For such an interesting and entertaining night, we learned nothing new:
-
CC Sabathia is a very good pitcher. The big lefty continued his strong first season in New York by throwing eight innings of one-run ball on short rest in a big spot, giving the Yankees complete control of the ALCS with a lead of three games to one. Sabathia dealt with the issue of working on three days’ rest by getting through the first four innings on just 38 pitches, going to two balls on a batter just twice in that span. He walked one, struck out five, and save for a seven-batter stretch in the fifth and sixth, was never threatened. It was exactly what the Yankees needed after Monday’s difficult, and taxing, loss. -
Alex Rodriguez is a very good baseball player. Rodriguez had three hits, including a homer and a double, as well as a walk and a stolen base. He looked like an all-time great player in the prime of his career, which is what he is and has been for his entire time in New York. He’s been the team’s best player across seven post-season games this season, with five home runs and a .407 batting average. Mike Scioscia voted on the matter by walking Rodriguez intentionally with two outs and no one on base in the ninth inning of Monday’s game. -
Playing baseball well in the postseason is not a skill above and beyond playing baseball well. I’d like to think the above paragraphs will help to put an end to the myth that October is somehow different. Sabathia and Rodriguez had assembled recent track records in postseason play that served to define them as failures in the eyes of many who want to believe that success on a baseball diamond is a moral issue. You cannot evaluate baseball players on a handful of starts or plate appearances, and that remains true no matter the date. Given time, all players perform at their established levels, and that’s what we’re seeing now from Sabathia and Rodriguez. Would that this lesson took hold, but even I’m not that naïve. -
At heart, the Angels are hackers. On a night when they would have been well-served to make Sabathia work hard-with the pitcher working on short rest, the Yankee bullpen coming off two games of heavy use, and Yankee manager Joe Girardi prone to making mistakes-the Angels reverted to form, swinging at 16 of Sabathia’s first 38 pitches in the first four innings. Take Bobby Abreu out of the mix, and they swung at half his offerings in that span, averaging 2.6 pitches per plate appearance. It was exactly the wrong approach against the wrong pitcher on the wrong night, and was one of two main reasons-the other being Scott Kazmir-that they lost. -
Smallball is dumb. A day after a baseball game was won by a team that crushed a bunch of extra-base hits, the first batter of the game got himself picked off after a single. Later, Brett Gardner got caught stealing in front of a walk and a home run. Both of these teams can hit for power, so it’s amusing watching them try to abide by the idea that you win games in October by risking outs for bases. You don’t. -
Humans are no longer the best technology for the practice we know as “umpiring.” I never, ever want to hear about what’s in an umpire’s heart. Baseball games should be determined by what the players do, not how those actions are interpreted by the people around them. An October that has been defined by its unimaginably bad umpiring crossed into the ludicrous last night, as Tim McClelland made two calls that, had they been made in your local softball league, would have resulted in a beatdown. On the first, he ruled that Nick Swisher left third base early when tagging up, a call that was both flat-out wrong as well as one that he could not possibly have made based on where he was standing when Torii Hunter caught the ball. He could not have seen both Hunter’s glove and Swisher’s foot simultaneously. He made the call up, and-please don’t think me rash-he should not be allowed to umpire another game this season for that. He made the call up.Minutes later, McClelland made an inexplicable decision, calling Robinson Cano “safe” after Mike Napoli tagged him while Cano was standing a foot away from third base. Cano made a bizarre choice himself, appearing to surrender third base so that Jorge Posada could reoccupy it, which is the kind of thing the slow eight-year-old does in tee ball. Napoli tagged both runners while neither was on a base, but McClelland called Cano safe. Perhaps he knew Cano was safe in his small intestine.
Second-base umpire Tim Scott joined in the fun, too, missing an out at second base-Swisher being picked off-that preceded McClelland’s call on the appeal play. The sequence, from that call through the Cano play, reduced MLB to WWE for one disgusting half-hour. We have to take the game away from the technology that cannot hack it-the humans-and put it in the hands of that which can-video. What we’re seeing this October is not some kind of anomaly; it is a concentrated form of the incompetent umpiring that plagues MLB every single day. It’s time to put an end to it, and if this October hasn’t proven that, I can only imagine what championship-changing event it would take to do so.
Lastly, let me say this. I don’t need radical changes to the postseason schedule. I’m OK with starting the series on fixed dates. But could we please, for the love of all that is holy, get rid of the stupid offday between Games Four and Five of the LCSs that serves no purpose but to make the networks happy? Is there anyone not in upper management at Fox or TBS that thinks this is a good idea? It’s “Spiderman-on-the-bases” level silliness.
Thank you for reading
This is a free article. If you enjoyed it, consider subscribing to Baseball Prospectus. Subscriptions support ongoing public baseball research and analysis in an increasingly proprietary environment.
Subscribe now
1. Fewer double headers means its easier to catch all the games
2. Better rested bullpens
3. Starting your #1 three times.
A 5 game series? The whole idea is to see more baseball, not less. And a 7 game series is slightly less of a crapshoot than a 5 game series.
If you want to usefully contribute to a relevant discussion, think about how to do replay swiftly. If you instead want to pontificate self-righteously, well, keep up the good work.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1161272/index.htm
Here's another way to shorten the length of games. Change the rules so that a pitcher has to face at least TWO batters (rather than one batter) before he can be removed from the game. I would include obvious exceptions such as injury situations, or where the pitcher faces only one batter but records the third out of an inning (so he could still be pinch-hit for if his spot in the batting order comes up in the next half inning)
It would greatly reduce all of these late inning pitching changes that add to the length of games for no apparent good reason. It would force teams to actually try to develop pitchers who can actually be effective against both lefthanded and righthanded batters.
To a less sympathetic reader this is also known as the "Pompous Windbag" mode.
I especially like his line "An October that has been defined by its unimaginably bad umpiring" Really? How many of the series has the umpiring decided? How many games? If I talked to twenty people in any of the ballparks how many would share that opinion?
It's not a matter of the umpiring DECIDING the games, it's a matter of the umpiring being as bad it has been to begin with!
In terms of the bad umping deciding games, just flash back to game 2 of the Twins/Yankees series, where Cuzzi made the blown call that kept Mauer from doubling, and more than likely cost the Twins at least a run.
But with that being said, it gets grating to read about in every single piece about either series. It really hasn't detracted from my enjoyment of the series - but YMMV.
On to the umpiring. Monday night's NLCS game had the worst balls and strikes calling I've ever seen, regular or postseason. Finally, I did't see the ALCS game last night, but it sounds like McClelland went with the old "even up" call you see so much in hockey.
Plus, November baseball is a bad idea in NY, Boston, Chicago, etc.
Once the fans in terrace level saw the replay on the TVs they have down there, they started loudly booing, then the crowd started chanting "Bullshit" for quite a while. Did Fox let that through on the air?
But that's exactly the point. If the advent of instant reply has allowed fans to see a call was blown but the umpire can't see it, that means that umpiring hasn't kept pace. Once, long ago, it was the umpires in the best position to make the call and be the arbiter. Fans in the stands couldn't see as well and players had competing interests. But now, that has changed. The fan at home CAN see. It seems folly to cling to an obviously inferior method.
Umpires are still important and necessary; I just wish they'd put more emphasis on making the correct calls vs. clinging to anachronisms. Besides, it's much harder as a fan to complain about the umps when they can support their calls with visual evidence!
Each baseball team only gets 27 (regulation) outs. Blowing even one of them can have a HUGE impact, whether it's player or umpiring error, the result is the same.
Am I delusional, or was there a brief moment in time--maybe between the Richie Phillips Massacre and the 2004 World Series--where it looked like umpiring was improving? I remember umps, of their own volition, conferencing on difficult calls and crews being more willing to rectify mistakes, even if it meant "showing someone up."
More damning than McLelland's call is the fact that there were FIVE OTHER UMPIRES ON THE FIELD and he did not ask them for help NOR did any of them see fit to approach him and say, "No, no, I had a tag, I've got this one."
The game deserves better.
Idk.. I'm not saying there is a huge, huge difference like the msm will have you believe, but players are under quite a lot of pressure during the post season and they frequently admit, they feel the pressure a lot more during october than the regular season.
I'm not saying look at one bad series and infer "that guy will always choke under pressure", but players are human, and pressure situations affect all humans differently. I would certainly say playing baseball well in the postseason is a skill above being a good ball player, in that you have to deal with a lot more stress just to be able to perform at your normal talent level.
Think about a job interview. Is it not a skill to perform as well in a job interview as any other social situation (where there is significantly less pressure)?
Not to bring out the "nerd in your mother's basement" jokes, but I don't see how a non-player could make that assertion, and it just seems overly contrarian.
What if during an instant replay the network goes to a commercial (or 2), then when there is an actual commercial break it is 1 (or 2) commercials fewer?
I have to think that the players do not need as much time to switch sides as the commercial breaks give them.
(And here are mine...)
1.) Honestly the off days allow fans the ability to enjoy the games after they get home from work on East Coast; Monday's Game Two at 4pm EST sucked for those who work a regular gig and would like to watch their team play. In tonight's case, Dodgers/Phillies fans can watch the game in prime time (again...East coast bias), as can Yanks/Angels fans tomorrow. It's still a million times better than the NBA BTW.
2.) I've never in 30 years of watching baseball seen worse officiating. I believe in earnest that the Swisher tag call was a makeup for an obvious blown call at 2nd base, however the Cano/Posada debacle was a joke. As a Yankees fan I don't know which was worse, the call or Cano's stupidity.
There is no reason to have humans calling balls and strikes anymore. None. Let's stop.
We can probably also get robots to call out and safe at the bases, too, using technology very similar to what's been used in Olympic fencing for the past dozen years. With MLB's money behind it, I'm sure they could improve it and make it wireless pertty quickly.
I'm with you on some sort of robot/computer/instant replay in baseball but I've yet to see a three-dimensional computer strike-zone. The ones on tv, at least, are two-dimensional. But the strike zone is three-dimensional. A pitch can be out of the strike zone when it first crosses the front of the plate but then be in the strike zone when it crosses the back end. I'm not saying umpires would necessarily be better than computers at understanding the three-dimensionality of strike zones, but as far as I know, they're the only ones who do. Also, strike zones change, not just from batter to batter, but within and between pitches as hitters crouch down, stand up, or otherwise move about during their at-bats. Again, I'm not saying it's impossible to develop a computer model to capture this dynamism, but as of now, the umpires have the uniquely best views in the game.
On the bases and base-lines, it's a different story.
"The Strike Zone shall be determined from the BATTER'S STANCE as the batter is prepared to swing at a pitched ball."
The strike zone has nothing to do with a "natural hitting stance," but is determined by each individual hitter's particular stance (take a look at some Pete Rose video); and no, a strike zone could never be over a batter's head.
But its unlikely you can identify those players by a small sample of post-season statistics. Teams should put pressure & moisture sensors in bats, maybe that'll provide verifiable results.
Conversely, Jeter, Teixeira (despite his lack of hitting) and A-Rod have played like consummate professionals. I feel privileged to witness their greatness.
I mostly agree with you here, but can you clarify something?
The "slow 8-year-old" wasn't supposed to be a euphemism, the way a lot of people use "slow" for "retarded," was it?
You were writing about foot speed, right?
Because I seriously can't imagine you were writing the other thing.
The only real complication would be on those plays (mostly fair balls called foul) which cause the defense to stop playing, or the offense to stop running the bases. I have no perfect solution for this, but would suggest the rule that if the ball passed the base on the fly, it's an automatic double, on the ground it's a fielder's choice, with the lead runner being called out.
This would correct the blatant errors, without increasing the game length by any noticeable margin.
I guess my question is, are the skills that allow a player to fool an umpire "part of the game?" Should they be?
Whats worse is that you'll see the catcher set up right on the outside corner, and the pitcher will hit the mitt and get a strike. The next pitch he'll set up another 3-4 inches outside and the pitcher will hit the mitt and get a strike. Then the NEXT pitch he'll set up 3-4 inches outside of that and if the pitcher hits the mitt, he gets a strike. Now you've got a hitter called out on a pitch in the opposing batters box and he's standing there going, "where's the fricken plate if that's a strike?"
And if the umpire dares to call a ball on a pitch which the catcher doesn't have to move for, the catcher starts to complain.
They're slow to get instant replay;
It is ridiculous that a player who gets suspended for fighting or throwing at a batter gets to keep playing under the guise of an appeal (if you're suspended, you should sit out right away--no appeal, no whining, just get lost for 2 or 3 days--this is not the American justice system here, it's players playing in a private club with private rules);
No viable solution to the vast gap between the haves and the have nots.
You can fault McLelland for being out of position, but he can't call what he can't see, and in combination with the fact that Cano stopping a foot short of the bag was rather improbable, I can absolutely see why he made that (incorrect) call.
He could not have seen Swisher leave early b/c a) he was 5 feet from Swisher and 200 feet from Hunter and they were at different angles from his perspective, and also b) he DIDN'T leave early! And yet he called it.
Two stunningly STUNNINGLY bad calls. I'm really glad that game wasn't close.