MLB Needs to Extend Foul Ball Netting, Doesn’t Want to Talk About it Right Now
On Wednesday night, two more fans were hit by foul balls in MLB games. The incident in Houston, where the Cubs’ Albert Almora lined a ball that hit a little a little girl, got most of the coverage because of the involvement of a child and the fact that Almora was visibly distraught and almost inconsolable.
https://twitter.com/Cubs_Live/status/1133907473264500736?s=19
But just a couple of hours later, a man sitting along the first-base line in Dodger Stadium was hit in the head by a foul ball off the bat of Alex Verdugo. He was left with a cut on his forehead.
https://twitter.com/ChadMoriyama/status/1133937805325848576?s=19
The best news is that both people are OK. The girl was brought to a hospital for observation, but no serious injuries were reported.
These events rekindled calls for Major League Baseball to extend the netting that divides the fans and the field further down the lines. Those nets were extended to at least the far end of each dugout in every stadium prior to the 2018 season.
Of course, there are people arguing for and against extending the nets both in height and length. But given that there were two fans injured on a single night by foul balls — and Almora’s memorable reaction — I was sure that this debate would be one of the top stories in baseball the following day.
And it was on a number of TV shows, podcasts and other media outlets. But for those who don’t want baseball to change a thing, they must have enjoyed Major League Baseball’s response Thursday.
On the league’s own network, there was a grand total of four minutes devoted to talk about the two incidents and what to do now. Although, nothing much was actually said; it was just Ken Rosenthal on “MLB Central” rehashing was happened and then basically saying, “We’ll see what happens.”
Then the league sent out a statement that said even less.
On Friday, Chris Russo spent two minutes at the top of his “High Heat” show talking about the situation, and he began by saying, “Give baseball credit for letting me do this, because it’s tricky. I get it.”
It’s not really that tricky unless Major League Baseball thinks that lawsuits are coming. Even so, they could still allow the on-air talent on their own network to discuss the larger issue at hand: What can or should the league do to stop this from happening?
But outside of Rosenthal’s four minutes and Russo’s two minutes, MLB Network went silent. They wanted to spend all of their programing hours talking instead about the latest Royals-White Sox and Reds-Pirates dustups, the weekend’s Red Sox-Yankees series, the Mets’ bullpen implosion from Wednesday night, etc.
The object that shares its name with the damn sport had just injured two people. One of the league’s players had just provided one of the season’s most indelible images in the aftermath, and his teammates said after the game that the sport needs to do more to make the game safer for the paying customers.
But from Major League Baseball, with the exception of a few spare minutes from Rosenthal and Russo:
Let me be clear: Major League Baseball needs to extend the foul ball nets both in height and length. Some parks already have nets that go about two-thirds of the way down the lines, but I think there should be netting that covers all foul territory, from pole to pole.
That time is coming. Even with the league kind of playing dumb on the issue, I believe a change is only a matter of time. Almora’s reaction and the fact that there was another child at the center of the latest scare won’t wash away quickly. It’s just awful that this is what’s seemingly required to make baseball safer.
Here were my quick two cents from Wednesday:
Because Twitter picked up that post to be included in a “Moment,” it garnered a decent amount of conversation, including plenty of people who don’t want the nets to move further.
Here are the most frequent reasons I saw presented as to why no changes should be made and why each of those reasons is more or less ridiculous.
1. PUT DOWN THE PHONE!
https://twitter.com/HELLRAISER32907/status/1134067148463202304?s=19
Damn millennials! Always on their phones, with the texting and the Facebook and the Instabook and the Snapbook …
Phones got a really bad wrap in this thread, but they are used as shorthand here for “Pay attention!”
However, if you were to really pay attention to every pitch, that doesn’t only mean you shouldn’t be on your phone. That means you also shouldn’t…
- Talk to friends/family/co-workers/stadium vendors/anyone who dared to sit next to you
- Eat
- Drink
- Take in the beauty of the stadium and its various sights
- Watch other parts of the freaking game on the field
- Breathe
So, if you avoid all of those distractions and stay locked in on every one of about 300 pitches in a 180-minute game, you will have an enjoyable, pain-free time at the ballpark.
2. FLASH SOME LEATHER!
Oh, one more thing you probably shouldn’t do at a ballpark if you hope to stay conscious: blink.
The exit velocities on the foul balls hit by Almora and Verdugo were not made public, but according to ESPN’s Jeff Passan, Statcast recorded that Almora’s ball ripped through 160 feet of air in slightly more than one second. It’s pretty safe to assume that both line drives were traveling at more than 90 mph, giving either person little chance of getting out of its path.
Still, people seem to think that if you’re going to sit close to the field, you should be Brooks Robinson.
https://twitter.com/R41nt35/status/1133969592609415168?s=19
I mean, the players make it look so easy, and they are only perhaps 90-120 feet away from the point of contact; what’s the fan’s excuse of not stopping a bullet from 160 feet away?????!?!111111111111111
It’s difficult to take anyone who actually believes this seriously. No one should expect any fan — much less a child — to be on guard and ready to create their own Web Gem on any scorcher off the bat, especially in this age of baseball where pitchers are throwing harder, batters are commonly creating contact speeds in the triple digits, and the number of foul balls is increasing. This kind of thinking does, however, dovetail into the next most common argument against expanded netting.
3. KIDS SHOULDN’T BE SITTING THERE!
Unlike the previous item, this line isn’t completely laughable out of hand. David Price said his family sits out of harm’s way. I’m sure plenty of players do this, and considering the consequences, why not?
But this argument is self-defeating. You can see the chasm contained within: If there are areas of the stadium where people don’t sit because they feel unsafe to place themselves or their children there, shouldn’t Major League Baseball do something about that?
These are most often first-level seats, down the lines, within 15 rows of the field. From simply a cold-hearted, capitalistic point of view, MLB and all team owners should want those seats occupied because they ain’t cheap.
Owners should be in favor of more netting if for no other reason than by ensuring more fan safety in the more expensive seating areas, it’s probably best for their bottom line.
Also, while we are all so worried about the children, can I get another look at the fan who was hit by Verdugo’s foul ball?
Uh-huuuh.
So, no kids or elderly? Attending a baseball game in the field level is becoming akin to riding a loopy roller coaster.
4. NETS RUIN THE EXPERIENCE!
In his two-minute diatribe Friday, Russo pointed directly to season-ticket holders for what we saw Wednesday night:
Blame the fans, the season-ticket holders, who I guess complain to their ownerships and their front offices that [netting] interferes with how they view the game. They want to see it unobstructed, they want to catch a foul ball, and so as a result, they don’t want the netting. Get over it. Put the netting down both sidelines.
Whether that’s on the mark or not, fans feel like the nets subtract from the product and what they pay to get a pricey seat.
https://twitter.com/HyzerMike/status/1134035791246766080?s=19
Never mind the fact that the most expensive uncovered seats in any park are right behind home plate and that dang net. And yet, people still unload a premium for those seats because, well, one, it’s kind of a status symbol. But if you’re there for the actual game, your eyes adjust to the netting in short order. Please take that from someone who has viewed literally hundreds of games with netting in my way. The thin mesh is designed to be protective while not distracting.
Some fans don’t even realize that they have already watched portions of the game through nets even if they weren’t sitting directly behind them. Let’s not pretend as if these nets are the same as sitting behind a pole in the Fenway Park grandstands.
Sure, the netting makes photo and video shots less than optimal, but I have to believe that baseball cares less about their fans’ photo quality than their fans’ increasing odds of being maimed.
5. HEY, IT HAPPENS!
Let’s end with the laziest and most offensive of all anti-net arguments.
https://twitter.com/cjlange/status/1134031013930262535?s=19
“Yeah, it was only one child!”
Well, not counting the child who suffered facial fractures and bleeding on the brain at Yankee Stadium two years ago.
“But no one died!”
Except for the woman who died after being hit by a ball while sitting IN THE SECOND DECK last year.
And then another child was sent to the hospital this past weekend after getting hit at a minor league baseball game.
And, again per Passan, this will continue to happen in large number.
So, an adult has died and multiple kids have been put in the hospital just within the past nine months and despite the dugout-to-dugout netting that was put in place prior to last season.
What else needs to happen for baseball to force its clubs to go even further? Sadly, we probably know the unfortunate answer. The NHL knows. Even after Brittanie Cecil’s death, there were fans who ranted and raved in gross disapproval of this safety measure.
Now, who even gives the netting a second thought?
Going further in baseball is necessary now, even if I know nothing would be implemented until 2020 at the earliest. Extending the nets to the foul poles makes the game safer and, in turn, better.
Linda Goldbloom is already dead. Hopefully it doesn’t take the sacrifice of a child to serve as the impetus for change again. Wednesday’s scene with two injured fans and a ballplayer in tears was stark enough.
Would you pitch to Aaron Judge with first base open during a late-inning tie?
Most of the time, you can only laugh when a Joe Fan screams that they could do a better job than their favorite team’s head coach or manager. It’s an irrational stance.
Most of the time. Because there are those moments when a manager does something which leaves everyone watching convinced that, yep, any Joe could do better.
One of those moments occurred Monday night when Angels manager Mike Scioscia had to consider the title question. Tie game. Eighth inning. Man on second. First base open. Aaron Judge up.
Well, would you?
Scioscia said “Sure” and Judge said “Thanks.”
The Yankees would go on to win by the margin provided by Judge’s blast, 5-3.
After spending a few minutes repeating “Why?” to myself, I tried to look at things from Scioscia’s point of view. He must be aware that Judge is hitting baseballs harder and farther than anyone this season. With Mike Trout on the shelf, Judge is the game’s best (healthy) batter right now. Of course, Scioscia is aware. And he intentionally walked Didi Gregorius a few innings earlier — a decision that backfired when Chase Headley followed with a two-out RBI single that scored Judge from second — so it’s not like he is against the practice.
But after Aaron Hicks’ one-out double, you knew something strange was afoot as Scioscia went to his closer, Bud Norris, to face Judge. Why bring in a new pitcher if you’re just going to inten–wait.
They’re gonna pitch to him?!
It seemed like my bewilderment was overblown after the first two pitches from Norris: a couple of cutters that were in the left-handed batter’s box.
Norris’ third pitch, another cutter, was, uh, not located well. Something like that.
Give credit to Judge for actually smashing that pitch — I wouldn’t be writing here and many Angels fans wouldn’t be calling for Scioscia’s job if the mammoth rookie simply popped out. But this was an easily avoidable result.
After the game, Scioscia admitted that the pitch was not in the right location. The fact that it was even in the home plate circle was an oversight, really. However, Scioscia continued his postgame presser with this response when asked if he gave any thought to walking the MVP candidate.
“Yeah, definitely there is, yeah. But I think with a base open and with Bud being able to move the ball and spin it, you hope that you can get him to expand a little bit, and he never really, never got there and left the one pitch over the plate.”
With a base open, we thought we could get him to expand his zone? My brain needs to be rebooted.
By the way, Judge has swung at 24.8 percent of pitches outside the zone this season, a very respectable rate for a slugger who was swinging at more than a third of all such pitches just last year. But given that Scioscia is still a big proponent of the bunt, I know he’s not aware of those numbers.
Walk Judge, take your chances with Matt Holliday. He is having a better-than-expected season, but Judge is having a better-than-everybody-else season. Heck, Holliday even has a higher O-swing percentage (26.0).
Alas, Scioscia decided to chance it and hope that his pitcher wouldn’t make a mistake pitch. He did. But it’s not Norris’ mistake that decided Monday’s game. It was made possible only because of a greater mistake from his manager, one that I don’t think Joe Fan out there would have committed. For one moment, anyone could have been a better manager for the L.A. Angels than Mike Scioscia.
Both the Cubs and the Indians have reasons to be optimistic heading into Game 7
Everyone is excited for Game 7 of the World Series tonight. Rightfully so, and I am as well, but I’m also feeling a bit glummy with the realization that this is the final meaningful baseball game for five months (unless you count the World Baseball Classic in March, which my baseball-starved mind definitely will come that time).
One game left, and what a game it is. Two very worthy teams with — in case you hadn’t heard — two lifetime-spanning championship droughts. One from each side will fall tonight. Which ones? I’m not going to make a pick; let’s just enjoy the game without predictions. However, both the Cubs and the Indians should be supremely confident that they will feel the sweet, sweet burn of champagne in their eyes by the end of the night. Here’s why.
Chicago Cubs
Another late-series surge by the offense
Cub Fan was freaking out after Chicago’s loss in Game 3 of the NLCS. After being shut down by Rich Hill and the Dodgers, the Cubs trailed in the series, 2-1, and had scored one run in the previous two games.
Then came Game 4. Anthony Rizzo and Addison Russell, who were in the slumpiest of slumps, both homered and the Cubs rolled from there. They won the next three games with the help of 23 runs (17 earned).
This all feels familiar because the Cubs’ bats had taken an early winter hibernation for most of the World Series as well. That lasted until yesterday’s Game 6. Buoyed once again by an offense highlighted by home runs from Rizzo and Russell, the Cubs won easily, 9-3. We’ve seen very recently how this attack can heat up in a hurry and stay hot. It took care of Clayton Kershaw on short rest just 11 days ago, so what’s the big challenge of facing Corey Kluber on short rest (again) when this lineup is clicking?
They have their own advantage in the bullpen
The Indians have the better overall bullpen, sure. But tonight being Game 7 and all, everyone who can throw a pitch is available. That’s good news for the Cubs since, if Joe Maddon’s usage of Aroldis Chapman in the past two games is any evidence, they could use some more trustworthy arms in the ‘pen. So how about Jon Lester and John Lackey in relief? No matter how it works out after starter Kyle Hendricks departs, that looks good on paper. Both are World Series winners. As for Lester, it would be pretty cool to see the possible 2016 National League Cy Young Award winner come into the game in the sixth or seventh inning. Lackey, you may remember pitched one-run ball over five innings in a World Series Game 7 as a rookie. Granted, that was 14 years ago, but the point remains that he won’t have any stage fright if called upon. Cleveland’s bullpen is better, but the Cubs’ bullpen is as deep and has more talent than ever before tonight.
Aroldis Chapman is available
I am one of the millions who disagreed with how Maddon used Chapman in Game 6. Bringing him in during the middle of a seventh inning for the second consecutive game seemed like an unnecessary reach. Doing so with a five-run lead seemed like overkill. But I’m not concerned with how it will affect him tonight. Yes, he has thrown four innings and 62 pitches over the past three days. He has logged 6.1 innings and 102 pitches in this series, which he didn’t appear in until Game 2.
And I really don’t think it matters all that much. The Cubs will call upon Chapman whenever they feel like it tonight, and he will try to give them what they want. He and his fastball will be amped, that’s for sure. Pain be damned. I wouldn’t be shocked if he is asked to get more than three outs. As a free agent-to-be and one who likely won’t be re-signing with Chicago during the winter, the Cubs will fire the Cuban Missile for as long as they can.
They were the best team this season
The regular season may mean nothing now, but if the Cubs want a mental boost before tonight’s game, they need to remember how they got here: 103 wins. Third-most runs scored in the league. Fewest runs allowed. Largest run differential by more than 60. The better team doesn’t always win, but the Cubs should remind themselves that obtaining that lofty win total didn’t just happen by chance.
Cleveland Indians
They are playing at home
This actually might be a plus for the Cubs given that the away team is 4-2 in this series, Chicago brings a massive fan base to every city, and we just saw in Game 6 how quickly the home-field advantage can be squashed. But if you gave each team the option of where they would want to be playing Game 7 of a World Series, of course they would pick their home yard, for good reason. The Indians had the league’s second-best home record during the regular season, tied with the Rangers and the Dodgers at 53-28. Only the Cubs were better at 57-24. For what it’s worth, the Cubs also carry MLB’s best road record, 46-34. That’s what happens when you win 103 games!
Home field isn’t worth much, but it’s nice to have in the most important game of the season. For some players, it will be the most important game of their career.
Corey Kluber is dang good
He’s on short rest for the second time in as many starts, and this will be the Cubs’ third look at him in eight days. OK, I got it.
Counterpoint: Corey Kluber is still a beast.
He has allowed just three runs over 30.1 innings this postseason while compiling a 0.99 WHIP and a 35:8 strikeout-to-walk ratio. Chicago got to him in the first inning of Game 4 for a run on two hits, but then Kuber didn’t allow a runner past second base for the rest of his outing. A first-inning pounce is probably a big key to a Cubs victory tonight. As we’ve seen already, Kluber can dominate on three days rest once he settles in. If that happens, look out, because …
Miller, Shaw and Allen are locked and loaded
What’s a good nickname we can give this trio? Miller had it so easy with “ABC” as a member of the Yankees. The possible three-initial combinations just don’t work as well here. Sigh ….
Anyway, while I don’t think using Aroldis Chapman in Game 6 puts the Cubs at a clear disadvantage for tonight, the Indians staying away from their Big Three on Tuesday leaves them in an absolutely perfect situation IF they can just be leading after five innings.
Kluber for 5, Andrew Miller for 2, Bryan Shaw for 1, Cody Allen for 1.
Or Kluber for 6, Miller for 2, Allen for 1.
Or Kluber for 5, Miller for 4. Truly, the Indians should keep Miller in the game until he gives up consecutive hits or he tears his shoulder out — whichever comes first, and my money’s on the shoulder giving way. The run that he gave up in Game 4 was the first and only one he has allowed in 25.1 career postseason innings.
Miller has had three days off; Shaw and Allen have had two. Here is their collective pitching line for these playoffs:
38 innings, 27 hits, five runs (four earned), 11 walks, 62 strikeouts. That’s a 0.95 ERA and a 1.00 WHIP.
If the Indians are leading once the sixth inning arrives and lose this game, it will be pretty surprising.
One more baseball game for the next five months. It should be one to remember.
Pace of play? The Diamondbacks and Rockies hold the longest 9-inning game in National League history
You don’t hear about pace of play this season as much as you did when the new rules to speed up baseball games were instituted in 2015. But don’t be mistaken; it remains one of commissioner Rob Manfred’s top initiatives. And frankly, he’s fighting a losing battle right now.
Game times are up in 2016, surpassing the dreaded three-hour mark as of mid-May. The biggest culprit? There’s just more of stuff. More pitches, more walks, more strikeouts and more balls staying out of play. Those add up, and you had the perfect storm Friday night when the Rockies hosted the Diamondbacks.
It took 4 fours and 30 minutes for the D’Backs to pull off the 10-9 comeback victory. The game time bested a 15-year National League record for longest nine-inning game by 3 minutes. The previous record-holder was a Dodgers-Giants tilt from 2001.
This one had all the ingredients for a extraordinarily long game: 19 runs; 30 hits; 13 walks; 16 strikeouts (eh, that’s not too bad); six mid-inning pitching changes (serenity now!).
As pointed out by the Rockies’ SB Nation blog, Purple Row, the teams combined for 46 at-bats with runners in scoring position. That is pretty amazing to fathom but easy to understand when you see that there were 12 doubles (tied for the most in a game this year), six stolen bases, five errors, three wild pitches, two balks and all of those damn walks. There were actually 60 plate appearances with runners in scoring position, and imagine how much longer this game would have lasted if the teams had hit better than .196 in those RISP situations.
I never want to complain about game times; my life is always better at the ballpark. But it’s games like this one that make Manfred tear out what’s remaining of his hair. Moreover, there’s really nothing he can do to stop these types of games from occurring. For all of his rules and suggestions, he can’t force pitchers to throw strikes. He can’t stop fielders from booting balls. He can’t stop hitters from taking so many pitches. Like the fans, he just has to sit there and wait for the game to, at some point, end.
The inevitable NBA Finals post-Game 7 talking points
Everyone is pumped for tonight’s Game 7 between the Cavaliers and Warriors, as well they should be. Besides an NBA championship, there are legacies for the players and the teams, both short-term and long-term, on the line.
One game shouldn’t define a player or a team, at least not while that game is fresh in our minds. Everyone falls prey to recency bias. Time is the best way to determine whether or not something is the greatest. The problem with time, however, is that it takes its sweet damn time, and nobody wants to wait that long for a clear picture to develop, so let’s just make a bunch of declarations now, OK?
That is how sports talk works. You need to present opinions on the impact of a just-completed event and its space in history immediately. This is a corrupt way of judging something, but it’s the world we live in. And for this series specifically, there are very clear questions that will be asked about each team and some of its players no matter who comes out victorious.
While I have no idea what will happen on the court in Oakland, the chatter subjects in the minutes, hours and days following the final buzzer — barring the occurrence of some non-basketball-related event during the game, like an alien invasion — are pretty obvious. I’ll cover those topics now and give you my take so you don’t have to waste your time listening to others debate these issues after the fact.
If the Warriors win …
Is this the greatest team in NBA history?
On a single-season basis, I think so. Best record and winning percentage of all time. Although they were pushed to the brink in two playoff series, that shouldn’t weigh as heavy as the credit earned for ultimately winning against tough opponents. This team has shown its mettle in the playoffs. That should be commended. They annihilated the competition in the regular season, posted the second-longest winning streak in NBA history (dating back to 2014-15) as well as the association’s longest winning streak to open a season. They did it with purely sublime shooting, perhaps the best we’ve ever seen.
Are these Warriors, 2014-present, the greatest team in NBA history?
James Shields needed 84 pitches to get 6 outs in his White Sox debut
I don’t remember the last time a big-ticket pitcher was booed off the mound in his home debut (not that I’ve done any research to that end), but that’s what greeted James Shields on Wednesday night in Chicago. I don’t quite find the pleasure or purpose in booing poor performance, but Shields sure didn’t leave those who are so inclined any other choice.
Two-plus innings, eight hits, seven runs (all earned), two walks, two strikeouts, three home runs and one wild pitch.
It was a long night for Shields made even longer thanks to a bevy of lengthy at-bats. Nine of the 16 hitters he faced saw at least three balls. That led to the rapid ascension of Shields’ pitch count.
He threw 32 pitches in the first inning, 47 in the second and finally five more to Anthony Rendon before he singled to open the third.
Eighty-four pitches. That’s the second-most pitches ever needed to record no more than six outs. And when I say “ever,” I mean “since no later than 1947, when pitch count data became the norm via Baseball-Reference’s Play Index tool.”
Shields actually joins three other starters who spent 84 pitches to get six outs. Russ Ortiz in 1999, Steve Parris in 2000 and Chris Young in 2007 all accomplished as little with as much. The “record” belongs to 23-year-old Matt Moore, who dialed up 86 pitches in his six-out stint in 2013.
Everyone knows this marriage between Shields and the Southsiders isn’t always going to be a smooth one. Since the start of 2015, Shields has made the majority of his starts in some cavernous National League venues, including Petco Park, Dodger Stadium and AT&T Park, and he allowed 42 home runs in 269.2 innings during that time. Bartolo Colon took him yard.
Now he moves to one of the game’s most homer-friendly pads. Including Wednesday’s thrashing, Shields has given up 12 homers in 74 career innings at U.S. Cellular Field. Rough outings are going to be on the menu. But the White Sox will deal with that as long as Shields eats up innings, preferably more than two per night. If there’s a silver lining to this for White Sox fans, it’s that they have probably seen the worst Shields has to offer.
Yordano Ventura needs another, longer timeout
On Tuesday night, we were treated to yet another example of Yordano Ventura’s desire to start fights.
The fuse was lit in the second inning when Ventura threw a couple of fastballs up and in to Manny Machado, who responded with a stiff glare and some trash talk after he flew out. Then in the fifth inning and trailing 5-1, Ventura sent a fastball at 99 MPH — his fastest pitch of the night — right into Machado’s back.
A melee ensued. Machado immediately charged at Ventura, hit him with a right and then basically DDT’ed Ventura into the mound. It was ugly and it certainly could have been avoided.
But this is what Yordano Ventura does when he’s not striking batters out at a declining rate or issuing walks at a rising rate. A similar incident occurred last April when Ventura, once again on the losing side of things, decided to drill Brett Lawrie with a 99 MPH fastball.
A week before that, Ventura got in Mike Trout’s face for … some reason. In his start directly following the Lawrie beaning, Ventura instigated a brawl with the White Sox after mouthing off to Adam Eaton because … I really don’t know why. It’s quite difficult to identify Ventura’s modus operandi all the time. He was tagged with a seven-game suspension for his role in that donnybrook, a ban that felt like a make-up call on MLB’s part after it only fined Ventura for throwing at Lawrie.
And now he has done it again to one of the biggest stars in the game. Already frustrated with the look of his box score, Ventura decided to take it out on Machado at ninety-freaking-nine miles per hour.
What’s to come of this? It’s tough to say. Baseball has sent a message in recent years with its penalties — or lack thereof — for beanball pitchers. Since the start of 2012, only two pitchers have been suspended more than six games for intentionally throwing at batters. That’s one fewer than the number of pitchers who have received such suspensions for using pine tar. The Diamondbacks’ Ian Kennedy set the recent high-water mark in 2013 when he was banned for 10 games after throwing at the heads of Yasiel Puig and Zack Greinke.
Perhaps Ventura won’t get 10 games (I mean, he tried to hurt only one batter). But he should. He is now a repeat offender, choosing on multiple occasions to throw as hard as he can with the intention of inflicting pain on another baseball player. The fact that he did it to an MVP-level player this time should carry some weight as well.
Ventura was compared to Pedro Martinez as he made his way through the minors for his delivery, slight build, eye-popping velocity and nasty offspeed stuff. He’s got another thing in common with Martinez now*. People romanticize how Pedro would pitch inside and intimidate hitters. Shortly following the brawl, I heard some TV broadcaster say, in relation to Ventura, at least Martinez never tried to hurt anyone (Hey, Gerald Williams! Hi there, Karim Garcia!).
That is ridiculous. This shouldn’t be dolled up “old school” baseball. This is dangerous and could be construed as criminal. Yordano Ventura can continue to jabber and piss off opponents and likely some of his teammates when he tries to get under a batter’s skin. The larger issue is the 25-year-old has hit a batter in consecutive years on purpose with a 99 MPH fastball. That really, really needs to be seen as more egregious than scuffing the ball with pine tar.
*Actually, an affection for the beanball should be considered the only thing Ventura and Martinez share as pitchers currently because Yordano has been one of the league’s worst on the bump this season and hasn’t come close to living up to the hype.
The new ‘Killer Bs.’ And I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords
If you are a baseball fan and were born before, say, 1990, the nickname “Killer Bs” should create a distinct image in your mind.
Craig Biggio, Jeff Bagwell and a revolving door of players made up Houston Astros’ trio of “Killer Bs” from the late-90s and early 2000s. I’m not sure why everyone felt the need to always group Biggio and Bagwell with a third alliterative surname, but that’s how it was done. I guess three bees are so much more intimidating than a measly duo of bees. I can’t say since one actual bee is enough to send this phobic man into a catatonic state.
In the ’90s, Derek Bell or Sean Berry played the role of the third man. (I think Bill Spires even snuck in there for a bit too). At the turn of the millennium, Lance Berkman fit right in. Carlos Beltran was part of the band for a few incredible weeks in 2004. But Chris Burke was never included. I don’t know what the makers of that poster were thinking. Also, the nickname shouldn’t have an apostrophe. But I digress.
Together, Biggio, Bagwell and the other guy were the “Killer Bs.”
That time has passed, and the nickname’s legacy remains pretty much in tact, at least in baseball. The Pittsburgh Steelers are using it to describe Ben Roethlisberger, Le’Veon Bell, Antonio Brown and, when he’s not suspended, Martavis Bryant. Honestly, the usage there makes more sense on the surface considering the Steelers’ uniform color scheme.
But it’s time for baseball to dust it off and get it to catch on across the country en masse with Mookie Betts, Xander Bogaerts and Jackie Bradley Jr.
Too soon? Yeah. Collectively, they have fewer than 4,000 MLB at-bats between them. Bradley looked like an overrated prospect prior to 2016, and Betts has just one full season under his belt. Biggio is a Hall of Famer, Bagwell should be one, and both were established studs by the time they were tagged with the moniker 20 years ago.
But baseball should be doing whatever it can to market its young stars — Bradley Jr. is the elder at 26; Betts and Bogaerts are 23 — and three all-around quality ballplayers in a big, diehard baseball market seems like a perfect opportunity. I know baseball is strongest at the local level; its low national ratings are commonly overrated when discussing the sport’s well-being. That doesn’t mean baseball should just ignore attempts to get fans everywhere interested in particular players. Why not make Betts, Bogaerts and Bradley Jr. poster children?
Bradley Jr. was already a spotlight player in May as his hitting streak was the top story around the league — whenever Clayton Kershaw wasn’t pitching. And when Bradley’s streak stopped at 29 games, Betts took over the lead by hitting basically every ball he saw out of the park. In the span of seven at-bats on Tuesday and Wednesday, Betts hit five home runs. Meanwhile, Bogaerts entered tonight leading Major League Baseball in hits and batting average. That’s all.
Sell that burgeoning talent, that youth, and the excitement those three create on the diamond, package it with a gimmick that ties eras together and see what happens. And yes, the fact that all three are not white should make this an even more important matter to the powers that be.
At the very least, wait a year, let David Ortiz have the going-away party he deserves and then plaster these guys all over any media outlet you have. I trust that none of them fall into a horrendous slump that sees them benched or flown back to the minors. In the near future, they may even be batting back-t0-back-to-back in the Red Sox’s order. Plus, Boston is their baseball home, so the “Killer Bs” will be playing in the “B-hive?” OK, that’s a little ridiculous. Or a lot ridiculous.
I think a committed, multi-player nationwide campaign would be fun. I’m a Yankees fan, and I have loved watching Betts, Bogaerts and Bradley Jr. this year. I think everyone outside of Boston and who doesn’t pay for the MLB Extra Innings package would love them as well. Baseball should expose them to the hilt and keep alive the charm of the “Killer Bs” nickname.
Matt Albers: Laser show
I have a certain affinity for Matt Albers, mostly because he is the closest thing I have to a doppelganger in today’s game. His every-man body, the way his jersey sags on him … that could be me out there! I mean, if I could throw a mid-90s fastball with sink or had strong legs or could walk. Oh, whom am I kidding? Compared to me, Matt Albers is this generation’s Jim Thorpe.
Albers will also assuredly be forgotten by most baseball fans shortly after he retires. He has played for six teams in 11 mostly nondescript seasons. He hasn’t started a game since 2007, doesn’t have a save to his credit and doesn’t throw extraordinarily hard. Nothing about him is exciting. In a line of work where you have to be pretty special just to make it to this level, Albers is all parts ordinary nonetheless.
However, he accomplished something Thursday that I and many others who adore quirky baseball will remember. In the 13th inning of Wednesday’s game versus the Mets, Albers led off the inning by rocketing a double to left-center field.
Let’s stop there for a moment. Matt Albers doubled. A well-hit, opposite-field, honest-to-goodness double. Well, it would have been reduced to a single with Albers being thrown out at second base if Neil Walker hadn’t been there to act as Albers’ personal backstop. He definitely would have fallen off the bag if no one had been there to help him slow down all of that momentum.
Regardless, it was Albers’ first hit and only second at-bat since 2007, when he was with the Astros (He has made all but eight of his appearances since then with American League clubs). AL relievers roping out extra-base hits isn’t as rare as I imagined, as the last person to do it was the Yankees’ Branden Pinder just last year. It has happened five times in the past decade.
With this kind of odd feat, there are so many angles you can cover, but let’s just go way down the rabbit hole. After his double, Albers moved to third on a wild pitch, scored on a Jose Abreu sac fly, and then went on to close out the game in the bottom of the 13th. So who was the last American League relief pitcher to score a game-winning run in extra innings and get the win?
That would be Ryan Hancock for the 1996 California Angels. He singled with one out in the 13th inning and scored on J.T. Snow’s two-run homer off of Julian Tavarez as the Angels beat the Indians, 8-6. While you probably won’t remember Albers, you definitely don’t know who Ryan Hancock is, unless you share a blood relation.
That’s because 1996 was Hancock’s only MLB season. He had a 7.48 ERA and a 1.84 WHIP over 11 appearances. But on the bright side, he had only one career plate appearance, so Hancock will forever own a 1.000 average and a 2.000 OPS.
Before Hancock, you have to go back, understandably, to Sparky Lyle in 1972 to find the last pitcher who achieved the hit-run-win trifecta in extras. One year later, the DH was upon us, and AL pitchers becoming offensive heroes have been rarely seen in the wild. Thank you, Matt Albers.
The Dodgers’ phenom is here
In 1980, an unimposing, 5-foot-11 lefthander from Mexico named Fernando Valenzuela made his debut for the Los Angeles Dodgers at the age of 19. He didn’t allow an earned run in 17.2 innings that year and followed that up in 1981 by becoming the first player to ever win the Rookie of the Year and the Cy Young awards. He began that season by posting five shutouts and allowing just two earned runs through his first seven starts. He ended it as the best player on a World Series champion. Through it all, Valenzuela was so beloved by Los Angeles’ large Latino – specifically, Mexican – community, his starts became must-see events. The craze was known as “Fernandomania.”
Thirty-five years later, there’s another 19-year-old, 5-foot-11 lefty from Mexico ready to become the Dodgers’ next phenom. And he will begin his journey tonight.
That’s Julio Urias, a pitcher whom MLB.com has listed as a top-10 prospect two years running. He will take on the Mets at Citi Field, and the Dodgers clearly believe he is ready for such high-end competition. They could have called up someone else and held Urias back until next week’s home series versus the pitiful Braves. Instead, he will be thrown into into the orange and blue flames tonight. Urias has done nothing to second-guess his preseason rankings as he has a 1.10 ERA and a 44:8 strikeout-to-walk ratio through 41 innings at Triple-A Oklahoma City. He threw six no-hit innings in a start earlier this month.
Urias does compare slightly to Valenzuela as a pitcher, but that doesn’t mean he will throw a bunch of shutouts right away – it’s a different era. However, Urias pitches with more power and better control. His career K-to-walk rate through more than 250 minor league innings is better than 3:1. Scouts have marveled at his feel for pitching at such a young age, and there was a belief that Urias was MLB-ready last year, at the age of 18, when he was baffling mature hitters in Double-A. Even at age 16, Urias was striking out more than 11 men per nine with a sub-2.50 ERA and a WHIP barely over 1.10. He is a player well beyond his years.
Urias has a full repertoire of pitches, too. A mid-90s fastball, an excellent changeup, a developing curveball and a slider. He can throw all of those pitches for strikes and spot them on different horizontal and vertical planes. His combination of age and stuff has led to comparisons with not so much Valenzuela, but Felix Hernandez.
Felix was the last pitcher to debut at such a young age. Bryce Harper was game’s most recent teenage hitter. Those players had a surplus of hype surrounding their first games, and it should be no different with Urias. I won’t be able to watch tonight’s game because living in Los Angeles and seeing the Dodgers on TV is not something many people can do around here. Also, I’ll be at Angel Stadium for Astros-Angels. Because who needs to watch the game’s next great arm introduce himself when you can just go see Mike Fiers battle Matt Shoemaker, right?
Anyway, I’m just giddy and glad that Urias is here. He looks like the nerdy, scrawny babyface who gets bullied by the jocks in high school. But he is about to make a bunch of grown men look stupid. I’m not sure how many starts he will make; the Dodgers will monitor his pitch and inning counts very closely and may stick him in the bullpen for this season. But for one night, everyone should want to see what he brings. Maybe he won’t produce anything close to “Fernandomania” in the long run, but if he is as good as billed, I, for one, welcome the age of “U-phoria”
Gerrit Cole goes 7 innings, throws hard, strikes out no one
A starting pitcher making it through at least seven innings without recording a strikeout isn’t exactly rare, even though it feels like it should be. With strikeouts rising throughout the league, I was surprised to find that this has happened 20 times since the start of 2013. Colby Lewis did this just a few weeks ago. Rick Porcello threw a no-strikeout shutout less than two years ago.
Most of the names attached to these performances from the past couple of seasons are less surprising. Justin Nicolino. Brett Oberholtzer. Mike Pelfrey. 2015 R.A. Dickey. Yeah, none of those dudes are breaking radar guns.
But Gerrit Cole? He with an easy 95-MPH fastball and with a changeup and a slider in the high-80s? Against a Colorado squad that whiffs a fair amount?
Cole threw seven innings on Thursday night and couldn’t get a third strike on any of the 28 Rockies he faced. And Cole was throwing hard. All of his average pitch velocities were higher than their season averages. He reached 98 MPH a few times and even got his changeup up to 90.
He got the win, 2-1. He got zero K luck.
So I wanted to find out how often this happens to a starter with a career K/9 average greater than Cole’s 8.5 (minimum 500 innings pitched).Well, that’s not that easy. After some searching, my best guess is this hasn’t happened to such a strikeout pitcher since 1987. And it happened to that particular pitcher twice during the same month in ’87 .
That pitcher was Roger Clemens.
Clemens went nine innings in both of those outings and —
Wait a minute …
ROGER CLEMENS HAD TWO COMPLETE GAMES WHERE HE DIDN’T RECORD A STRIKEOUT.
Are you kidding me!? In case you are wondering, this never occurred with Nolan Ryan or Randy Johnson, the two men above Clemens on the career strikeouts list.
Anyway, on July 1 and July 21, Roger notched complete-game victories without a K. He would still strike out 256 batters that season and go on to claim his second consecutive Cy Young.
My next best guess is that Gerrit Cole will strike out somebody when he returns to the bump in five days. In the meantime, he can celebrate both his odd win and his odd tie to one of the greatest.
Presenting the last word on Rougned Odor vs. Jose Bautista
More action than any recent Floyd Mayweather fight
I’m so late to this party, the cake is stale and the only person left in the room is the janitor sweeping up the streamers and balloons. So let me just hit you with some bullet-point opinions about baseball’s Fight of the Century.
- For me, seeing this type of baseball fight — a true rarity compared to those from days gone by — is sort of like passing a massive car crash on the freeway. I don’t get any intrinsic enjoyment out of the sight, yet I can’t take my eyes off of it because the curiosity is overwhelming. Baseball fights, unlike some car crashes, are wholly avoidable, and it’s rather ridiculous that the level of hatred can reach such high levels. But in the moment, that was some compelling.
- A few Blue Jays said after the game that the Rangers acted cowardly by hitting Bautista in what was likely his final at bat of the season series between the two teams. That sounds like a lot of sour grapes. The Rangers felt the need to retaliate for what happened during last year’s postseason — All of this over a bat flip? Really? — and they did so at a time that left the Blue Jays with little to no time for payback. That’s not cowardly, that’s called picking your spots. And then Toronto lost the actual fight. The Rangers basically got the best of their playground nemesis on the last day before summer break. Smart. All Toronto could do was hit Prince Fielder in the thigh with a pitch. Ooooh, that’ll show ’em. Not like Prince has a lot of meat on his legs to cushion that blow or anything.
- Please let these teams meet in the playoffs again. Please let these teams meet in the playoffs again. Please let this teams meet in the playoffs again …
- No player or team was “right” in this matter, but Rougned Odor was the No. 1 jerk by far. Not just because of his push-punch combination, but as Jose Bautista is sliding into second base, Odor clearly drops down and attempts to either nail Bautista with the ball or his fist. If you can stand to watch it again, just look at how the throw comes out of his hand. Yeah, Bautista slides in illegally, but he didn’t really contact Odor much before the throw, and that ball almost went into right field. Odor had no intentions of completing the double play.
- With that said, Odor is a Texas Rangers legend for life (assuming he doesn’t torment the Rangers with another team or disparage the franchise in the future). Clips of that punch will be shown around Globe Life Park and the Dallas-Fort Worth area for years. He’s basically the newest personification of “Don’t Mess with Texas.” He is right up there with Nolan Ryan, Ivan Rodriguez and Cordell Walker. Who knew his first name was Cordell?
- Major League Baseball obviously said publicly that it doesn’t condone this violence. However, if that’s completely honest, I don’t think this would have been this lead story — with numerous replays of the fight — on every show that aired on its own network for the following two days. Plus, you know that photos of this thing will find itself on MLB-licensed material in the future. Fighting is bad, mmmkay? But the league won’t turn down the extra attention.
- I’m surprised there weren’t heavier suspensions and more in total. Bautista gets just one game while Jesse Chavez gets three? Maybe Joe Torre felt Joey Bats had taken enough punishment already. Elvis Andrus had to sit for a game while Kevin Pillar did not. And Josh Donaldson gets only a fine? That seems inconsistent with the video.
- To anyone who thought the brawl would piss off the Blue Jays or fire up the Rangers, both of these teams were swept in their next series. Toronto got thrashed by Tampa Bay at home, and Texas had a forgetful few days in Oakland. So much for those narratives that were all over the place on Sunday and Monday.
Weird, wild, wacky stuff. Fortunately, baseball went back to normal on Tuesday when a real baseball fight took place.
Look at that fake machismo and all of that wasted energy from the bullpen pitchers! That’s how you do it, boys.
The Angels were *this close* to having a Rally Cat
I am a cat person. Not to be confused with a crazy cat person, but cats are better than dogs. I grew up with a few of each, and cats, while obviously being more independent and self-sufficient, can be just as loving. If you disagree with that last sentence, you haven’t found the right cat for you, but they are out there and are absolutely the best.
On Thursday night, two of my greatest loves, cats and baseball, collided and almost formed a beautiful long-term relationship.
In the bottom of the fourth inning at Angel Stadium, a cat — I’ll call it an orange tabby, although I’m sure a true feline aficionado can correct me — dashed across the middle of the infield during the Cardinals-Angels game. And this being a 2016 Angels game, a cat on the field is the usually the most exciting non-Trout play of the night.
But this was no ordinary night. The Cards and Angels slugged it out until a nearly four-hour affair ended in St. Louis’ favor, 12-10. The Angels’ TV broadcasters said repeatedly during the game that if the Angels were able to win this one, that cat had to become the franchise’s unofficial mascot. Which would have been fine by everyone, since the Rally Monkey’s best days occurred when “Gettin Jiggy Wit It” was nesting in your brain.
Alas, Los Angeles’ comeback attempt in the ninth fell short, and I assume this will be forgotten shortly. Maybe some PR intern will come up with a funny campaign using the cat, but I wouldn’t hold my breath.
The cat, which is apparently one of a few strays that live in and around the park, seems to be getting its chance at a happy ending:
I would take it in if I could, especially because you know what happens to those animals if they don’t find a home soon, right? Actually, let’s not think about that.
Viva the Cat-lifornia Angels!
Noah Syndergaard hammers two home runs
Thor does it all. As Vin Scully brought up during his Wednesday night broadcast between the Mets and Dodgers, Thor is the god of thunder, lightning, storms, strength, fertility, healing, hallowing, the protection of mankind and … oak trees?
Baseball’s Thor, Noah Syndergaard, must have been super pissed after serving up two home runs to the Dodgers given that he had allowed just one in his previous 38.1 innings.
But that’s OK, because Syndergaard did what he usually does on the mound otherwise and must have felt compelled to do something about those home runs, so he hit two of his own. And yes, I used the spanish announcer calls because Vin Scully wasn’t available.
Obviously, using “hammers” in the headline here is a cheap pun that everyone is using today. But there was nothing cheap about either of those shots. Look at that second one again, especially. A slider on the outside half that he barrels out to left-center? Syndergaard’s pitching repetroire isn’t the only unfair aspect of his baseball talents, apparently.
Syndergaard became the first pitcher since 2007 to hit two homers in a game. That pitcher was Micah Owings, who was always a better hitter than pitcher. In 205 career MLB at-bats, he recorded nine home runs and OPS’ed .813.
The last Mets pitcher to double up with the longball? Walt Terrell in 1983. I always love it when random players who have been completely forgotten for 20-plus years pop up in these conversations.
Also, in case you’re not keeping track, the Atlanta Braves have nine home runs this season. Mets pitchers have three, all of which have come in the past week.
The man who started this power surge will be on the mound for the Mets tonight, Bartolo Colon. I’ll be at the game, and I will be so giddy if Bartolo can go deep in consecutive starts. But if he homers — or even makes solid contact — off of Clayton Kershaw … I don’t even know. Baseball is really weird, but that’s straight gonzo.
Max Scherzer: 20 Ks in dominant, efficient fashion
What Max Scherzer did on Wednesday night, striking out 20 Detroit Tigers, was better than a no-hitter, and he’s thrown two of them. Way more rare, way more about his true abilities than the abilities of the men behind him. And just way more sexy.
It is. If you’re a batter, the name of the game is to hit the ball. Major league hitters ultimately failed to do that against Scherzer 20 times tonight. Sorry to dumb it down, but when something happens that has occurred only four previous times in the past century, reducing the accomplishment to its lowest form somehow makes it seem that much more special.
Of course, Scherzer joins the company of Randy Johnson, Kerry Wood and Roger Clemens, the other pitchers to strike out 20 in no more than nine innings (Clemens pulled it off twice). Coincidentally enough, there were no walks in any of these five outings.
But Scherzer did a couple of things that even Johnson and Wood did not. Scherzer completed his game with a ground out from James McCann (Nationals fans so very much wanted to see Anthony Rendon throw that ball away, even if it would have meant postponing the win). His 20th K was the second out of the ninth, so only Scherzer and 1986 Clemens can say they got to 20 strikeouts in less than nine innings pitched.
Also, Max was remarkably efficient. He entered the ninth with 106 pitches. When he gave up a homer to J.D. Martinez to begin that frame and when Victor Martinez singled with one out, people on Twitter started wondering how long Dusty Baker would stick with him. First of all, it’s Dusty Baker, so if Max’s elbow is still attached, no moves were going to be made.
Secondly, this wasn’t uncharted territory for Scherzer in terms of his pitch count. This wasn’t Ross Stripling or Adam Conley. Scherzer threw 116 pitches in a game earlier this year. He reached 119 twice last season. Even in a one-run game, Scherzer would have needed to let at least one more batter reach base before Dusty had come with the hook.
But back to that pitch efficiency. Wood, Johnson and Clemens all topped the 120 mark in their performances. Clemens threw 151 pitches when he did it in 1996 (also against Detroit). How did Scherzer keep his total manageable? He threw only 23 balls, and nine of his strikeouts took three pitches. In the gif below, you can really see how Scherzer utilized his changeup to achieve an incredible amount of quick strikeouts.
My favorite fact of the night came in a tweet from Fangraphs’ Dave Cameron:
Scherzer struck out 20 batters in nine innings AND broke xFIP. That is indeed sexy.
NFL Draft: What the Giants, Cowboys and Eagles need
The NFL Draft gets underway in about an hour, and let me just say I can’t wait. Not because I’m such a draftnik, but because the deluge of pre-draft talk that dominates sports talk at this time of year is often nothing more than meaningless blather.
Everyone wants to make predictions about what each team is going to do in the first round, whom they are going to select. The sources behind the predictions provide a level of certainty that makes it seem like what the reporters are hearing is a done deal.
Then something happens on draft night no one expected, reducing the source’s scoop to scrap.
Case in point, recent reports surrounding what the New York Giants will do at No. 10 overall. Yesterday, sources told Ralph Vacchiano of the New York Daily News there is a “strong chance” the Giants will draft a linebacker at that spot. Specifically, Georgia’s Leonard Floyd.
Great. The Giants undoubtedly need a linebacker. Welcome, Leonard!
Then, from a different New York Daily News reporter this morning:
Based on these reports, the Giants will probably choose a defensive back in Round 1.
If reporters from the same news outlet in the team’s backyard can’t get on the same page, why should we put stock into any of the rumors we hear during draft season? Let’s just get on with the show already.
…
Oh. I guess I’ve buried the lede six feet under here, but the real point of this post is to get you to read something I wrote Wednesday for the Redskins team site Breaking Burgundy. The article has very little to do with the Redskins. Rather, it’s my last-minute assumptions of what positions and players the three other teams in the NFC East will be targeting over the next three days. There’s no actual reporting I’m swearing by. Just a lot of educated guesses.
And if you are interested in knowing what the Redskins might do during the draft, click literally any other link on Breaking Burgundy.
Enjoy the NFL Draft, if that’s your thing. If Ezekiel Elliot’s wardrobe is any clue, it should be an interesting show.
https://twitter.com/inluvwitdajojo/status/725807509722656768
The latest shortstop “renaissance” is just beginning
Last night, ESPN Red Sox writer Scott Lauber posted a stellar article on shortstops Xander Bogaerts and Carlos Correa. It sort of reads like two short features in one as you get background about each player. But before that, Lauber points out how Bogaerts and Correa are part of a group including Corey Seager, Francisco Lindor, Addison Russell and Trevor Story that hearkens back to a time when the likes of Derek Jeter, Alex Rodriguez, Nomar Garciaparra and Miguel Tejada were all young and ruling during the late-90s and early 2000s.
Lauber does say that this current class of burgeoning shortstop stars is “absurdly deep.” However, it may be deeper than he and many casual baseball fans realize.
MLB.com and Baseball America each included 13 shortstops among their preseason top 50 prospects lists. Baseball Prospectus had 12. MLB.com placed 11 shortstops inside its top 30 alone. One of those players, Seager, the No. 1 player on all of those lists, is already a major force in the Dodgers’ lineup and showing why so many picked him to take home Rookie of the Year. I made that same call and still feel very comfortable about it, no matter how much Story doth protest early on.
However, for 2016 purposes and beyond, we’re waiting on Trea Turner, J.P. Crawford, Dansby Swanson, Orlando Arcia, Brendan Rodgers, Raul Mondesi, Franklin Barreto, Alex Bregman, Tim Anderson, Gleyber Torres, Jorge Mateo and Ozhaino Albies. And those are the most common names in only the top 50. That’s the tip of the iceberg of minor league talent. For instance, Story was nowhere to be found on either Baseball America’s or Baseball Prospectus’ preseason top 100. He was ranked 8th and 10th by each organization, respectively, just among Rockies prospects. And look what he’s done so far.
Obviously, not all of those players will pan out as expected. The picture at the top is a good example. In 1997, those five shirtless guys — from left: Alex Gonzalez, Alex Rodriguez, Edgar Renteria, Rey Ordonez and Derek Jeter — were seen, according to Sports Illustrated’s Tom Verducci, as members of “The best crop of young shortstops to come along in 56 years.” They were “the most multi-talented group ever … redefining the position and putting a fresh face on the game.”
Two were clearly great. Renteria had an accomplished, long career. And the remaining 40 percent of that quintet played baseball too.
Secondly, not all of these current prospects will remain at shortstop if they reach the majors. Bregman is a shortstop on the Astros. I mean, he is for now. If he remains in Houston, he sure as hell won’t be remaining at short.
But while Bogaerts, Correa and others are on the scene and making their presence known at the 6, they are the first wave in a sense. The pipeline of difference-making shortstops didn’t empty with the promotions of Seager and Story. The pipeline appears to be absolutely stocked and this “renaissance,” as the editor of Lauber’s story put in the title, will probably last a long time.
Sunday was all about crazy comebacks in baseball
Movie, good. Baseball, better.
I saw “The Jungle Book” today. Very entertaining. Even with so many of today’s movies being overwhelmed by computer graphics, the CGI in this movie is outstanding. If there is a criticism, it’s that, other than the wolf pack and a couple others in the forest, there seems to be only one of each animal. One panther. One tiger. One snake. One bear. Forget about the one human boy among the wild; someone needs to investigate what befell so many of the species in this ecosystem.
But that’s all I did Sunday. Otherwise, I relaxed and watched some baseball. However, it’s difficult to relax when you are on the edge of your seat, and that’s where a handful of games put me. There were some wholeheartedly “good” games — Mets-Braves, Cardinals-Padres and Marlins-Giants were all tense late — but four games specifically turned this lazy Sunday into a crazy one.
Let’s start chronologically and with perhaps the wildest game of the bunch: Twins-Nationals. Stephen Strasburg was the story for the first seven innings. But in the eighth, he challenged Brian Dozier with one too many fastballs, and Dozier sent Strasburg’s 114th and final pitch way out for a three-run homer that gave Minnesota a 4-1 lead.
The Nats got two runs back in the bottom of the eighth. Then in the ninth, Dusty Baker made a brilliant managerial move: He sent Bryce Harper to the plate. What a strategy.
Harper had been given the day off, but in a one-run game, it was time for him to get involved.
Harper took a couple of hacks that made it known he wants to hit this ball into the Atlantic. I’m not sure why Kevin Jepsen gave him the chance — so what if you walk Bryce Harper? Throw it out of the zone, for goodness sake — but his low fastball wasn’t low enough. Unless you’re a Twins fan, click here to feel all the chills.
The Yankees left runners on base in every way imaginable Friday
The Yankees’ loss on Friday night was an especially frustrating one for the home fans, which saw the local nine go 0-for-12 with runners in scoring position and leave 12 runners on base.
But it’s how they left those runners on base that is kind of neat. It doesn’t take away the sting of a loss for a fan, but it’s April 15; what’s the use of getting all glum with 153 games remaining anyway? Now is not the time for fear. That comes later.
Anyway, here is how the Yankees stranded their baserunners. Stay with me …
First inning: Carlos Beltran left on first, Mark Teixeira left on second.
Second inning: Chase Headley left on second.
Third inning: Brian McCann left on first.
Fourth inning: Dustin Ackley left on third, Starlin Castro left on second.
Fifth inning: Brett Gardner left on third, Teixeira left on first.
Sixth inning: Didi Gregorius left on third, Headley left on second, Gardner left on first.
Ninth inning: Gardner left on third.
The Yankees lost this game, 7-1. But stranding Gardner on third — and only him specifically on third — to end the game was significant in that it filled out the Yankees’ stranded baserunners bingo card. They left runners on base in every way possible. Moreover, each combination occurred only once. The Yankees left the bases empty in the seventh and eighth innings.
I don’t know how often this happens, but I want to know. I really, really want to know. You have no idea.
I’m still asking around. I will update this post if I receive a response. I’m sure you are all awaiting the answer as eagerly as I am.
Top Story: Is it time to sell high on the Rockies’ rookie shortstop?
It’s not going to get better than this.
Trevor Story is on pace for 189 home runs this season. He is not going to hit 189 home runs this season. Nor is he going to score 189 runs, drive in 312, compile a .333 average or OPS 1.468. In that way, all fantasy owners who decide to trade Story following his historic first week in the bigs would be selling high.
But should they sell high? Because of that first week, Story is a safe bet to surpass 25 home runs. No shortstop has done that since Story’s idol, Troy Tulowitzki, knocked out 30 in 2011. Playing half of his games in Colorado’s thin air will help that cause. He should be a decent source of runs and continue to see pitches to hit as long as he is batting in front of Carlos Gonzalez and Nolan Arenado. Story even has the legs to steal double-digit bases.
The clear negatives are that Story will swing and miss a lot, and he probably won’t finish with a batting average above .275. But hey, a lot of valuable players pile up the Ks and don’t have a sparkling average. It’s the price you pay for Story’s all-or-nothing approach (he has just two hits that aren’t home runs), and shortstops with his ability with the stick and on the basepaths aren’t in plentiful supply.
But just take a look at whom Story is fetching in recent trades in Yahoo fantasy leagues.
On April 8, the day of Story’s multi-homer game versus San Diego, he was dealt straight up for the likes of Kris Bryant and Matt Harvey. The following day, Story was in one-for-one deals with Tulowitzki twice and Bryant. He was traded for Marcus Stroman, Jose Fernandez and Adam Jones each on April 10. Today, he’s been swapped straight up for Carlos Correa, Justin Upton and Felix Hernandez, to name a few.
In some notable two-for-one trades, Story was packaged with Roberto Osuna for each Miguel Cabrera and Nolan Arenado. Story and Justin Turner brought back Prince Fielder in one league. Story and Mark Trumbo brought back Nelson Cruz in another. He was traded along with Yoan Moncada (must have been a dynasty league) for Dallas Keuchel. Or how about Story and Billy Hamilton for Chris Sale?
As much as buy low, sell high is stressed, people often d0 the opposite because they are prone to panic. Over the past few days of tracking Story’s trade market, Tulowitzki and Bryant appeared to be the hitters most commonly involved in trades with the rookie. That’s not a shock since Tulowitzki and Bryant have combined for a .176 average and one home run. People are bailing on players they drafted in the first few rounds just a couple of weeks ago for a fresh rookie riding an unsustainable hot streak. They are panicking.
Should you sell high on Trevor Story? A definitive answer is difficult — barring a complete cratering, he’s got a good shot of finishing as a top-5 or top-6 shortstop — but you would be doing yourself a disservice if you didn’t at least try. Explore what’s possible, especially while all of your league’s owners are engaged. That won’t always be the case.
Like they say in fantasy, if you’re not trading, you’re not trying. Seeing the return in some of these deals, Story’s owners should bring forth a high asking price and see if they can take advantage of an owner who’s nervous because his early-round stud is slow out of the gate. You might get your wish. And yes, I’d take either Kris Bryant or Troy Tulowitzki for Story.
But why stop there? Story was traded along with Craig Kimbrel for Giancarlo Stanton. He was traded with Dellin Betances for Josh Donaldson. It doesn’t get much better than that.
More Talk, Less Walk 