2010 MLB Season

[ghost of miles]

Even national-level politicians from Michigan are getting into the midst of it now.

[Chalupa]

Selig won't reverse blown call

Yet another golden opportunity to get things right and Selig punts it away. Alas.

[ghost of miles]

Selig won't reverse blown call

Yet another golden opportunity to get things right and Selig punts it away. Alas.

At least they're going to look at expanding replay. Hopefully we'll have both Galarraga and Jim Joyce to thank for something like this never coming to pass again, with everybody on the planet, including the ump, acknowledging that he was wrong, and a player robbed of glory...and yet the call shall stand, even though there would be no reason whatsoever if some sort of limited replay had been in use.

Edit: Denkinger now supports replay as well.

Edited June 3, 2010 by ghost of miles

[Chalupa]

Jason Donald: "I was out."

[ghost of miles]

Hey, at least Galarraga got A NEW CAR!!!!!

[GregK]

why didn't he just get the call right in the first place if he is supposedly such a "great ump"? it wasn't all that close of a play, how did he miss it so badly? And, in the top half of the inning, Johnny Damon got a gift call on the same kind of play at first.

[Chalupa]

Here's something to ponder - What if the situation was reversed? What if Donald had been safe by a 1/2 step and had been called out by Joyce thereby giving Galarraga a perfect game. How would people feel then?

[Dan Gould]

According to GoM, that's the call he should have given. There's supposed to be an unwritten rule. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Aggie87]

I'm all for the instant replay being expanded, with two challenges per game allowed each team. I don't think this will downgrade the quality of the game, or the time it takes to complete a game.

Dan - would you honestly still feel so strongly about this had this been the Red Sox on the "getting screwed" end of things, instead of the Tigers?

[ghost of miles]

According to GoM, that's the call he should have given. There's supposed to be an unwritten rule. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

That's not at all what I said. I said that if in Joyce's mind the call was so close that it could go either way, that he should have defaulted, benefit-of-the-doubt style, to Galarraga. Plenty of other people, including former players like Joe Morgan, were saying the same thing last night. I was NOT advocating that Galarraga turn what he thought was a "safe" call into an "out." The fact that he evidently thought Donald so clearly safe is simply more evidence of how badly he blew the call.

With any kind of luck this kind of travesty won't come to pass again. Kudos to Galarraga for being such a class act about it. Until then, we can all go back to sighing about "Oh, isn't it terrible? All part of the 'game.'" Maybe that had to be the case at one time, but in 2010 there's no need to continue letting such black marks upon baseball's integrity stand. At least something good will probably come of it in the form of expanded replay.

I'm all for the instant replay being expanded, with two challenges per game allowed each team. I don't think this will downgrade the quality of the game, or the time it takes to complete a game.

Well, exactly. If nothing else, it's going to certainly reduce the amount of time managers spent jawboning angrily at umps--and it will do much to ensure the fairness of the game and that the game's results more accurately reflect the players' performances. Why on earth that's such a terrible thing is beyond me. It certainly hasn't hurt professional football at all.

[ghost of miles]

On a totally unrelated and much happier (for me) note, the Yankees are certainly benefiting from a relatively soft part of the schedule (excepting a Toronto series this weekend and the Phillies coming up soon)--and from having their lineup nearly at full strength again (save for Nick Johnson, who outside of being a Human Base-On-Balls machine wasn't contributing much anyway). After today's game six of their nine most-frequently-playing starters are hitting .300 or higher (including both catchers--Cervilli and Posada--with Posada looking to be the primary DH until Johnson returns later this summer. Frankly, I think NY's better off with the current Cervelli-at-catcher, Jorge-at-DH configuration). And though there's been a lot of talk about A-Rod's possible power decline, at his current pace he'll end up with about 40 doubles, 25 HR, 130 RBI, and a .300 BA/.500 SA. With Cano on an absolute tear behind him in the #5 spot, we're even managing to survive Tex's continuing woes in the #3 slot quite well. (EDIT: looks like Cervelli's now dropped to .294...but still 6 of the top 9 batters at .300 or better, 7 at .290 or better, plus Thames coming off the bench at .303)

As for pitching, Javy seems to be finally getting on track, Phil Hughes has had only one bad start all year, Andy Pettitte is having a great season... my continuing concern is the bullpen. Even if Joba manages to stabilize and Mo pulls out yet another very good year as a closer, the middle relief still looks very shaky and unsettled to me.

Edited June 4, 2010 by ghost of miles

[ghost of miles]

Voila--The Code. And far more meaningful/significant in this instance than A-Rod's little jog across Dallas Braden's mound, if we're going to be talking--thanks to Braden--about "unwritten rules" this year.

Edited June 4, 2010 by ghost of miles

[ghost of miles]

Nice words from A-Rod for Griffey.

[Patrick]

15 of 25 Indians on major league squad have less than 3 yrs service time: 4 rookies, 5 with less than 1 yr service time, 3 with less than 2 yrs, and 3 with less than 3 yrs. [And arguably their two best position players, Grady Sizemore and Asdrubal Cabrera have potential season-ending injuries.] Does it show?

[Chalupa]

Someone just tweeted this to me...

"It's a shame no one will remember Armando Galarraga's name in 50 years like we will Dallas whatshisface from Oakland."

[ghost of miles]

As others have observed, if this does indeed lead to expanded replay, Galarraga may well be remembered even more than if he'd gotten the official perfecto (though it still would have been an astonishing moment for baseball history...the second perfect game in 4 days and the third in less than a month, a feat I doubt we'd ever see equaled again). It's sure made me a fan of him.

I'm also still in awe of the tremendous catch that Austin Jackson made... not to mention the way Jackson's been hitting for Detroit so far this year. Much as I like Curtis Granderson, I still regret that we had to give up AJ to get him.

[Brad]

Someone just tweeted this to me...

"It's a shame no one will remember Armando Galarraga's name in 50 years like we will Dallas whatshisface from Oakland."

I disagree. No one will forget his imperfect perfect game. One of the radio hosts in NY said that years from now he and Joyce will clean up on the autograph circuit, appearing in shows together.

[Chalupa]

Someone just tweeted this to me...

"It's a shame no one will remember Armando Galarraga's name in 50 years like we will Dallas whatshisface from Oakland."

I disagree. No one will forget his imperfect perfect game. One of the radio hosts in NY said that years from now he and Joyce will clean up on the autograph circuit, appearing in shows together.

Brad, I think that was the point the tweeter was trying to make.

[Brad]

Someone just tweeted this to me...

"It's a shame no one will remember Armando Galarraga's name in 50 years like we will Dallas whatshisface from Oakland."

I disagree. No one will forget his imperfect perfect game. One of the radio hosts in NY said that years from now he and Joyce will clean up on the autograph circuit, appearing in shows together.

Brad, I think that was the point the tweeter was trying to make.

J.H.,

You know that we NY guys are a little on the slow side

[Quincy]

The good that's come out of this won't be adding another 12 to 15 minutes to games through instant replay challenges, it's that we learned what an incredible classy guy Galarraga is. Also extremely cool-headed. And smart. Had he complained his strike zone would be the size of a shoebox next week. Had he gotten the perfect game instead the reaction would have been "Who?" followed by "What's wrong with baseball with all of these perfect games? Bring back steroids & offense!"

And there lots of material for parents teaching their kids. Authority figures are sometimes wrong. If Galarraga can control his temper after getting screwed out of the ultimate individual accomplishment for a pitcher, so can you you little rugrat. Nobody likes a crybaby, but everybody admires classiness & grace. And so on.

And to say that instant replay hasn't hurt football at all isn't true. Given how unscientific ball placement is, and the fact that they still use chains (why not lasers hotshots?), and then they make the refs go to the side and look at some silly screen on the sidelines while in the elements… please! This is what you want for baseball? It's a process only lawyers could love. Do you want that for bang-bang plays at first and stolen base attempts for every blasted "ordinary" game? Just what they need in Cleveland and Kansas City in August, more time sitting around in the summer heat watching umps review calls while nothing happens on the field. Look for strategic uses by the likes of Tony La Russa to disrupt the starting pitcher's rhythm too.

The loss on the record books of an individual accomplishment that is now more memorable because of the wrong call and did not effect the outcome of the game in the standings is not a good reason to "lawyer up" a game and slow down an already slow game. I'm tempted to say "perhaps for the playoffs," but now I can hear Buck in my head droning on (like I have) about the length of games and late start times, and how the poor children can't stay up to watch games because instant replay takes too damn long.

[Dan Gould]

Eric is 100% correct. And I still haven't heard an explanation for what happens when a manager has used his allotment of challenges and something like this happens. There's absolutely no reason to assume that managers will hold a challenge to the end of the game - use 'em or lose 'em. Is the other manager supposed to use one of his in the name of "historical integrity"? Or maybe, in the limited situation of 26 outs in a near-perfect game, the umpires should huddle up and decide if anyone else thought he fucked it up, so they'll call a review.

Actually Eric is a 1000% correct. So a perfect game didn't go into the record books. Big fucking deal! If it isn't killing the kid, why is it killing everybody else?

[Neal Pomea]

After a 10 game road trip that had us Nationals 3-7, including 3 straight losses to Houston, it's a tough home stand against the Redlegs, then Strasburg's debut next week! Time to climb back over .500. Did anything else happen in baseball this week?

[ghost of miles]

Use of instant replay is not going to result in 10-12 minutes being added to games--particularly as if, per reports yesterday, that Selig is looking at a one-challenge limit. (Also, I haven't seen any recent stats, but the first year the NFL went to expanded replay, they found it added an average of 72 seconds per game.) Also, any time "used up" for umps reviewing a play is sure to be made up for by fewer incidents of managers yelling their heads off at umps. Besides, are we going all Joe West here? TV's a big culprit in why games have gotten longer. Besides, you're talking a maximum two reviews a game, and even that won't be the case most of the time. NFL refs are given 60 seconds to make their determination. I just think the whole "will slow the game down!" cry is a bit of a red herring.

It's not "lawyering up," simply giving managers one chance per game to make sure the right call was made in a key situation. I'm more inclined to favor two challenges, but one's better than none. As for the scenario of "if you give 'em one, they'll want more": I can almost guarantee you that managers and now even umps would rather have one than none. They'd be inclined to use their one challenge quite judiciously. Have NFL coaches clamored for more challenges? Hardly! (Though they do use the same two-challenge system that I favor.) The NFL has had its current instant replay system since 1999, and if anything, the game's only gotten more popular.

What on earth is so wrong about a limited use of available technology that makes it much more likely that athletes' performances on the field during a game will be accurately reflected in the game's outcome? Rather than living with what in effect is a lie, simply because we didn't want to wait 60 seconds to make sure a crucial call was right.

EDIT: USA TODAY has an interesting article on MLB & the NFL's move to instant replay.

Edited June 4, 2010 by ghost of miles

[Dave James]

As much as I'm turned off by the expression, the Joyce/Gallaraga incident is turning out to be a teachable moment on a number of different levels.

[BERIGAN]

After a 10 game road trip that had us Nationals 3-7, including 3 straight losses to Houston, it's a tough home stand against the Redlegs, then Strasburg's debut next week! Time to climb back over .500. Did anything else happen in baseball this week?

I am really looking forward to Strasburg coming up...but, they are going to overdo this babying of him! He was coming out of games after 52 pitches! Yeah, I get it, you want him to not become the next Mark Prior(Who had much better mechanics than Strasburg) but they seem more caught up in innings pitched than even pitches thrown...at least that's what it appears to be. I keep hearing that they only want him to pitch 110, 120 innings max, for the rest of the season. And that would mean a lot of 4 or 5 inning games if he went 6 innings the start before. Or will he be on a pitch count and come out after 3 2/3rds after striking out 7 and throwing 60 pitches???

They were not letting him go 6 in those wasted starts at AAA....stoopid, IMHO.

But, I still...it will be thrilling to see him pitching in the majors...finally!