MLB 2008

[papsrus]

Well - I can't resist.

Sabathia pitches a one hitter complete game shutout (really a no hitter if anyone saw the play).

Looks like the Brewers will get the wild card.

Will they catch the Cubs?

Probably not, although they still have 6 games together (& I do know what happened the last time they played each other).

Brewers would clearly win either of the other 2 NL divisions.

That should definitely have been a no-hitter, IMO. Morgan was saying tonight -- and I agree with him on this -- that the first hit of the game should be a clean one. No written rule, but accepted practice. And that certainly wasn't a clean hit, from what I saw on the replays.

[Dan Gould]

Uh, sorry Brewers and Sabathia fans, but you don't get to turn something into a no-hitter after the fact. I mean, beyond the fact that the hit call is totally defensible and proper, I find it really funny that now, under these circumstances, they are begging for an error, whereas, if an error were judged the first time, they'd be bitching and moaning about the injustice of it. But most importantly, part of a no-hitter is pitching NINE FULL INNINGS without allowing a hit. Its spending the last four or five 1/2 innings all by your lonesome on the bench because your teammates are following protocol. Its the building pressure, out by out, knowing a mistake means it will all go for naught. Its hardly the same to have a fair ruling overturned after the fact, and presto chango, you just threw a no-hitter. Where ya goin', C.C.?

:rolleyes:

It is analogous to the fallacy of the claim of "if we just got that guy out in the seventh inning, the game would have turned out differently." No it wouldn't, because the subsequent events are dependent on that out not being recorded. A manager might have pinch-hit someone. He might have called for a bunt, he might have done any number of things differently and therefore you can't change one event and assume that everything that happened subsequently would be the same.

[BERIGAN]

One of the camera angles they showed on baseball tonight, showed that at the moment CC grabbed the ball, Andy LaRoche was about halfway down the line. The stupid scorer should have asked for video footage of it around the 6th or 7th inning, when it clear CC wasn't going to give up another hit, and just overturned his ruling. Hits are turned into errors and vise versa all the time during games....

[papsrus]

Uh, sorry Brewers and Sabathia fans, but you don't get to turn something into a no-hitter after the fact. ...

I agree. It certainly is hard to argue that it was a "clean hit," and it probably should have been scored an error, IMO, but it wasn't, so ... too late now.

One of the camera angles they showed on baseball tonight, showed that at the moment CC grabbed the ball, Andy LaRoche was about halfway down the line. The stupid scorer should have asked for video footage of it around the 6th or 7th inning, when it clear CC wasn't going to give up another hit, and just overturned his ruling. Hits are turned into errors and vise versa all the time during games....

I wonder how long is appropriate to wait? Given Dan's argument above, would it have been appropriate for the scorer to change it to an error in, say, the ninth inning? Or the eighth? It's a slippery slope. I'd say it's perfectly acceptable to change a score by the start of the next half inning, certainly. ... Would you agree the window has closed now?

[tkeith]

Uh, sorry Brewers and Sabathia fans, but you don't get to turn something into a no-hitter after the fact. ...

I agree. It certainly is hard to argue that it was a "clean hit," and it probably should have been scored an error, IMO, but it wasn't, so ... too late now.

One of the camera angles they showed on baseball tonight, showed that at the moment CC grabbed the ball, Andy LaRoche was about halfway down the line. The stupid scorer should have asked for video footage of it around the 6th or 7th inning, when it clear CC wasn't going to give up another hit, and just overturned his ruling. Hits are turned into errors and vise versa all the time during games....

I wonder how long is appropriate to wait? Given Dan's argument above, would it have been appropriate for the scorer to change it to an error in, say, the ninth inning? Or the eighth? It's a slippery slope. I'd say it's perfectly acceptable to change a score by the start of the next half inning, certainly. ... Would you agree the window has closed now?

The window is far from closed -- an official protest of the scoring has been filed with the league according to Buster Olney. He doesn't expect it to be overturned, which means it's likely that it will be. As for an in-game scoring change, the scorer can use the whole game if he wishes. Folks might not think to highly of it if the change were made in the 9th inning, but he'd certainly be within the rules.

Whether people want to asterisk this thing if it happens is one thing, but bluntly, the correct calls should be made -- end of issue.

Been a busy weekend and I haven't seen much -- has the instant replay been given a trial yet?

[papsrus]

Been a busy weekend and I haven't seen much -- has the instant replay been given a trial yet?

Don't believe so. But the Brewers' appeal has been denied, according to ESPN.

[Patrick]

Cliff Lee!!!!! Complete game shutout against Chisox, retiring 21 in a row at one point. Now 20-2 with a league leading 2.32 ERA, and it's only September 1. First 20 game winner for the Tribe since Gaylord Perry in '74 (Sabathia and Carmona each got to 19 last year). He better be the AL Cy Young winner--I don't care how many saves K-Rod records this year. One of the few bright spots during the season from hell in Cleveland (...recently capped off a 10 game winning streak by getting swept at home by the Mariners...).

[tkeith]

Been a busy weekend and I haven't seen much -- has the instant replay been given a trial yet?

Don't believe so. But the Brewers' appeal has been denied, according to ESPN.

Wow! Mark the date -- Olney got one right!

[Big Al]

GO CUBS!!!

[BERIGAN]

Cliff Lee!!!!! Complete game shutout against Chisox, retiring 21 in a row at one point. Now 20-2 with a league leading 2.32 ERA, and it's only September 1. First 20 game winner for the Tribe since Gaylord Perry in '74 (Sabathia and Carmona each got to 19 last year). He better be the AL Cy Young winner--I don't care how many saves K-Rod records this year. One of the few bright spots during the season from hell in Cleveland (...recently capped off a 10 game winning streak by getting swept at home by the Mariners...).

A truly amazing year!

[Soulstation1]

rockies are making their move

[Chalupa]

Braves and Marlins are in a classic pitching duel right now......

14 all in the bottom of the 8th.

[Dan Gould]

So is it really possible for Pedroia to get a decent amount, or any, MVP votes? Leads the league in BA, hits, multi-hit games, already set the team mark for runs scored by a 2B, on his way to 20 homers and 20 steals (and this is the guy who challenged Youk to a 50 yard dash last year - maybe he should demand a rematch), top flight defense ... I wonder who the last guy to win an MVP was who hit (mostly) second. Joe Morgan? Well doesn't that make sense?

[Quincy]

I wonder who the last guy to win an MVP was who hit (mostly) second. Joe Morgan? Well doesn't that make sense?

Don't know about the AL, but just eyeballing the NL I know of at least 3 since Morgan (and I confirmed on Retrosheet and Baseball-Ref.):

1995 - Barry Larkin - Batted 2nd for all of the playoff games at least.

1985 - Willie McGee - Some of the time. Whitey like to change things around, plus there so many speed guys on the team it was easy to do.

1984 - Ryne Sandberg. Frey's line up was set in stone. Dernier, Rhyno, Sarge, Bull, Moreland, Penguin, Jodie and Bowa.

I was kind of surprised there were that many, and there may be more since Morgan (and I didn't look over the AL.) Although if you recall in Morgan's 2nd MVP year in '76 he was batting 3rd as Griffey was moved into the 2nd spot.

Edited September 3, 2008 by Quincy

[tkeith]

I wonder who the last guy to win an MVP was who hit (mostly) second. Joe Morgan? Well doesn't that make sense?

I think Barry Larkin. Joe was in the 3-hole most of the time during his MVP years, as I recall.

[Dan Gould]

So does he get the MVP votes those guys did?

[tkeith]

So does he get the MVP votes those guys did?

Doubtful. He should, but I think Youk having a career year will cost him votes. Unfortunately, too many sports writers confuse "Most Valuable Player" with "Greatest Offensive Season" (see Ripken, Cal vs. Fielder, Cecil and/or Belle, Albert vs. Vaughan, Mo). Nonetheless, it'd be a helluva finish to the season (you know, *after* they win the series).

[Tom in RI]

Not to incite Thom on Tom violence, but, I don't see how Albert Belle v. Mo Vaughn supports the "Most Valuable Player" with "Greatest Offensive Season" confusion. Belle had better stats than Vaughn in every major offensive category except stolen bases (Vaughn had 11, those runnin' Red Sox!) and RBI, which was tied at 126. But Vaughn won the award.

I do agree about Youk taking some votes from Pedroia, specially if Youk has a big September.

Now rooting for the Yankees (hurts to say that).

[Quincy]

I wonder who the last guy to win an MVP was who hit (mostly) second. Joe Morgan? Well doesn't that make sense?

I think Barry Larkin. Joe was in the 3-hole most of the time during his MVP years, as I recall.

I forgot they have the splits on Retrosheet. In his MVP year (there was only one) he batted 2nd 63 times, 3rd 49 and 1st 19.

[tkeith]

I wonder who the last guy to win an MVP was who hit (mostly) second. Joe Morgan? Well doesn't that make sense?

I think Barry Larkin. Joe was in the 3-hole most of the time during his MVP years, as I recall.

I forgot they have the splits on Retrosheet. In his MVP year (there was only one) he batted 2nd 63 times, 3rd 49 and 1st 19.

I assume you're talking about Larkin here; Joe won in consecutive years.

[tkeith]

Not to incite Thom on Tom violence, but, I don't see how Albert Belle v. Mo Vaughn supports the "Most Valuable Player" with "Greatest Offensive Season" confusion. Belle had better stats than Vaughn in every major offensive category except stolen bases (Vaughn had 11, those runnin' Red Sox!) and RBI, which was tied at 126. But Vaughn won the award.

I do agree about Youk taking some votes from Pedroia, specially if Youk has a big September.

Now rooting for the Yankees (hurts to say that).

Belle had better stats and was more important to his team (making all around him better). I realized when I typed this it didn't fit my argument that well, but it's one that always rubbed me. Let's call it the "vote-for-the-good-guy" mentality. Belle was, is and always will be a prick. Likewise, he was, is and always will have been more valuable between the lines than Mo, but Mo was likable. I retract the example on the grounds I gave, but open up this new avenue of analysis. Mo sure did look good slidin' into second on those steals, though... only, uh, not.

I hate to throw him under the bus, because he's one of my all-time favorites, but Andre Dawson winning for the 6th-place Cubs is a good example. AD had a monstrous year, but really one the award because of a lack of viable competition. The MVP can't possibly play for a last-place club; it just doesn't make sense.

[Quincy]

I wonder who the last guy to win an MVP was who hit (mostly) second. Joe Morgan? Well doesn't that make sense?

I think Barry Larkin. Joe was in the 3-hole most of the time during his MVP years, as I recall.

I forgot they have the splits on Retrosheet. In his MVP year (there was only one) he batted 2nd 63 times, 3rd 49 and 1st 19.

I assume you're talking about Larkin here; Joe won in consecutive years.

Sorry, I misread your comment. Yeah, that was for Larkin.

And thanks to Retrosheet this is easy to answer. In '75 Morgan batted 3rd 119 times, 2nd 19, 4th 3, 8th 3 and 9th 2. Obviously the last 2 were coming off the bench.

In '76 he bated 3rd 130 times, scattered for the 11 games (but 2nd just once.)

I hadn't realized that by '74 he was dropped into the 3 hole some of the time. I misremembered it as starting in '76. Those Saturday Game of the Weeks from '72-'73 are burned into the brain, where Rose goes 1st to 3rd on Joe's singles when Joe was batting 2nd.

A couple of other MVPs since 1975 who batted 2nd (not that the one in '75 did mind you):

In '82 Yount batted 2nd 138 times (out of 156 games played.) Batted 2nd 45 times in his other MVP year.

In '99 Ivan Rodriguez batted 2nd for most of the time, but just 88 times out of 144 played.

So yes, a fellow batting 2nd can win MVP!

[Quincy]

Belle had better stats and was more important to his team (making all around him better). I realized when I typed this it didn't fit my argument that well, but it's one that always rubbed me. Let's call it the "vote-for-the-good-guy" mentality.

I recall one popular argument against Belle was that the Indians had locked up their division at a very early date (they finished 30 games above the 2nd place team.) Thus Belle never had any pressure on him when hitting. Uh huh, yeah, whatever. A fine excuse for not voting for someone because you just don't like him.

There have been a ton of bad choices for MVP, far too many to mention them all. Bell over Trammell in '87, Gonzalez over ARod in '96, hell, Sosa over McGwire was especially stupid. Sosa wins it because he team barely wins wild card? So what. Both the Cards & Cubs had winning records that year yet it obvious that whoever got in at wild card didn't have the stuff to make it far into the playoffs. Why McGwire should have been penalized for having lesser teammates while putting up better numbers is beyond me. Heh, I guess Alou or Biggio would be the "organic" pick for that year, uh, maybe Greg Vaughn too. Though that 50 HR looks a little suspicious...

[BERIGAN]

Braves and Marlins are in a classic pitching duel right now......

14 all in the bottom of the 8th.

That was some game...at one point, the braves were up 10-3, then I checked back and they were down 13-10, In the 5th I think!!!! Braves won 16-14....

By the way, I am usually against contraction, but the Marlins need to be contracted. They are playing in front of I'd guess less than 1000 fans today, no joke!!! I don't even know if they have drawn 5000 for this 3 game series. Just pathetic.

I know they have blown the team up a few times, but horrible teams can draw 10,000 fans a night, this is a good, fairly exciting team, every infielder has 20 Homers....

Well, move them somewhere then....

Just now, the braves announcers are talking about the team moving somewhere....they can't stand no response no matter what happens in a game....so quiet.

[Tom in RI]

Belle had better stats but his supporting cast looks like a Fantasy Team now. He had Carlos Baerga (.314, 90 RBI), Jim Thome (.314, 73 RBI), Kenny Lofton (.310), some guy named Ramirez who batted 7th I believe (.308, 107 RBI), and Eddy Murray (.323, 82 RBI). The Sox had Tim Naehring, Jose Canseco and Troy O'Leary just over .300 but O'Leary and Canseco didn't crack 400 at bats, Mike Greenwell and John Valentin were also very close to .300. Still, that Cleveland lineup was historic, and that's with Sandy Alomar (maybe the best 2nd baseman ever) playing only 66 games. So, while I can see your argument that writers didn't want to vote for the "bad guy", I think an argument could be made that Vaughn was more important to the Sox lineup than Belle was to the Indians. Mind you I'm not saying its a no brainer.