
Because then it will move to a circle of endless debate! You can see how well that’s working here!
Not true though
A circle of FINITE debate. Have an odd number of committee members so that a decision is reached!
I agree with all of you that the practicalities of this whole business are a real headache and the biggest challenge to reform. My point is it’s better – nay, necessary – to try to achieve positive change than to sit back and say “nope, ain’t gonna work”.
Situations where logistics, reason and emotion are muddled are why we have rules in games. You apply the rules in the moment, move on, and then change them if you learn an important lesson.
You don’t apply rules post facto to a game because it creates an unnatural imbalance that satiates few and upsets many.
In this case, I think someone said that internet polls show that
people who want the PG to be awarded outnumber those who don’t by 3 to 1. So this particular, unique action would satiate the many and upset the few.
Again, you're treating it like an isolated event
which, in terms of whether or not rules matter in baseball, it’s not.
After the call is reversed, how many people then think, “Hey, why didn’t they… Why won’t they?”
The entire population of Orioles fans would certainly be right to wonder why, after the ‘97 season, the institution of rules re fans leaning over outfield railings to catch balls result in ground rule doubles didn’t result in them winning their series against the Yankees.
In that instance, we’ve been down this road before and the precedent has been set (by Selig): rule changes don’t apply post facto.
The commissioner has the power to make decisions in the best interests of baseball
It’s in the rules. You should be happy!
The concept of the “best interests of baseball” is arbitrary and can be applied in a variety of ways depending on who is in charge.
Again, the rules are long-established and well laid out, and they are there to prevent the last resort of the commissioner intervening “in the best interests…” And, in this case, it’s not clearly in the best interests as you can see how it would create an imbalance in applying the rules.
The Orioles-fan leaning situation is the precedent for this situation.
we dont know what would have happened had that play been ruled a GRD
the yankees could still have gone on to win it. Which is why I wouldnt want the Comish getting involved in that game just like I have said elsewhere that I would not like him to get involved in Atkins botched HR call in game 163 or the Holliday slide.
We know for a fact that changing this play would result in ZERO impact on the game results and the standings. The positive outcomes of awarding Galaragga a PG are too big to ignore (place in record book, fame, his monitary gain off a PG)
Interesting...
When you say, "We know for a fact that changing this play would result in ZERO impact on the game results and the standings. " I think that’s a reason to not set a precedent, and you see it as a reason why the precedent is harmless.
Ignorance of the American League is a sign of good moral character.
"Cheap tacos are rightous!"-My Daughter
In sum, you are suggesting that we break the rules (the rules prohibit the umpires from reviewing the play) so that one person can gain from it.
Nevermind Sabathia and the dozen(s?) of other pitchers in this situation, or the other unfair calls made. We’ll change the rules for one person so he can be famous.
The argument is illogical on its face. He’s already famous. He’s more famous for not getting the perfect game. He got a Corvette, so that’s monetary gain. He’s not going to get a brand new contract just because he pitched a PG. One PG doesn’t outweigh what he’s done the past two years.
And like I already stated, you're assuming that just because you think that's what makes sense (and I agree), that that's what would happen.
As soon as you open up ANY loophole in an already given system, even when the expectation is that there is some sort of failsafe in place to prevent abuse, you’re still playing with fire.
You’re putting, IMO, too much trust in assumption that you precedent will be controlled. I know from experience in my own field that that simply cannot be trusted to be a guarantee.
You’re basically arguing that common sense will win here. When has common sense EVER been exercised in a competitive exercise like a professional sport?
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 10:56 AM MDT up reply actions
What I was clearly saying was that it is common sense for one exception not to lead to other unrelated exceptions.
But that doesn’t mean in any way, shape or form that it WON’T lead to other unrelated exceptions.
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 11:01 AM MDT up reply actions
Exactly, and just because that's the way it should work, doesn't mean it will.
How many double standards are there already out there in sports/government/politics?
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 11:17 AM MDT up reply actions
How many double standards are in my LIFE?
I have to work twice as hard for everything because I’m so damn good looking…
Shout it out
but that’s not logical. If one call is changed (against the rules), an exception is made. And you’re saying that you can rightly deny another team’s plea for an exception because the commissioner just can.
So, the commissioner is a totalitarian figure who is bigger than 120 years of history, and can be as arbitrary as he’d like in deciding whether or not to apply or not apply rules?
Yes.
Someone has to be in charge. Of baseball, of the economy, of the country. That person NEEDS powers. I’m happy for him to have them is this instance.
So, you’re comfortable with a person arbitrarily deciding that one-time exceptions can be made whenever ONE person sees fit, even if eight other commissioners would have not done it that way, and potentially hundreds of other games/individual players would remain unchanged on the other side of the one-time exception.
I guess that makes sense. Then we don’t need the rule book at all, and there’s no need to keep records anymore because they have no relevance to each other. Each game can just be played under a unique set of circumstances created by the commissioner because San Diego needs different rules than Minneapolis.
In a planned economy, with a solitary figure making decisions irrespective of multiple similar outcomes, what happens when a one-time exception is created? An advantage is granted to one person/entity to the detriment of everybody else who was/is/will be in the same situation.
The idea of SMEONE NEEDS TO BE IN CHARGE OF THE ECONOMY is the perfect argument against totalitarian authority in the commissioner’s office.
Jeez, let's just bring Neville Chamberlain back from the dead
you know where one time exceptions got him.
I’m as against reductio ad Hitlerum as the next guy, but he opened the door with “Someone has to be in charge. Of baseball, of the economy, of the country.” And Chamberlain’s concession of the Sudetenland is the perfect example of why that notion is illogical.
When an exception is carved out, you can’t expect everybody else not to act like people.
um yes the comissioner is that
and he has that power according to the rule book
there was no clear cut evidence that holliday either touched the plate or didnt touch
in this situation it was blatently clear that the runner at first was out
I know
and if the umpires reacted in the same manner as the Galarraga game (game over, we’re out), and Selig overturns (as some people want to see re Galarraga), there is a total cluster-f. The conclusion wouldn’t be reached until the next day at the earliest, after a convoluted decision is handed down from Selig.
but had they reviewed Atkins' home run..............
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 10:24 AM MDT up reply actions
and i wouldnt want selig overturning the atkins missed home run
im for him overturning the PG because NOTHING else would be affected by it. had the next batter singled instead of grounding out to third I would be in the same camp as you guys. But he grounded out, game over, changing it to a PG has NO impact whatsoever
You can treat it like an isolated event
but it still establishes:
1) the rules can be changed post facto
or
2) the commissioner is an all-powerful figure who can make arbitrary decisions as he sees fit, even if it flies in the face of everything his predecessors have done.
or 3)
Selig has absolutely no power whatsoever that even arbitrary decisions of “chocolate or vanilla” are made for him
Beating the competition, 4 tacos at a time
By the long-established rules
And thankfully there are rules that have prohibited Selig from ruining the game “in the best interests of baseball.”
I wouldn’t want him to get the idea that he could break one rule, let alone do it whenever passing public sentiment wishes he would.
I made this point in the Debate Fanshot
But I think it bears repeating:
Let’s assume, hypothetically, you are convicted of a crime, despite overwhelming evidence that indicates you didn’t commit the crime, and the court told you, “Sorry. Too Late. Jury’s already convicted you. You lose. Nothing we can do.”
Now this is pretty extreme example, and it doesn’t represent our judicial system, yada yada yada, but the point remains the same: if tradition and or rules harm the very institution it intends to serve/revere, then by all means, fix it and rectify the situation
Beating the competition, 4 tacos at a time
There’s a huge difference between being denied a perfect game because video evidence isn’t available, and not being granted a release from prison for a violent rape because DNA evidence isn’t allowed.
If there is a parallel between crime and perfect games, it is not between, say, someone who is convicted of rape and murder in 1999 (and is still alive, with DNA evidence having surfaced to exonerate him), and the Galarraga game.
It’s between someone wrongly convicted of rape and murder in 1949 (who is deceased, but now DNA evidence, somehow preserved, exonerates them), and the Galarraga game. Galarraga can have his perfect game, but Selig can’t go back and randomly declare this ball a strike, that foul a homerun, or that tag an out on every injustice done to players who are shut out of history.
So, the crime is example is about as far as you can stretch it, and I think it only applies if the parallel is very closely set up.
ok this is getting ENTIRELY too serious
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 2:59 PM MDT up reply actions
I know it's getting serious
but all of this arguing is really boosting my comment stats. After nearly two years, I’m almost at 800 comments.
my point is keep debating
but when we’re comparing rape trials to a controversial sporting event, it needs to tone down entirely.
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 3:56 PM MDT up reply actions
Which is exactly my point
They can rectify the situation for a guy who is alive and can be exonerated. The guy in 1949, yeah, it was wrong and the best we/they can do is admit that it was a huge mistake. Same parallel applies with Gallaraga. Two things to come from this: 1) Fix it the mistake 2) Learn from it and change the process/rules so it doesn’t happen again
Beating the competition, 4 tacos at a time
Because the situations are not parallels. Exonerating a wrongly convicted man has a just a bit more of a degree of urgency than granting a PG via video review, right?
Also, most of the comments I’ve responded to or made refer to the futility of a “one-time exception.” The situations (crime and PG) are also not parallels because there can be no one-time exception for releasing a wrongly convicted individual. Either the standard applies to all or none.
And that’s why the 1949 example is relevant and the 1999 one is not. You can’t change every bad call an umpire has made, not even every bad call at first base in the ninth inning of a potential perfect game. There are too many variables involved in retracting a call in baseball (discussed in various places throughout the day), and the logistics and lack of ability to travel through time make it impossible to rectify. Just ask Harvey Haddix. There’s only one when DNA evidence exonerates somebody: a free man goes free.
Add the above to the discussion in other places about why people are against one-time exceptions in baseball, and you’ll understand why the situations are not parallels and why many don’t think the call should be reversed.
For the record
since everyone seems to forget, Michael Barrett never had control of the ball and was impeding the path of the runner (Matty). In that instance Matt never actually had to touch the plate, he could be awarded the base automatically. I know it was never states publically, but my understanding of the play was that the umpire waited to see if Barrett came up with the ball, and when he didn’t the runner was automatically safe. There’s an official rule for that type of play, I’m mobile and don’t have the bandwidth to find it.
Hating Cubs fans since 1908
by Hizilla on Jun 4, 2010 2:43 PM MDT via mobile up reply actions
This is correct. He was blocking the plate and never had the ball
and never went back to tag Matty.
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
*never had control...
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
Only partially correct. He didn’t have control of the ball, but he did grab the ball and make a move to tag Holliday. He gave up on the tag (foolishly) because the umpire made a safe sign.
Had he made the tag, we could ask Bud Selig to review the play and possibly replay the 13th inning.
We wouldn't have asked for the review because
it wasn’t the last out of the game. We still had 2 more opportunities to score IIRC
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
Brad Hawpe to the plate
with Helton on second would have been the next situation
There are three things in my life which I really love: God, my family, and baseball. The only problem - once baseball season starts, I change the order around a bit. ~Al Gallagher, 1971
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings. ~Earl Wilson
JFK
My Hawper love almost wishes he
would have it the walkoff HR…but I’m cool with how it went down.
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
But San Diego would have had grounds for appeal if everything plays out the same.
Which is what I’m saying there about foolishly giving up on the tag.
I think changing the rules going forward to allow for replay of game ending tags, throw-outs, and fair/foul calls (in addition to HRs) is the way to go.
The problem with reviewing and changing the rules every time a special circumstance comes up is: what are the rules for? Should the AL/NL presidents just sit in front of a bank of TVs and make every disputed call as they see fit? If teams knew that they could have a rule changed post facto, the Orioles probably wouldn’t have spent the last 13 years in the gutter (after the Jeffrey Maier catch).
If you change one call (in a manner contrary to the established rules) post facto, it’s completely unfair to 120 years of baseball prior to the change. The rules need to be changed first, and then fairness will be applied to all future calls.
Its not a rule....its a ruling...more like a guideline, really.
I think Bud screwed the pooch on this one.
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
I would have throw a flaming rock into his office if he changed treated anything differently.
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." - Albert Einstein
by Andrew T. Fisher on Jun 4, 2010 11:57 AM MDT up reply actions
he deserves more then that....
i see in 20 years from now the tigers and baseball honoring him….or somebody overturning it….
well, that's a sound reaction :P
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
baseball likes to look back and honor those of the things that they mess up....
but i feel it will have to be after Selig retires….which unfortunately i don’t see happening anytime soon….
Once Selig starts making "one-time exceptions"
who thinks that the Yankees and Red Sox won’t get a disproportional number of exceptions moving forward?
Here’s the bottom line for me: If the call doesn’t affect win/lose, then the commissioner shouldn’t get involved.
Ignorance of the American League is a sign of good moral character.
"Cheap tacos are rightous!"-My Daughter
This is like accusing David Stern
of engineering a Celtics-Lakers final. How could the Yanks or Red Sox get a disproportional number of exceptions related to video review of on-field decisions? Are they going to conspire with ESPN and Fox to doctor the replay?
I'm not talking about some proposed future video-review system.
I’m talking about the commissioner reviewing video (or other) evidence after the fact, and changing calls/results.
BTW, I am one of those people who believe that the NBA Draft Lottery is rigged…
Ignorance of the American League is a sign of good moral character.
"Cheap tacos are rightous!"-My Daughter
It could be
but I still don’t see, with the abundance of video – tv, internet, stadium scoreboard video – available to the public to make their own determination on the play, how an MLB executive could change a call or result for a preferred team?
If they ruled in a biased manner, MLB’s credibility would be shot.
Funny thing you bring up, if this had happened to
say CC Sabithia….would it have been overturned?
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
As soon as I saw it...
I thought of the same thing. If that’s CC Sabathia, Roy Oswalt or any other “high profile” pitcher would an umpire tend to be more cautious and just call the player out?
I would like to think that he wouldn’t…
What is both surprising and delightful is that spectators are allowed, and even expected, to join in the vocal part of the game.... There is no reason why the field should not try to put the batsman off his stroke at the critical moment by neatly timed disparagements of his wife's fidelity and his mother's respectability.
~George Bernard Shaw
No.
The Yankees lose almost every appeal they file with the commisioner’s office.
Were there words between Joyce and Cabrera or Joyce and Galarraga before the ninth? A million little things could have entered into Joyce’s mind besides “It’s the Tigers. Maybe if it were the Yankees, I’d let them have a perfect game, but the Tigers are an inferior team in a hell hole city. F them.”
The Yankees/Sox being robbed of a no-hitter puts Selig in even more of a lose-lose situation. If it happens to someone like CC, and he overturns it, he faces the ire of 29 other teams. If he doesn’t overturn it, he still faces the wrath of the NY media market. In that situation, the only thing you can do is go with the rules. And he went with the rules in the real world too.
Iunno man
Joyce lost his composure, but not in a Joe West way. I have trouble believing he’d react the way he did if he had a bias against Detroit or just a “FU” mentality, you know? I know you’re not really claiming that he did, but for the sake of conversation, there it is.
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 9:53 AM MDT up reply actions
I meant to imply that it's highly improbable that all that ran through Joyce's mind
especially based on his post-game and next-day reactions. He doesn’t look like an actor (unless it’s a Western).
I could see that running through Joe West’s mind, but I’m sure he’s not the only umpire who’s been slightly biased against a team or player in a situation.
Actually....this has sort of happened
With the Brewers, Sabathia had a one-hitter. Iirc, the only hit was a comebacker and Sabathia petitioned MLB to change the ruling to an error on himself to get credit for a no-hitter but was denied. I seem to remember thinking I would have called it an error
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." - Albert Einstein
by Andrew T. Fisher on Jun 4, 2010 1:39 PM MDT up reply actions
I remember this now...he was screwed too
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
For Russ
"@OldHossRadbourn: Kudos, J. Granholm et alia! More politicians should pander via sports. True story: A. Lincoln’s Cooper Union speech was about the balk rule."
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 9:02 AM MDT via mobile reply actions
Personally, I think Selig did the right thing. In my opinion, it didn’t rob anyone of history so much as it robbed Armando Gallarraga of a “moment”, you know? He wouldn’t have that now anyway.
I know, I’m simplifying things, but I can’t imagine this being handled any better than it was by all parties involved. Gallarraga can tell his kids that he tossed a perfect game, and the media can use him as an example of how we should all act when things don’t go our way. Jim Joyce, like Ed Hochuli a couple of years ago, is an example of owning up to your mistakes. There is some good in it, and I think that’s important.
One thing that I think gets lost is that Jim Joyce should be commended on some level for doing what he thought was right. He wasn’t selling out a call based on the situation (a la Eric Gregg in the 1997 World Series). Even in a high stress situation like that, he called it like he saw it, and that’s something that he is being villified unnecessarily for, in my opinion.
Bud Selig gets dumped on for everything, but I think that he did the right thing here. There is no such thing as a “one time exception”. Those tend to lead to rule changes (slippery slope, I know, but they do) or “2 time exceptions”. I applaud all involved.
I hate the Red Wings.
Baseball is all about history...
One of the reasons baseball is so great is its great history. We all enjoy baseball feats we witness more when we can place them in their context in history.
There have been indeed 20 perfect games in the history of the game, that’s a very select group of men. To make matters worse, only 1 player of latin descent had ever thrown a perfect game before (Dennis Martinez). This would have been a huge deal for baseball in general but for Venezuelans it would have truly been something special… I disagree that he was not robbed of history… he was robbed of being able to stand where very few men stand in a game where history is mainly written in its record book.
What is both surprising and delightful is that spectators are allowed, and even expected, to join in the vocal part of the game.... There is no reason why the field should not try to put the batsman off his stroke at the critical moment by neatly timed disparagements of his wife's fidelity and his mother's respectability.
~George Bernard Shaw
I know and that's what I'll stand by as far as BBR goes
but in my memory, it’s a perfect game with 28 straight retired.
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 10:07 AM MDT up reply actions
what about the future generations who never saw this play?
they’ll just see it as a one hit complete game shutout
wikipedia dawg
how about Milt Pappas’ no-hitter?
I know it was a perfect game, because Bruce Froemming decided to tighten the strike zone on the last batter and Pappas ended up walking him.
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 10:16 AM MDT up reply actions
how about if he would have had a k on a wild pitch and the runner would
have reached first….there’s another example of 28….
it's not perfection
the strikeout is 99.999% of the time an out, but a strikeout itself is not a putout. The catcher catching and holding the ball is a putout. So while it would neither be an error or a hit, it would not be perfection
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 12:37 PM MDT up reply actions
somebody tweeted
“Rather than being 1 in 21, Galarraga is now 1 in 1”
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 9:54 AM MDT up reply actions
After the game, Haddix received many letters of congratulations and support, as well as one from a Texas A&M fraternity which read, in its entirety on university stationery, “Dear Harvey, Tough shit.”
“It made me mad,” recounted Haddix, “until I realized they were right. That’s exactly what it was.”
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 10:36 AM MDT up reply actions
Not really sure
how you can say he didn’t rob Gallaraga of history. There have been 20 perfect games in the history of the game. 20!!!
Since he didn’t get the complete game on the record books, that is history.
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
reply fail... that was for wtnelson
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
sorry perfect game
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
A very good point
every time someone throws a perfect game…what is the first thing we hear? “Tonight, Roy Halladay threw the 20th perfect game…” Hell, google it, the number 20 is in half the tag lines for the top links.
I get that
Just so I’m clear, I don’t mean to say that it wasn’t historic. I mean to say that, for the players involved, there is a “moment” on the field that they all have. They wouldn’t have that after the fact, and that’s what I think he got robbed of. Certainly, he still won’t have his name in the record books, but there is something special about that moment.
Call me crazy, but I think that history is more for the fans, while the moments are what the players desire. Somehow, I think Cal Ripken cherishes his lap around Camden Yards far more than he does the record. I could be wrong, but that’s something that just can’t be described. You had to be there, kind of a thing.
I hate the Red Wings.
yes, this is the absolute point
You can’t go back and give the Tigers their celebration, the fans their cheering, anything. If it was overturned, Detroit can go “oh. Well cool.”
Remember when Helton almost had his 2000th hit last season, and it was a borderline error/IF single, and Hurdle tried to get them to overturn it? I was honestly thinking "I really, really hope they don’t overturn it, because I want to celebrate it when it happens, not be like “oh. cool.”
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 9:56 AM MDT up reply actions
Exactly.
I’m not for overruling final games.
But instant replay would do the trick for those types of games- I’ll be for that.
It’s just weird changing a game that already happened.
This is R year!
by prettyinpurple on Jun 4, 2010 10:00 AM MDT up reply actions
I'm not sure about it live even...
Like what I just said about 2007, even if they could of reviewed Joyce’s call…it would kill the emotion of the no hitter/perfect game. “After further review, the call on the field is that the runner was out. End of Game”…oh, and congratulations kid…just KILLS the moment that is exclusively baseball.
I don't know. It would feel good if it's the RIGHT call.
This is R year!
by prettyinpurple on Jun 4, 2010 10:05 AM MDT up reply actions
Sure it would feel good,
but it takes away a moment that is baseball (I keep saying this, I know). How many times have you jumped out of your chair because of a absolutely BLOWN call? Me…countless. Kind of funny actually, and then I’ll still sit there and fume over it. Tell me another sport where this happens and lingers?
Good or bad, it’s the immediate reaction that is unique to baseball.
The argument that something's not worth doing because "the moment" can never be recaptured
Is facile and utterly self-defeating.
There are many strong arguments here for not overturning the call, but that ain’t one of them!
You don't need to be so dramatic...
If you think a “moment” isn’t worth it, that’s fine. I do. But to start reversing calls opens up a Pandora’s Box that cannot be closed again. It changes the integrity of the game.
The integrity of the game is flawless, is it?
Again, this isn’t about a result or a score. The phantom “hit” is the only stat that would be changed, and I reckon the batter could live with it.
The integrity of the game,
in MY opinion is that it’s based on the fundamentally flawed judgment of humans. “Human Error” that purists go back to. That’s something near and dear.
so instead of just denying Galaragga of the momment
you want to deny him the momment AND his place in the record books?
It's not about integrity in the historical sense
It’s about the integrity of the rules, which are meaningless once you start carving out exceptions post facto.
BTW, I believe MLB rules didn’t prohibit PEDs (in the late 90s and 00s, they relied on the idea that US law prohibited non-prescription steroids, and the players were obliged to follow American law). So technically, the players were criminals, but whether the integrity of the game was tarnished depends on your perspective of criminals.
That argument is stupid
but one time I marked two answers on a social studies test in fifth grade. I totally erased the second one, but you could still see it a bit and the teacher marked the question wrong.
Can I get that one back?
Your example has nothing to do with what I was saying there
I was addressing the spurious argument that ebcause Gallaraga can never recapture “the moment” of achieving a perfect game, then awarding him a PG later is worthless.
Your example is one where I’m NOT suggesting a change should be made, as it would alter a result in the past. It sucks, it’s within the rules, and it’s done and dusted.
Yeah, I was agreeing with you that
“inability to recapture the moment” is a symptom of not overturning the call, not an actual reason to not overturn it.
But still, your one-time exceptions argument. You want to reply to that up top?
That's not the optimal scenario in my world
but that’s another good example of historical precedents saying that you can’t selectively enforce the rules (as in, the Supreme Court saying count all the counties or count none).
Selective enforcement (or disparate local election recount standards) are still a big problem in states (Al Franken).
Fair enough
But the fundamental issue here is that inefficiencies in the system led to a palpable wrong not being righted. In an ideal world, it would not happen at all, but that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t try and rectify mistakes when it’s in our power to do so.
Al Franken won.
"Ninety feet between a hot dog and my mouth is too far" - Maria M (SDCAT09 is awesome for coming up with this fake quote for me!)
Co-president of the Ubaldo Lovers Club.
I'm going to go out on a limb here...
but you already told us that you’re not from the US, and now a comment was made about “in an ideal world”…
In my opinion, that’s one of the fundamental differences between the US and the rest of the world, and really between Republicans and Democrats here at home. We acknowledge that we DON’T live in an ideal world and we realize that an ideal world will not ever exist. Rather than waste a lot of time and energy trying to achieve an unachievable result, let’s accept the fact that the world is imperfect and do/make the best of what we can with what we have.
Baseball, like the world (or life) isn’t perfect. But why tinker with it when what we have is pretty darn good. The minute we start tinkering with something to achieve something that isn’t possible (making everyone happy), we waste all of our energy doing that and forget to enjoy what we have.
by The jDub on Jun 4, 2010 11:40 AM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
there's a GIGANTIC difference
If I got the call saying “oops here’s a cool mil” I’d be like HELL YES because this will in fact change my life going forward. My loans get paid off, car gets paid off, etc etc etc
I was about to delete this all, because I know you’re going to turn it around for the arbitration process and cite the pay increase he would get based on a PG as opposed to a 1-hitter.
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 10:20 AM MDT up reply actions
I made that argument yesterday :)
Maybe Gallaraga’s all time rep will actually be heightened because of the (I)PG and his grace etc. But he deserves a spot on the hallowed table and all the accoutrements that go with it.
My (also facile) argument here is that something can still be good after the fact. You better believe Dallas Braden still falls asleep with a smile on his face even though his “moment” happened weeks ago. Mark Buerhle will still be dining out on his triumphs in 5 years time.
and Galarraga will be dining out on his near triumph
and the ensuing pity, sympathy, but ultimately pride that people will take in his reactions will fill in the rest.
Honestly, and this has no footing in anything but my own head, but the way he reacted and handled the situation may just boost the whole “character” thing as much as the PG would. Again, based on nothing at all.
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 10:27 AM MDT up reply actions
debatably
since we don’t have this in baseball, it’s kind of hard to tell how we’d/they’d react. Someone else likened it to Hockey – those official reviews can be as nailbiting as anything.
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 10:06 AM MDT up reply actions
but you don't know that
they’ve never done it
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 10:17 AM MDT up reply actions
Good Point...
But I’m going to dig my heels in and say I don’t want to try it.
“Sewer rat may taste like pumpkin pie, but I’d never know because I’d never eat the filthy muthaf*****”
hahaha well said
why you gotta hold back progress jdub? huh? why do you hate technology?
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 10:28 AM MDT up reply actions
Excellent, excellent point.
Even replay at the end of a game that could ultimately determine the outcome of the game, that would ruin a moment that is exclusively baseball. Can you imagine if there was a review in 2007 that went down and came back “after further review, there is inconclusive evidence to overturn the call on the field that the runner was safe. End of game.” By the way…you can go ahead and celebrate now…
Yeah, also true I guess.
This is R year!
by prettyinpurple on Jun 4, 2010 10:01 AM MDT up reply actions
Topic change
Are you the one who keeps asking about Tulo’s hair, Prettyinpurple? For Rowbot Radio? One of these days, we’ll talk about it.
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 10:02 AM MDT up reply actions
The first week I missed the comment.
The second week, I was going to bring it up, but Andrew and I were both in a hurry to finish as quickly as possible.
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 10:05 AM MDT up reply actions
Just try to remember tomorrow ; )
This is R year!
by prettyinpurple on Jun 4, 2010 10:06 AM MDT up reply actions
yep
There are three things in my life which I really love: God, my family, and baseball. The only problem - once baseball season starts, I change the order around a bit. ~Al Gallagher, 1971
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings. ~Earl Wilson
JFK
yep
There are three things in my life which I really love: God, my family, and baseball. The only problem - once baseball season starts, I change the order around a bit. ~Al Gallagher, 1971
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings. ~Earl Wilson
JFK
yep
There are three things in my life which I really love: God, my family, and baseball. The only problem - once baseball season starts, I change the order around a bit. ~Al Gallagher, 1971
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings. ~Earl Wilson
JFK
ha ha ha
There are three things in my life which I really love: God, my family, and baseball. The only problem - once baseball season starts, I change the order around a bit. ~Al Gallagher, 1971
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings. ~Earl Wilson
JFK
Yeah really, plus there has been alot of good pitching this year too.
Kinda cool.
This is R year!
by prettyinpurple on Jun 4, 2010 9:40 AM MDT up reply actions
One more thing
That article on umpire bias is interesting. Part of me resides in this camp.
3. Live and love it. What would it be like if fans, player and managers didn’t have someone to vent our frustration on. The umpire are a part of the game that affects everyone and those that adjust will have an advantage over those that don’t. They are just part of the game.
I often find myself saying something like, “What good would the game be if everything was perfect? There’s nothing quite like hating the umpires.”
One thing that my gut tells me is that something was left out of that post. That is, left-handed strike zones seem to really expand when there is a lefty on the hill, and not so much when there is a righty on the hill. That’s just a guess, but it appears that way to me, though, specifically with left-handed breaking balls.
I hate the Red Wings.
Ugh,
I umpired 12-15 yr old girls noncompetitive softball games last night, and the parents would not get off my ass about the strike zone. When maybe one out of ten pitches meets the strict criteria of a strike, anyone would expand the zone a little bit. It’s especially trying when the pitches approach the plate at a near-vertical angle.
Just venting a little bit, I bitch about umps in MLB all the time.
The best things in life are Tulo dingers, Ubaldo strikeouts, and uh, yeah.
I hear ya
I’ve coached that age since I was in high school. I have coached competitive ball and high school C-Team ball since that time. I’m amazed at the things that come out of people’s mouths. I’ve only come close to being tossed out one time, and this guy deserved to be chewed on. He and I have never gotten along for some reason, and he really blew this one.
There are things that are said, though, at 8 and Under games and C-Team high school games where the poor pitchers are just there because they can get it to the plate, that blow my mind. People are unbelievable. I always like to give the umpire a chance to explain himself, then explain what I saw if there is a dispute.
I’ve done a lot of reading about umpires. I think it helps me if I understand their positioning, rotations, mechanics, etc. It keeps me from blowing up, and I think it lends to my generally more “pro-umpire” feeling than is prevalent in the baseball fan world. I love to hate ’em as much as the next guy, but I also find myself coming to their defense a lot.
I hate the Red Wings.
Let's try looking at from the other way...
Imagine that the runner had been safe by the same margin, but Joyce had called him out. Game’s over, Tigers win 3-0, Galarraga has a perfecto. Then video replay shows he was clearly safe.
Would everyone be petitioning Selig to take away Galarraga’s perfect game and have them finish the game later?
Ignorance of the American League is a sign of good moral character.
"Cheap tacos are rightous!"-My Daughter
This is a fair point
and I think you are probably right, there wouldn’t be much outcry. But, of course, it didn’t happen that way.
No, it did not.
But I think it’s helpful to see that people in the alternate case would be a lot less worried about “fairness” or “getting it right because we can”.
Ignorance of the American League is a sign of good moral character.
"Cheap tacos are rightous!"-My Daughter
That's my thinking exactly
Joyce was doing what he should have done, in my view. He called it as he saw it. That’s worth something, if you ask me.
I hate the Red Wings.
agreed.
Based on his history as a relatively good umpire, and honest, human reaction afterward, I can’t see anything but integrity in the man. He made the call honestly. “I had a good angle, I just blew the damn call”
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 9:58 AM MDT up reply actions
Exactly. People would say, "Human error is part of the game."
There were probably 10 different moments where the ump could have called a ball a strike and ruined the game that way,.
Also, PEDs are part of the game, injuries are part of the game, bowling into 2nd with spikes knee high is part of the game
When will people realise that it’s not GOOD for the game?
because then statheads like me would just simulate baseball on a computer and there'd be no questions about what happened
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 10:21 AM MDT up reply actions
I think there's a strong argument* that statheads are already neutering the unpredictable joy of baseball
“who cares if Uribe just hit 4 homers in a game, he’ll regress to his career numbers”
The mistakes make a difference, but the hits and walks and errors and and and make a difference too!
*I disagree with this argument btw.
I agree with maintaining a performance baseline that enables stats today to equate to stats 100 years ago
I abhor, for example, the moving of franchises – that’s a stain on the game that can never be forgotten or forgiven.
But when traditions actively harm (IMHO) the game, and are only in place because of some sense that the game mustn’t be changed (even though it has been, countless times), then I think a rethink is in order.
Fair enough...
But as much as it sucks for the kid…blowing the call and not reversing it doesn’t hurt the game.
Don't forget, though, that I am a very latecomer to the game
I didn’t grow up with it at all. I didn’t know what ERA meant until 2005. I have never lived in the US, never seen a major league game, and the only people I discuss the game with is you guys.
All this leaves me hopelessly underinformed and naive, I’m aware of this. But it also gives me the clarity of insight to see that the game would be greatly improved by all 30 pro clubs playing each other over the course of a season – the concept of leagues is a relic of elemtns of the game’s evolution that positively harm the development of the sport (again, IMHO).
Part of the reason for divisions (not necessarily leagues) is simply the time constraints.
East Coast teams don’t want a third of their games to start at 9:05 PM because they’re playing in California.
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 10:36 AM MDT up reply actions
Sue, I understand that
But I feel strongly the top tier of a major sport in a superower should be a national event. I’m not suggesting each team plays each other team the same number of times (it’d be ideal perhaps, but not practical and would be too big a change), but they should equally not play team A 18 times and team B 0 times.
I am also amongst those that is uncomfortable with that.
Really, I think it’s dictated mostly by money in that sense (less traveling if you only go to the cities in one division instead of 7-14 more).
The idea of playing every team every season turns me on ideologically, but not practically.
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 10:43 AM MDT up reply actions
the unbalanced schedule and divisions are two of the "tradionalist" things i actually agree with
i enjoy having divisions made up of teams within one area of the country thus creating rivalries. And the fact that you place your division opponents more than anyone else just makes sense to me and further helps out the rivalries.
sure it isn’t fair that you dont play everyone equally but since when does sports have to be fair? ill admit though, if i was a fan of the orioles, rays, or blue jays i may think differently
Yes because
the Rays are surely showing the signs of playing in an “unfair” division.
They are simply putting out the most competitive team they can with the resources available. As are all teams.
im aware of what the rays are currently doing
id still imagine that their fans are complaining about the division they play in
Moving franchises
Cue random historical fact from Andrew Martin…
There are three things in my life which I really love: God, my family, and baseball. The only problem - once baseball season starts, I change the order around a bit. ~Al Gallagher, 1971
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings. ~Earl Wilson
JFK
like how the Baltimore Colts packed up and left in the middle of the night?
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 12:39 PM MDT up reply actions
I was thinking
three HOF players trivia fact you gave me a couple weeks ago.
There are three things in my life which I really love: God, my family, and baseball. The only problem - once baseball season starts, I change the order around a bit. ~Al Gallagher, 1971
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings. ~Earl Wilson
JFK
and that's where people aren't giving the statheads any credit
I’d argue that it’s a VERY INCREDIBLY SLIM piece of the pie chart of statheads who saw numbers and that’s what drew them to baseball, and not the other way around.
I loved going to Coors Field before I loved crunching numbers in my labcoat.
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 10:29 AM MDT up reply actions
that is to say we all loved watching Mike Cameron belt 4 homers in a game
we know he’s not gonna do it tomorrow, or the next day, or the next day, ad infinitum, but damn if we weren’t excited.
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 10:30 AM MDT up reply actions
I like your view...
from the other side of the fence. I hate to jump into the cliche of “It’s part of the game”…but it really is. It sucks for the kid to not get a perfect game, as rare as they are, but his spot in the annuls of baseball is to be “the kid who got robbed”. Who threw the 14th ever perfect game? How about the 9th? Can anyone really tell me that with out the aid of Google? My point is that he’s probably going to get more notoriety for being wronged in this occasion, and everyone will still ultimately agree that he tossed a no hitter. My 2.5 cents.
yeah p much
he got a damn corvette out of the deal.
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 10:02 AM MDT up reply actions
Classy by the motor company.
This is R year!
by prettyinpurple on Jun 4, 2010 10:07 AM MDT up reply actions
Not Classy
good advertising….
"Ninety feet between a hot dog and my mouth is too far" - Maria M (SDCAT09 is awesome for coming up with this fake quote for me!)
Co-president of the Ubaldo Lovers Club.
Sure it is
but to think they had any other motive besides the huge amounts of great pr and free advertising they recieved out of this is silly.
"Ninety feet between a hot dog and my mouth is too far" - Maria M (SDCAT09 is awesome for coming up with this fake quote for me!)
Co-president of the Ubaldo Lovers Club.
Checking the draft order
Look at how many picks the Angels get!
You could rework your entire 2015 lineup in just a couple of rounds.
The oxen are slow, but the earth is patient.
i think the diamondbacks had 8 of the first 64 picks
Or something of that nature
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." - Albert Einstein
by Andrew T. Fisher on Jun 4, 2010 10:51 AM MDT via mobile up reply actions
are we going to get any draft previews on who the rockies might take?
i know predicting baseball drafts is more of a crapshoot than the other sports. i definitely agree with the BPA draft strategy in baseball. i wonder if this is a recent shift in strategy for the rockies as wasnt one of the main reasons we passed on longoria was our depth at 3b at the time?
by the way
VERY shameless plug: a purple row story is featured on the main sbnation page www.sbnation.com
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." - Albert Einstein
by Andrew T. Fisher on Jun 4, 2010 10:55 AM MDT via mobile reply actions
which article...
I can’t figure it out – these sb nation sites are so hard to navigage…
"Ninety feet between a hot dog and my mouth is too far" - Maria M (SDCAT09 is awesome for coming up with this fake quote for me!)
Co-president of the Ubaldo Lovers Club.
and that isn't a link
to purple Row
"Ninety feet between a hot dog and my mouth is too far" - Maria M (SDCAT09 is awesome for coming up with this fake quote for me!)
Co-president of the Ubaldo Lovers Club.
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." - Albert Einstein
by Andrew T. Fisher on Jun 4, 2010 11:32 AM MDT up reply actions
cool
"Ninety feet between a hot dog and my mouth is too far" - Maria M (SDCAT09 is awesome for coming up with this fake quote for me!)
Co-president of the Ubaldo Lovers Club.
man my stuff is never frontpaged like that
btb totally stole my thing
i’m assuming
(btw I love btb)
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 11:34 AM MDT up reply actions
They essentially did
though they linked to my fanshot on Btb. So you stole it from LMM, I stole it from you and they stole it from me.
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." - Albert Einstein
by Andrew T. Fisher on Jun 4, 2010 11:59 AM MDT up reply actions
was a very good article
There are three things in my life which I really love: God, my family, and baseball. The only problem - once baseball season starts, I change the order around a bit. ~Al Gallagher, 1971
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings. ~Earl Wilson
JFK
Have you considered hiring a navigagor?
I read something about some pitcher in the AL that almost threw a perfect game and there was a bad call or something. Any of you guys heard anything? I haven’t seen it discussed here at all… :)
by Junction Rox on Jun 4, 2010 11:50 AM MDT up reply actions
Wieters
Matt Wietes Facts. Pretty awesome:
Chuck Norris Jokes Are Based Off Stuff Matt Wieters Actually Did.
this one
made me chuckle:
Matt Wieters Once Visited This Website And Laughed, Not Because It Was Funny, But Because He Found It Humorous That Some People Thought His Greatness Could Be Described.
"Ninety feet between a hot dog and my mouth is too far" - Maria M (SDCAT09 is awesome for coming up with this fake quote for me!)
Co-president of the Ubaldo Lovers Club.
His greatness can easily be described
His greatness = third best catcher on my fantasy team that also includes Francisco Cervelli and Geovanny Soto.
by Junction Rox on Jun 4, 2010 12:41 PM MDT up reply actions
Matt Wieters’ greatness can be described in that he has never made a spelling error while mocking someone in an internet forum.
by deacs on Jun 4, 2010 1:56 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
ha ha
win! and rec’d…
"Ninety feet between a hot dog and my mouth is too far" - Maria M (SDCAT09 is awesome for coming up with this fake quote for me!)
Co-president of the Ubaldo Lovers Club.
Wait, i'm not the first
I just noted that deacs was probably referring to himself.
I am crestfallen…
It was in jest, unless you believe the Galarraga call can justifiably be overturned
In that case, I’m dead seriously mocking you. But I’m really kidding.
What was my spelling error?
My mock outrage was in jest as well
I thought Soto’s name looked wrong, but I was too lazy to figure out what was wrong with it…..
My outrage with Wieters’ performance is beginning to become quite real, though…
And don’t sell yourself short. You seem pretty quack to me… :)
Oh, and as for the Galarraga call
I would not support overturning the call. I don’t really like invoking something like replay to change a call in a game, when replay wasn’t available to decide the call during the game. For better or worse, the game is played under the rules in effect.
It’s not as if my semi-annual Bud Selig outrage would be provoked if he decided to overturn the call, but as bad as I feel for Galarraga, I just can’t really justify changing the call at this point.
Beat the Snakes senseless!
TULO = 2010 MVP!
Troy Tulowitzki: "When people think of the Rockies, I want them to think of a winning organization."
yes
"Ninety feet between a hot dog and my mouth is too far" - Maria M (SDCAT09 is awesome for coming up with this fake quote for me!)
Co-president of the Ubaldo Lovers Club.
by hotdoglady on Jun 4, 2010 11:24 AM MDT up reply actions 4 recs
awesomeee
rec’d
TULO = 2010 MVP!
Troy Tulowitzki: "When people think of the Rockies, I want them to think of a winning organization."
by TuLoRocks2008 on Jun 4, 2010 11:39 AM MDT up reply actions
OT: O's fired Tremblay, replaced with Juan Samuel
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;ylt=AnuKj3.K3GEuRv232R9Vfd4RvLYF?slug=txoriolestrembleyfiredylt=AnuKj3.K3GEuRv232R9Vfd4RvLYF?slug=txoriolestrembleyfired" target="new">
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
Samuel was the 3B coach
that was very interesting.
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 12:40 PM MDT up reply actions
something
had to happen. That team has been in the cellar for too long.
There are three things in my life which I really love: God, my family, and baseball. The only problem - once baseball season starts, I change the order around a bit. ~Al Gallagher, 1971
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings. ~Earl Wilson
JFK
this article
also means I have a chance to manage in the Majors without actually playing professionally.
There are three things in my life which I really love: God, my family, and baseball. The only problem - once baseball season starts, I change the order around a bit. ~Al Gallagher, 1971
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings. ~Earl Wilson
JFK
So that's the 9th manager since Peter Angelos bought the team in 1993...
Ever get the impression that maybe THE PROBLEM IS NOT THE MANAGER!
Ken Rosenthal concurs with you
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/baltimore-orioles-fire-dave-trembley-have-other-problems
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
Most of the city of Baltimore agrees with this
… and shares my level of frustration.
Oh well, This is a big part of why I’m now a Rockies fan with a soft spot for the O’s rather than an O’s fan living in Denver. Maybe one day the O’s will follow the model the Rockies, Twins, and Rays have all followed. Maybe MacPhail already is and the fruits wont show for a few years. One can hope. At least I now live in a beautiful city with an organization committed to long-term thinking and winning from the bottom up.
I'm beginning to think all of my Rockpile titles should be movie references
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 12:05 PM MDT up reply actions
yep.
"Ninety feet between a hot dog and my mouth is too far" - Maria M (SDCAT09 is awesome for coming up with this fake quote for me!)
Co-president of the Ubaldo Lovers Club.
I won't be making many FIght Club references.
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 12:47 PM MDT up reply actions
My least favorite Fincher film, save perhaps Alien3, which I haven't seen since I was like 11.
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 1:04 PM MDT up reply actions
No, you don't.
Fight Club is practically the bible of film students of my generation. Back in my freshman year, it was screened in the dorms nearly every night.
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 1:06 PM MDT up reply actions
I never said I hated Fight Club.
I don’t hate it, it’s just not a film I particularly like. It’s got some interesting ideas and themes about consumerism, but I find it to be distracted with its own style more often than not.
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 1:44 PM MDT up reply actions
sorry i shouldnt have used the term hate
I know there is a difference between least favorite and hate. My bad for jumping to conclusions.
i like fight club but the cult following gets to me sometimes. Back in college in the dorms it seemed like everyone had a fight club poster hanging on their wall. And more times than not, it was right next to a Animal House or Pulp Fiction poster
I actually quite like Animal House, and I love Pulp Fiction.
As a member of some fanbases of cult films, I can totally understand the frustration with them, especially when they like to get all dressed up and such (I know someone who dressed up as Marla from Fight Club, but at least it was for Halloween and not for a screening of the film.)
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 1:55 PM MDT up reply actions
I am Juan Uribe's buckled knees
would have been good for the last game. Some variation would probably work for the rest of the Ubaldo days this year…
I don't if this has been discussed, but SBNation's Jeff Sullivan on Ubaldo.....hmmmm ...read and discuss
http://www.sbnation.com/2010/6/4/1501562/ubaldo-jimenez-baltimore-orioles-five-numbers
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
Respectfully hatin'
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." - Albert Einstein
by Andrew T. Fisher on Jun 4, 2010 1:27 PM MDT up reply actions
pretty much.
He lists all the reasons why Ubaldo is the best pitcher in baseball and the proceeds to say that he’s not…..or did I miss something/.
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
what's the over/under on
“special’
“very special”
“in my opinion”
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
just got a very, very
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
Well, that was a quick interview...
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
Yeah. But Jim did talk quite a bit.
And he think he said “Scott” more than anything else. I’ve always admired people who are able to use the name of the person they’re talking to. For some reason I’ve never been good at that.
I don't do that much either, unless it would be for some reason unclear who I am speaking with.
While in a one on one discussion, I don’t use names. I think it’s because I find it awkward when someone uses my name when I already know they are talking to me.
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 1:25 PM MDT up reply actions
I find it helpful, especially if its a debate of some sort.
People like to hear their name. :)
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
I would have to go search for it, but I know there are
various effective communication tactics that involve using a person’s name. That’s why I’ve always wished I could do it.
I usually won't remember the first time..
So during conversation, I’ll say, “I’m sorry, I know you told me your name, but could you tell me again.” No one has ever been offended that I forgot. Most people actually say , oh no problem thanks for asking.
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
Then during conversation,
I’ll say so, “John or Jane, what do you think about blah de blah” Wait for their answer, or say “John or Jane, yada yada….” works every time, I swear.
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
i would look at you wanting to know why you would be throwing
yada yada yada’s in our conversation…but that’s just me
I've seen that.
However, I don’t respond the way it says people respond.
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 1:32 PM MDT up reply actions
My sense is that you don't respond to anything
they way “most” people would.
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
lol
In many cases, maybe. But I can’t say I have that abnormal of a psychology. I tend to react emotionally to things as one normally would. I don’t have any crossed wires in that sense, usually.
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 1:57 PM MDT up reply actions
I learned to repeat a person's name
3 times upon meeting them and then I remember. It’s worked like a charm everytime for me.
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
All in a row, or over a couple minutes' time?
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 1:28 PM MDT up reply actions
lol, no , I work into the conversation
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
lol
“Hi, my name is Jim.”
“Jim Jim Jim. Nice to meet you, Jim Jim. Jim.”
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 1:31 PM MDT up reply actions
It would also lead the other person,
to think…"hmm, rainman much
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
Hey...good call....
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
I thought it was Georgy?
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
Could be worse
Like Alanna Rizzo…after she gets done with her hhhhhhhhhorhhhhhhay dela RRRRRoSa, I feel like I need to go wipe the TV off.
o_O
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
surprise/bemusement
one eyebrow raised…..
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
It is a face
O_o
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." - Albert Einstein
by Andrew T. Fisher on Jun 4, 2010 1:40 PM MDT up reply actions
Ah...I'm not with the times.
In response to Tracy calling Jorge, George or Georgie, FSN’s Alanna Rizzo OVER enunciates the latin pronunciation of his name.
Is Rowbot Radio playing automatically for anyone else on the front page?
That’s not supposed to happen… looking into it.
Fixed.
The new player was loading automatically.
by Greg Stanwood on Jun 4, 2010 1:50 PM MDT up reply actions
Don't stop reading after the "stock" portion.
There’s another blurb farther down on the Jimenez/Lincecum game.
good article
thanks for sharing!
"Ninety feet between a hot dog and my mouth is too far" - Maria M (SDCAT09 is awesome for coming up with this fake quote for me!)
Co-president of the Ubaldo Lovers Club.
I liked this section:
Headliner of the Week:
Finally, this bulletin just in from the always-amusing goofballs at Sportspickle.com:
UBALDO JIMENEZ TOSSES BASEBALL’S 211,314TH IMPERFECT GAME
There are three things in my life which I really love: God, my family, and baseball. The only problem - once baseball season starts, I change the order around a bit. ~Al Gallagher, 1971
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings. ~Earl Wilson
JFK
I don't see how you can plan for any pitcher to last 10 years anymore
Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Yep, proving y'all wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
Matt Daley - He's pretty good
Quitter's People United Member #4
UBALDO JIMENEZ TOSSES BASEBALL’S 211,314TH IMPERFECT GAME
Ubaldomania.
by The Lodo Magic Man on Jun 4, 2010 3:44 PM MDT up reply actions
Another concern is that Jimenez has had what the same GM called “some odd injuries,” and that he has thrown more pitches the past two years (4,787) than any pitcher in his age bracket — not to mention the third most in any age bracket.
FFFFFFFFFFFfffffffffffffffffffffffff
by Andrew Martin on Jun 4, 2010 3:58 PM MDT up reply actions
what "odd injuries"
"Ninety feet between a hot dog and my mouth is too far" - Maria M (SDCAT09 is awesome for coming up with this fake quote for me!)
Co-president of the Ubaldo Lovers Club.
He throws so fast
it hurts other pitchers shoulders…
"Ninety feet between a hot dog and my mouth is too far" - Maria M (SDCAT09 is awesome for coming up with this fake quote for me!)
Co-president of the Ubaldo Lovers Club.
I know we had some discussion earlier this season on Pitcher Abuse points...
Is Ubaldo still the league leader?
Ignorance of the American League is a sign of good moral character.
"Cheap tacos are rightous!"-My Daughter
Yeah, although Doc is gaining
Although last year’s leader Verlander seems to be doing ok. Timmy, though, has lost a bit of velo.
The new Spring Training complex
… will be called “Salt River Fields at Talking Stick”
There is still a chance that one of the fields will be named after Keli McGregor
I fanshotted that earlier today.
Thanks to whichever mod deleted my duplicate post.
Agree that McGregor needs to be memorialized there.
Ignorance of the American League is a sign of good moral character.
"Cheap tacos are rightous!"-My Daughter
I quite like that name.
And one of the fields (the main one if the D-backs agree) should definitely be named after KM.
congrats
enjoy the day and hopefully a Rockies win
There are three things in my life which I really love: God, my family, and baseball. The only problem - once baseball season starts, I change the order around a bit. ~Al Gallagher, 1971
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings. ~Earl Wilson
JFK
Congratulations
Enjoy this day!
"Ninety feet between a hot dog and my mouth is too far" - Maria M (SDCAT09 is awesome for coming up with this fake quote for me!)
Co-president of the Ubaldo Lovers Club.
Don't listen to anone when they say it goes up or down from here.
It goes wherever you want it to go, however much you want it to.
Thanks everybody.
And to deacs, yeah I completely understand man :)
by CentralCaliRox on Jun 4, 2010 6:24 PM MDT up reply actions
This made me laugh
“Tracy believes that better pitching and cleaning up of steroid era has contributed to this year of the pitcher”
Don't think it was linked here
But did you guys see Carson Cistulli’s new NERD metric to try and figure out which games are the most appealing to the Sabr-conscious baseball watcher? Then today he posted his games to watch over the weekend using the metric.
The metric doesn’t love Ubaldo nearly as much as it should, as Carson mentions in both articles, including this bit from today’s:
The fact that Jimenez gets a 7 on the current NERD scale is proof that the system needs to incorporate Awesomeness into its criteria. Or at least fastball velocity. One or the other.
by controlled_slide on Jun 4, 2010 6:40 PM MDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Purple Row
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
