Outrage at Second

[fusion_text]Previously on this site I have recommended a baseball rule change, requiring a baserunner to slide toward the base he is approaching and awarding a doubleplay when this rule is broken. The urgency of such a rule change increased tonight when a slide that should be illegal not only broke a shortstop’s leg, but changed the outcome of a playoff game.

With runners on first and third, one out and the Dodgers trailing 2-1, Mets second baseman Daniel Murphy fielded a hard shot behind second, tossed the ball to shortstop Ruben Tejada who reached backward for the ball, pirouetted and started to throw to first. Dodger runner Chase Utley, however, ignored second base and instead slid into Tejada well off the bag. In fact, and this should’ve been important, Utley did not even touch second base. His slide was late, starting only when reaching the bag, and wide.

Not only did the tying run score from third, the replay official noted that Tejada’s toe did not quite reach the base and so he ruled Utley safe, ruling that when an umpire makes an incorrect call on the field, the runner should be placed where he would have been had the correct call been made. Why anyone could think that Utley would have been at second if the umpire had not signaled him out is astonishing. It was just as likely, had the umpire signaled “safe,” that Tejada would have tagged Utley, who had overslid the base by several feet. Unless, of course, the replay official was factoring in Tejada’s broken leg, which he could not have known about at the time of his decision.

Under my proposed rule, a double play would have been awarded and none of the Dodgers’ four runs that inning would have scored. Maybe the Mets wouldn’t have held onto the 2-1 lead for another inning, but they should have had the chance.

The game announcers never really came to grips with this issue. Cal Ripken, surprisingly for a former shortstop, didn’t see anything wrong with Utley’s late slide. Ron Darling, former pitcher, faulted the slide, but with hesitation, while the play-by-play man, not a former player, deferred. No one took on the absurd conclusion that Utley “would have been at second” absent the incorrect out call. The postgame announcers were wildly out of their depth on the subject: I’m sure TBS did not expect to be holding hearings on rules interpretations when they signed up Pedro Martinez, Gary Sheffield and Dusty Baker to be their analysts.

I will look for more informed comment in the newspapers tomorrow, but my conclusion is clear and firm: the takeout slide at second – or any base – has no place in today’s game of baseball. The runner’s sole purpose can only be reaching his base safely. If he hits a fielder in the course of that aim, so be it; but he must not be allowed to interfere with the fielder, let alone attack him dangerously, if the fielder is not in his way as he goes to the base. You can’t run into a fielder who is fielding a batted ball; the catcher can’t block the plate without the ball; a runner can’t intentionally knock the ball out of the fielder’s glove – let’s make it consistent and rule that the runner can’t slide into a fielder if he is not going for the base. Period.[/fusion_text]

Rule Change at Second Base

[fusion_text]The playoff-bound Pittsburgh Pirates lost their star rookie shortstop for the season when his leg was hit by the base runner’s slide. Even though the shortstop was several feet away from the base, the slide was legal because the runner reached the bag with his outstretched hand while his feet were colliding with the shortstop. This is traditionally known as “breaking up the double play” and is equally traditionally applauded in the dugout as a hustle play. There is already some talk that this kind of slide should be prohibited. To me, the decision to implement a rule change accomplishing this is a no-brainer.

Unlike football, going after an opponent’s body is not part of the game of baseball. Making a runner slide directly at the base, unless he is trying to avoid a tag, takes nothing away from the offense. A well-turned double play is one of the prettiest defensive plays in baseball and deserves facilitation, not obstruction. And the most important argument for a change is to reduce the chance of serious injury. This was deemed reason enough to institute a rule eliminating most collisions at home plate, and this rule would be much easier to enforce than that one.

A secondary benefit of such a rule could be the elimination of the so-called “neighborhood” rule, in which the pivot man does not need to be in contact with second base when he catches the ball on a double play. This is a terrible rule, because it leaves so much to the umpire’s discretion: how far off second can the fielder be, no one knows or is saying. The main reason for this rule is to allow the pivot man to avoid injury from the onrushing runner. If the runner is prohibited from going after the fielder, there is less reason for this questionable protection. Before instant replay, it was often difficult to know for sure that the fielder’s foot had left the bag before the ball reached his glove; but with replay now available, that can be determined beyond argument.

In sum, I see no reason – other than the hoary one of “tradition” – to continue allowing baserunners to slide into fielders who are away from the bag, and I expect that the owners and union will quickly come to the same conclusion.[/fusion_text]

Defensive Indifference

[fusion_text]When the Twins have a lead larger than one in the ninth and a baserunner reaches first, they routinely decline to hold him on, giving him a free run to second base but allowing the first baseman to play behind the runner in presumably a better defensive position. Rather than registeringing this a stolen base, baseball scores this a nullity,  calling it “defensive indifference.” There is one additional marginal benefit: it allows Twins closer Glen Perkins to focus all his attention on the batter.

I am waiting for the statheads to pronounce on the wisdom of this maneuver, but until I see the empirical evidence let me give my view: I hate it, and I shall now count the ways.

One: allowing the baserunner to move from first to second eliminates the force play at second. I have frequently seen the play – the ground ball up the middle, the ground ball in the shortstop hole – where an out was possible at second base but not at first. Rarer, in my experience, is the play where the first baseman could not get an out because he was holding the runner instead of playing behind him. Thus, defensively, the DI makes no sense.

Two: the pitcher’s ability to hold a runner on first atrophies. Perkins is the prime example. He so routinely allows the runner to take second that he has become terrible at holding on the runner when it is needed. You can look it up, but my sense is that he has one of the highest stolen-base percentages of any lefthanded pitcher. In his mind, all that is important is getting the batter out. Unfortunately, sometimes the batter gets a hit, and if a runner has stolen second that can mean a run and the lead.

Three: I don’t like to see “meaningless” runs. Sure, a 6-5 victory counts the same as 6-4, but it doesn’t feel the same. Someone has gotten an rbi and someone has scored a run they don’t deserve. The team gets credit for a “one-run win,” which some analysts down the line will use as a yardstick for clutch performance. And to the unwary distant observer, the game will look to have been closer than it actually was – just as an empty-net goal makes a hockey game appear more lopsided than it really was.

Four: Every athlete in professional sports should give full effort at all times. This is, admittedly, a moral view of sports that is subjective and personal. In club tennis we talk of giving a “courtesy game,” rather than winning 6-love, but no professional would expect, or probably want, such a courtesy. The extreme example was Brett Favre’s allowing Michael Strahan to tackle him at the end of a game so Strahan would set the sack record. Strahan’s record, as a result, is forever tainted. A run scored after DI is not as bad, but it’s in the same ballpark. Every run should be earned, is how I look at it.

My clincher on the inappropriateness of defensive indifference is this: baseball is a game of statistics, ad nauseum, ad infinitum. I have yet, however, to see a statistic relating in any way to DI (e.g., which team has given up the most). No one thinks of it as part of baseball, and it shouldn’t be.[/fusion_text][fusion_text]Click edit button to change this text.[/fusion_text]

Twins Report

[fusion_text]It’s still early in the season, so perhaps it is not surprising that this year’s Twins are still searching for an identity. No pitcher has emerged as a stopper; no hitter has stepped up as clutch. They have won many more games than I feared they would after their disastrous opening series against the Tigers, but without any pattern. Each win has had a different hero.

The biggest hole so far seems to be the lack of a power hitter. Kennys Vargas showed strength and potential as a late call-up last year but has been too cold to even play everyday. Oswaldo Arcia has been similarly erratic, and neither of them is an asset defensively. Worse, the big hope for the future, Miguel Sano, missed last year with injury and is doing nothing in the minors this year. Every team needs a cleanup hitter, which the Twins just don’t have.

The offense, therefore, depends on Suzuki here, Santana there and the occasional pop from Plouffe. Mauer will hit .300, but many of those will be harmless singles and when he goes for power he just reaches the warning track. A lot of the other averages are closer to .200 than .300, which should correct itself; but I suspect that .250 will be enough to keep you in the Twins lineup this year. All this is enough to win some games but, depending on pitching, won’t get you above .500.

Aah, the pitching. Phil Hughes, the putative stopper, has yet to win, but has pitched okay. Kyle Gibson continues to be tough at home, worthless on the road. Then there are Ricky Nolasco and Mike Pelfrey, previous busts who may or may not regain form from a couple years ago. Since I started writing this report, the fifth starter, Tommy Milone, has been sent to the minors and replaced by Trevor May. In other words, the starting rotation is still in flux, and the relief corps even more so. Their only All-Star in the past is closer Glen Perkins, and while he is racking up saves, he isn’t blowing hitters away like he has. The rest of the bunch is pretty anonymous.

So, we will see. We can’t count on anything yet – not the pitching, nor the hitting, nor the defense and certainly not the baserunning. Yet after sweeping a home series against the White Sox, the Twins are looking better, surprisingly, than two of their four division foes. They are competitive. Whether they will be anything more is an open question. The Byron Buxton watch continues.[/fusion_text]

Instant Replay Redux

[fusion_text]On consecutive nights, Jordan Schafer of the Twins 1) hit a soft liner to center that the outfielder dove for and appeared to catch, but when the play was challenged it was obvious that the ball had squirted out of the glove and rolled on the ground before being picked up again; and 2) made a diving catch to save a run that was ruled a trap until the replay showed that the ball never touched the ground. The same week, two runners that were called safe at first were shown, when challenged, to have reached the bag just after the ball. There was no manager running out of the dugout, kicking dirt, no complaints by either side, no discussions among umpires. How did baseball get along, one wondered, without replay challenges?

One reservation: when a White Sox base stealer was called out at second he hopped up, immediately asking his manager to challenge the call. It appeared to the Twins announcers (and me) that the call was incorrect, but after a review of the replay, the umpires confirmed their call. There simply wasn’t a camera angle that clearly showed when the tag was made. And thus, the Sox lost their challenge for the game.

Of all the sports that have adopted an instant replay challenge system, tennis is the cleanest. The camera technology always shows whether the ball is in or out, down to a millimeter. Plus, the replay is visible to spectators, so it becomes part of the entertainment.

Football probably has the longest history with replays – and the most problems. The principal one is that there are 22 big bodies around the ball, and sometimes there is no clear view of the play. Second, there is no clear line dividing when a player has control of the ball; thus, the question, did his knee touch the ground before the ball came loose is often debatable. The lack of clarity is evident when the TV announcers predict the review result and are wrong, which occurs regularly. The other problem in football is that the replay challenge, even when there is a clear result, can’t always undo the damage of a bad call. If the referee thinks the runner is down before he fumbles and, consequently, blows his whistle, and the fumble is recovered by the opposing team and run in for an apparent touchdown, the ball will be brought back to the spot of the fumble and the touchdown nullified, even if the replay shows the whistle should not have been blown.

In all, it is rather impressive how far and how fast instant replay challenges have infiltrated sports that have been around for years. The big question: how long until baseball allows the radar to call balls and strikes?[/fusion_text]

Who’s Your #1 Starter?

Just as basketball positions have morphed from what we knew as kids – guard, center, forward – to specific numbered slots, starting pitchers are now referred to as a #2 starter, #5 starter, etc. So far as I can tell, this refers to the order of who’s the best, on down. But what does it matter? In basketball, the number refers to the characteristics of the position – the “4 slot” may be a “power forward,” the most physical of your forwards; the “2 guard” is more the shooter than the passer (I’m guessing here) – but that’s not the case with pitchers. Your #5 starter could be a power pitcher or a finesse pitcher; it just means he’s the fifth starter the team puts out there when the season starts. The #1 guy is your Opening Day starter, but after that, what’s the difference? Once the order is set, the pitchers follow one after another – that’s why it’s called the “rotation” – and you’re just as likely to start a series with #3 as #1. Yet every pitcher is now pegged, by quality if not practice, as a #1 to #5.

Twins Preview – 2014

I can’t think of  a baseball season in which I was less excited about the prospects of “my” team, in this case still the Minnesota Twins. It’s not just that they are universally picked to finish last in their division – with projected losses between 90 and 100 – it’s that there’s no individual player whom I eager to follow. The starters are all players I watched last year without much enthusiasm; perhaps they will be better, but that would just raise their batting averages from .225 to .250. Their only consistent hitter, Joe Mauer, hits a quiet .320, with as often as not a meaningless single resulting in a 1-for-3 box score.

The touted upgrade comes in the pitching rotation, where the Twins added two free-agent starters, Ricky Nolasco and Phil Hughes, to their two free agents from last year, Kevin Correia and Mike Pelfrey. Both can generously be described as journeymen with their potential behind them. Hughes, it is said, pitched particularly well at Target Field for the Yankees last year, but let’s remember whom he was pitching against. I said last year that Glen Perkins was the only Twin not named Mauer (at that time a catcher) who could play for any team in the Majors, and his season justified my view. I was pleasantly surprised by other relievers – Jared Burton, Casey Fien and Caleb Thielbar in particular – but there’s not much they can do if the starters give up five runs and the offense can only muster two.

Are we already putting too much pressure on Byron Buxton, Miguel Sano and Alex Meyer to resurrect the Twins before they play a game?

Liking the Cards

I have rarely been a fan of the St. Louis Cardinals. First, they win too much, like a Midwestern version of the Yankees. Second, they come across as organizationally boring, more corporate than colorful. Third, they compete with the Pittsburgh Pirates, to whom I will always feel an allegiance. Fourth, Tony LaRussa, the Tiger Woods of baseball. But after dabbling in the NLDS and NLCS – I’m still more of an American League fan – I find myself warming up to these Redbirds.

The first turning point came, I suppose, when they jettisoned Albert Pujols, letting someone else (the Angels) pay him the obscene salary he demanded (and, we now know, did not deserve). LaRussa, too, is gone, replaced by the perfectly nondescript Mike Matheny, one more catcher-turned-manager. Nor did I particularly begrudge their dispensing of the Pirates’ postseason, partly because the Pirates had already achieved so much success this year and, more to the point, because the Cards had beat out the Bucs for first place in their division, and the regular season should count for something.

Facing the L.A. Dodgers in the NLCS also put them in a good light. My feelings toward the Yankees have somewhat transferred themselves to the Dodgers now that I reside on the West Coast: the highest payroll, the glitziest owners, the excessive media attention, the rent-a-player roster are all black marks in my book. But the defining moment came in one at-bat: Matt Carpenter against Clayton Kershaw in the scoreless sixth game. Kershaw, the league’s best pitcher, threw Carpenter ten quality pitches – huge hooks, buzzing fastballs, biting sliders – and couldn’t get him out. Each pitch that Carpenter managed to foul off amazed me. Before the playoffs all I knew of Carpenter was a name that appeared among the NL batting leaders. I didn’t know his first name, his position or where he’d come from. Before this at-bat, he had not had a particularly distinguished postseason, and I was surprised to hear he had led the league with 199 hits during the regular season. On the eleventh pitch, Kershaw hung a slider (when a batter gets a hit, the announcers invariably identify the pitch as having “hung”) and Carpenter roped it into the rightfield corner for a double that started Kershaw’s and the Dodgers’ downfall, to the eventual tune of a 9-0 series clincher. It was a classic case of a very good hitter against a very good pitcher; those duels usually go to the pitcher, so when Carpenter won this one, I said he deserves it and the Cardinals deserve it. Yes, Yasiel Puig made two awful throws from rightfield and there may have been other flubs, but this was not a case of the Dodgers giving the game away – the Cardinals took it.

I am still learning about the rest of the team. There appear to be no prima donnas, no one set up for me to root against. On the contrary, it is thrilling to see Michael Wacha rising from obscurity to Bob Gibson territory, right before our eyes. And the one player I do know about, Yadier Molina, is the definition of solid excellence. I am used to seeing Minnesota writers canonize Joe Mauer, but I would prefer the durable Molina on my team; and if any part of a pitching staff’s success is attributable to the catcher, then it is no contest.

I am equally glad that the Red Sox have put the Tigers out of their misery and will be the Cardinal’s opponent in the World Series. When they were cruising, the Tigers were imposing, and their starters were second-to-none. But after Cabrera got hurt, they barely played .500 ball, and it was painful to watch Cabrera and Fielder slump through the playoffs. Jhonny Peralta back from steroids was a black mark, and the bullpen, with no closer, was the Achilles’ heel that ultimately doomed them. Still, if it hadn’t been for Big Papi’s big blast, one of the most dramatic home runs I’ve seen, the Tigers might have squeaked through. As it is, we get to watch the feisty BoSox, who swing and run and field with abandon and have those charmingly god-awful beards. Where will my sympathies lie? I don’t yet know, but it will be fun to find out.

Twins Spin (Wheels)

As we watch Postseason 2013 we are reminded not only of how bad the Twins were this year, but how little there is to look forward to. When the season started, I could identify only two players – Joe Mauer and Glenn Perkins – who would be welcome on any team, and the same was true in September. Justin Morneau, of whom many have fond memories, is still a ghost of his pre-concussion self, and his stint with the Pittsburgh Pirates did nothing to change one’s perception. Local commentators point to Brian Dozier’s “emergence” as a solid second baseman; and while it is true he improved over last year, when he was sent to the minors, he remains a .250 hitter who can be considered “average,” at best. The rest of the squad would not look out of place in Rochester, where many of them in fact spent time this summer.

The greatest discouragement, however, is on the mound. Last year’s acquisitions of Worley, Pelfrey and Correa didn’t even rise to the level of stopgap solution, and there’s no reason to think they will answer next year. All of the “promising” pitchers of the year before, except perhaps the frequently injured Samuel Deduno, are a year older and less promising: Diamond, DeVries, Hendriks, Hernandez, et al. The biggest hope in the minors, Kyle Gibson, showed nothing, which casts some doubt on the other prospects who are rumored to arrive. Just as bad as the Twins’ situation, however, is what we see going on around them, highlighted in these Playoffs. Not only are other teams not standing still, waiting for the Twins to catch up, they are showing off young arms that will raise the bar in the future. Michael Wacha, Sonny Gray, Gerrit Cole, Dan Straily – these are rookies who aren’t just promising, they are future aces (indeed, Oakland has an entire bullpen of rookies who can already pitch at the major-league level). It’s like the common blind spot experienced after each NFL draft: look how much better our team will be with these new draft choices, the fan thinks, not recognizing that every one of the competition is doing the same.

Maybe the Twins will get better when Buxton and Sano arrive – they must! – but they will have to get better faster than other teams do for it to make a difference, and, as the Playoffs also show, the name of the game is still pitching.

Tigers Sweep Yanks

Every Yankee-hater’s heart is swelling glad tonight after the Detroit Tigers’ four-game sweep in the ALCS. It wasn’t just the Tigers’ domination – they were never behind in any game – it was how bad the Yankees looked. They got two (two!) runs off Detroit starting pitching in four games, and both were scored by someone named Eduardo Nunez, who wasn’t even on the Yankees’ playoff roster when the series started.
Not only were the Yankee hitters impotent, they gave us hope of bad years to come. Look down the lineup: Ichiro is fading – Seattle was much improved by his departure. Curtis Granderson was exposed as a strikeout artist, and he’s on the wrong side of 30, too. Robinson Cano, supposedly the best player in New York and the only youth in the Yankee lineup, set a record by going 0-for-29 and responded with lackluster effort and poor defense. Derek Jeter, my personal bete noire for his smug manner, epitomizing ‘Yankee cool,’ broke his ankle and, at 37, will have a hard time ever reaching this year’s level. Nick Swisher is probably at the end of his time with the Yankees; and Mark Texeira, who mishandled two ground balls today, has, it’s safe to say, peaked. A-Rod? He’s been in steady decline and was thoroughly humiliated by his own manager as well as the Tiger pitchers, lefthanded and right. Who are the backups? Eric Chavez, Brett Gardner, a catcher no one has heard of – where will the Yankees turn next year, while they are still paying huge salaries to all of the above? Their pitching is forgettable, as well. Andy Pettite and Mariano Rivera are in the twilights of their careers. C.C. Sabathia is the only solid starter, and the Tigers rocked him tonight. It’s no stretch to believe that his best years are behind him. Somehow the Yankees compiled the AL’s best regular-season record this year. Including the playoffs, though, they were barely ahead of the Orioles. You have to think – with great pleasure – that this particular dynasty has ended.
As a Twins fan, my delight at the Tigers’ success is slightly alloyed with the recognition that they are now the dynasty to contend with. Theoretically, all their players still could have their best years ahead of them. Austin Jackson gets better every season, and they pulled a player out of Double-A, Avilais Gomez, who looked right at home facing the Yankees in the playoffs. Miguel Cabrera has obviously matured since his meltdown before the one-game playoff with the Twins a few years ago, and it is a pleasure to watch him hit, he is so completely comfortable at the plate. The most fun, though, is Prince Fielder, who seems to enjoy himself 100% of the time and brings that joy to his teammates, too. What a contrast to their Twins counterparts, Mauer and Morneau. Watching Fielder catch the final out today, motioning everyone away from a routine popup, brought tears to my eyes that I hadn’t felt since Argo. Then there is Justin Verlander, who is not only the most fun pitcher to watch because of his control and his stuff, it turns out he’s a fun personality, too. He was miked up for a half-inning of today’s game and held his own with the TBS announcers.
Speaking of announcers, the Tigers-Yankees series was a pleasure to watch. Ernie Johnson calls a clean game and his commentators – Ron Darling and John Smoltz – were smart and never intrusive – i.e., the exact opposite of Tim McCarver, who is doing the NLCS on Fox with Joe Buck. The TBS postgame show was also excellent, largely because of Dennis Eckersley, although Cal Ripken was also a creditable contributor (David Wells not so much). I also highly applaud a TBS innovation – keeping the pitch-track box on the screen for the entire at-bat, showing not only where the last pitch went, but where every pitch in the sequence crossed the plate. How long until this is standard on every baseball broadcast?
Will the World Series be an anticlimax? Probably, if only because I won’t be able to concentrate on the games, with McCarver babbling pointlessly. Also, I’m not as familiar with either St. Louis or San Francisco as I was with the American Leaguers, and from what I’ve seen of the Cardinals I don’t like their facial hair. I will hope that the Tigers continue to roll. Maybe a World Series win will make them less hungry next year. But for the moment, I can’t begrudge their potential supremacy over my Twins. I am first and foremost a Yankee-Hater at heart.