Subject: crazy baseball occurrence
Date: Thu Sep 14 22:46:58 2017
User: Punster
Message:Now "22" in a row !!
Indians down to their last strike in the 9th inning & Lindor doubles home the tying run.
Then in the 10th inning, Jay Bruce doubles home Ramirez for the game winner !!!
Date: Sat Sep 16 15:11:21 2017
User: Klepp
Message:I seriously doubt we'll see anything over 17 within the next half century, and it's hard to imagine 23 or more ever in the modern game--but that's merely one of the many great reasons we enjoy tuning in and turning on so much.
Date: Sat Sep 16 15:26:20 2017
User: Klepp
Message:BTW, IMO, the Indians have the greatest winning streak ever...ever, regardless what any Giants' fan, stat geek, 26 in-a-row lover says...(unless of course this person happens to be a super centenarian, (likely New Yorker) WHO ACTUALLY SAW IT GO DOWN)...
Date: Sat Sep 16 17:06:39 2017
User: BuzzClik
Message:The Giant's steak is legit. There were different rules for suspended games back in 1916, but the Giants did not lose and a tie game was not counted in the standings. The Giants had a tie game (called for darkness) that was replayed from the beginning, and the Giants won.
I don't see the problem.
Date: Sat Sep 16 22:19:13 2017
User: Blythe_Yet_Lusty
Message:I understand the problem most historians have with the Giant's 26 game record was the Giant's rumored use of a solver, or at the very least, a deck of (baseball) cards.
Date: Sun Sep 17 01:25:58 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:I kinda like the way this (see link) addresses the issue. I had done my own "back of the envelope" calculations (before seeing this), with likely slightly different starting conditions and assumptions, and came up with something closer to 1/25-30,000 instead of ("as low as") 1/65,000. And although I understand Paine's argument about competition (perhaps valid, but no way to *really* know), and 4-man vs. 5-man rotations, I don't think those are as much of a factor - especially the latter one, but who really knows? And I know Elo ratings are supposed to be the gold standard, but are they? (And I'm not saying they're not; just raising the question. I guess they're the best we have.)
See this site (a link within the one below) for relevant stats on "the best teams of all time", which I suspect many here have already perused since it's from last year:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-best-mlb-teams-of-all-time-according-to-elo/
And it's crazy that the 1916 Giants also had a 17-game winning streak that year, yet only finished fourth in the NL. ONE HALF OF THEIR VICTORIES FOR THE ENTIRE YEAR WERE CONTAINED IN THOSE TWO STREAKS! (A fading) Christy Mathewson was on that team, but was traded in July to the Reds, before retiring at the end of the season. Further, those same Giants had finished *last* the year before. As the saying goes......."baseball is a funny game". But it really does beg the question as to how they could be so incredibly good for those streaks, but well under .500 for the rest of the season? One could argue that on *both* sides of the "competition" argument.
I have my doubts that the 1916 Giants used a solver. For if so, why couldn't they "solve" the Phillies or the Brooklyn Robins, both teams to which they had a losing record that year. (I suppose one could argue that they acquired, or developed, said solver later in the year, as their streak was completely (I think) in September. Or maybe the Robins and Phillies had *better* solvers?) The theory of having a deck (of baseball cards) is interesting. Perhaps one of our resident "deckers" could weigh in on this...
Link: How does the Indians streak stack up?
Date: Fri Oct 27 13:01:40 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:Well........*besides* being a totally terrific game, the Astros very first W.S. win ever, and yes, being an "instant classic", game 2 of the W.S. brought us some new records. 8 HRs in a W.S. game is a record. The 5 extra-inning dingers is a record for *any* post-season game. Those are records that might stand for a while. ('Course that's the nature of records.) What a game.
Dodgers have won it enough. Let the Astros and their city have this very-needed feel-good story....
Link: HRs tell the story - again and again, it seemed
Date: Mon Oct 30 11:58:07 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:If game 2 was clearly an instant classic, what was game 5?!?!?
So many records.... Is there a stat for "swings and misses"? Only 28 in the whole game?!? Well, just read the first two of these articles, as any attempt at a summarization would be more inadequate than the article itself. So many ups and downs in one game..... Indescribable, literally.
(Oh, and in what now seems forever ago and nearly meaningless with 1 day's further context............Game 4 was the 109th W.S. game in the history of the Dodgers. It was the first time any of their pitchers had started a game with 5 hitless innings.)
This must already rank as one of the best W.S. in history - a moniker that's so easily thrown around in such times. I can't imagine how it's not true, however.
Link: "stretching the limits of credulity"
Date: Mon Oct 30 12:21:34 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:Further, the "slick" baseballs seem to be having a significant impact on the (lack of) effectiveness of sliders. If you've been watching the slo-mo of many of the various pitches which were supposed to 'slide', but didn't, it's very easy to see that this is a real thing. It was very noticeable as Darvish was getting shellacked. I think this SI article explains it pretty well. Especially read what Verlander said. And it seems that this issue is what may have been hurting Giles, and why he may not come in for any critical pitching the rest of the series. When the margins are so tiny at the very, very top of any sport (and many other activities, too), such seemingly miniscule nuances become quite magnified.
Link: slicker balls
Date: Mon Oct 30 18:21:20 2017
User: BuzzClik
Message:A ball that doesn't break would turns game-time pitching into batting practice -- unintentionally grooving pitches that get pounded. Flame throwing fastball pitchers were faring better than those who depend on nasty movement in the ball; but even they had no backup pitch. The plate umpire last night made it only worse by calling the pitches toward the outside of the plate very very tight, forcing the pitchers to put unlively throws over the meat of the plate or walking an uncharacteristic number of batters.
And to those who found Game 5 fantastic, take it from someone with their butt plastered to a seat for 5 hours and 20 minutes (from the opening pitch) that the game was excruciating. And making a 2 hour drive home starting at 1 am with work the next day only compounded the misery.
I was really looking forward to a tight battle between two aces; not so much.
Date: Tue Oct 31 10:15:45 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:It looked, on TV (and they showed the replays a lot) that the plate umpire had a pretty low strike zone. And I have to say it *appeared* to benefit Houston more. But I'll also say that there were SO many on-the-edge pitches; I would certainly have hated to have been calling that game. But of course major league pitchers/pitches are like that - those "miniscule nuances" spell the difference between success and failure.
And although it may have been physically brutal to attend the game in person, as the days, months, and years go by, you'll be very glad you did, I suspect. Very many such moments in life aren't easy to come by, whether it be for a concert, an eclipse, a wedding, or whatever.
Date: Tue Oct 31 11:57:15 2017
User: BuzzClik
Message:>>TN: "It looked, on TV (and they showed the replays a lot) that the plate umpire had a pretty low strike zone. And I have to say it *appeared* to benefit Houston more."
There is no seat in any stadium that can duplicate the views provide on television, so I won't pretend to have knowledge that approaches yours. However, from our vantage it seemed that Keuchel couldn't buy a pitch on the edge of the plate (outside for right-handed batters), and he walked himself into trouble by not getting that call. On the other hand, the ump would call that pitch (and those that appeared well off the plate) a strike for Puig. Sort of ironic that it was that pitch that Puig put out of the park in the ninth with his one-handed swing.
I have no regrets about attending that game.
Date: Tue Oct 31 12:31:43 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:Glad you have no regrets. Sounds almost like "well......if I had to be somewhere....." LOL.
There were truly an extraordinary number of pitches just *right* on the corners, and just *right* on the knees. And as you know, sometimes, even on tv, if one thinks a pitch is one thing, on instant slo-mo replay, one could easily see it differently. Although I don't watch tons on baseball on tv these days, I can't recall ever seeing the production crew show so many pitches in slo-mo, with the strike zone superimposed. And I'm telling ya, even like that there were umpteen (pun intended) ones for which a case could be made for either call. (And as you know, if any part of the ball catches any part of the plate, even the black border, it's a strike.) As a former umpire (long ago), it looked like tough behind-the-plate duty. But of course that's the job.
To be honest....since the game lasted so long, and went through so many 'phases'.....I don't remember the specifics of the calls of Keuchel's pitches. I don't remember at the time thinking "this guy's getting screwed on the edge by the ump". I *do* remember thinking at one point around the 6th, 7th, or 8th inning, that the 'stros were getting the best of the low-ball pitch calls. But in fact, contrarily, I remember two instances when I thought a called strike was too low from the initial outfield view, but then when the side camera view was shown, I stood corrected. In fact, I was amazed how true that was on those two. On one called strike 3 on one of the Dodgers' left-handed hitters, which was out #3 (I think) in a late inning sure looked questionable, and the batter (Bellinger???) certainly thought it was the wrong call, too.
Date: Thu Nov 2 10:50:43 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:Has there ever been a game 7 decided before the first out was ever made? (Of course this would not be known until the end, but that's pretty amazing.)
I normally would put this article in the "Stream of Consciousness" thread.......but since Koufax (age 81) has been shown in the stands during the series; and along with Don Newcombe (age 91), throwing out the first pitch last night, I'll stick it here. It's a long read, but really well done, imo. I remembered most of it from back when it was first published in '99, but not all of it, and it's good for a refresher. Likely many of you haven't seen it before.
Link: Long, but nice 'study' of Koufax
Date: Thu Nov 2 20:34:31 2017
User: Klepp
Message:It's been a long time since a team has smacked the ball around as well as Houston did this whole season. It often this WS didn't seem to matter if LAD pitching was too high, too fast, too whatever, Springer, Altuve, Gurriel just kept slamming 98mph exit velocity balls over and over and over, bad pitch, good pitch, great pitch, whatever, all alongside their truly superior infield defense...
(Lord let the supra-GENIUS of David Stearns (erstwhile Astros' sole asst. GM to Luhnow '12-'15) continue working in MIL...)
Date: Thu Nov 2 22:22:52 2017
User: Dr.Bombay
Message:I meant to get this posted on Sunday. If you followed Twitter after 4th inning of the game there were numerous tweets about Kershaw’s teams being either 99-1 or 100-1 when he had a 4+ run lead after the fourth inning. That disappeared one inning later of course but then the Dodgers eventually caught back up only to lose 13-12
Date: Thu Nov 2 22:22:52 2017
User: Dr.Bombay
Message:I meant to get this posted on Sunday. If you followed Twitter after 4th inning of the game there were numerous tweets about Kershaw’s teams being either 99-1 or 100-1 when he had a 4+ run lead after the fourth inning. That disappeared one inning later of course but then the Dodgers eventually caught back up only to lose 13-12
Date: Fri Nov 3 00:26:28 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:Sometimes crazy baseball occurrences occur in baseball - tautological though that may be.
Date: Sun Oct 20 15:17:03 2019
User: TNmountainman
Message:This may not be crazy to you all, but it is to me. After last night's fabulous game, we now have a World Series in which there are two teams who have switched leagues (sort of). The Astros, of course, switched from the NL to the AL some years ago (and I still have trouble reconciling that in my mind). And the Nationals, who moved from Montreal, and used to be the Expos - but kinda 'replaced' the twice-departed Senators, an AL team.
So we have an ex-NL team representing the AL, and a 'replacement' AL team representing the NL.
Great for baseball to have the Nats in it, and good for mrbuck as I'm sure he gets some kind of significant residuals.
Date: Sun Oct 20 18:23:56 2019
User: mrbuck
Message:If you meant heart stress as a significant residual, then yes, I get that.
Nats, Nats, Nats, Wooooooooooo!
mrbuck
Date: Sun Oct 20 21:00:29 2019
User: Bryce_Harper
Message:Got a new big screen. Don't want to miss any of the action.
Date: Sun Oct 20 21:13:39 2019
User: TNmountainman
Message:Gee, Bryce.......with that $330 mill, couldn't you just buy the team, or at least make enough of a down payment) and just sit in the owner's suite?
Date: Mon Oct 21 03:08:08 2019
User: lightfield
Message:hey, thanks for this discussion. i'm stuck at home with no cable. so i'm missing the series. sounds incredible.
Date: Fri Oct 25 18:59:18 2019
User: Klepp
Message:The network ought to look for a Washington native who recalls the last (only) city's MLB champ, Senators circa '24...
There must be a centenarian baseball fan from Washington (not yet subject to senility) who recalls.
Date: Sun Oct 27 08:51:46 2019
User: JackK2019
Message:The lack of interest in the series is something. Few care. At the cigar shop I was at last night the three TVs had college football on. The season is too long, The games are too long and there are not enough American born players to relate to.
Date: Wed Oct 30 13:47:31 2019
User: TNmountainman
Message:So.......the road team has won the first six games of this Series, the first time that's ever happened. Indeed, the road team winning the first 5 games had happened only twice before - 1996 and 1906.
Also noteworthy is that this is the first time in *any* of the major U.S. sports that this has happened.
And........now the Nats have won 7 straight road games in a single postseason, an NL record.
Overall, the road team has now won 8 straight games, a record which may never be broken - unless it happens tonight. No team has ever won the W.S. without winning at least one game at home - again unless it happens tonight.
Justin Verlander is now 0-6 in his W.S. starts, while Strasburg is now 5-0 in the postseason.
I would disagree with JackK2019's assessment of this W.S. Seems pretty interest-generating to me.
mrbuck's residuals are highly, highly leveraged tonight.
Date: Thu Oct 31 13:08:26 2019
User: TNmountainman
Message:Congrats to mrbuck and his Expos/Nats/ghosts of Senators past. Here's a quite well-done and poetic analysis.....
Link: "just Nationals baseball"
Date: Fri Nov 1 16:03:51 2019
User: odalittlemouse
Message:Boswell wrote another good one today about the incredible odds that the Nats overcame. It ends with the lines:
Let it all loose, DC.
Go shark raving mad.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/nationals/nats-postseason-upset-run-was-the-greatest-in-mlb-history-with-moments-well-never-forget/2019/10/31/ebe71472-fbff-11e9-8190-6be4deb56e01_story.html
Date: Fri Nov 1 17:43:43 2019
User: TNmountainman
Message:That link doesn't work for me, even if I remove the dots at the end. Maybe try making it a hyperlink?
Date: Fri Nov 1 20:42:39 2019
User: Dr.Bombay
Message:I didn’t want to jinx it but I was very happy to see the WAG-beating defenders lose. Sometimes karma works out 💪.
Date: Sat Nov 2 12:59:01 2019
User: mrbuck
Message:Thanks TN! Been a fan of the Nats since the first game at RFK. It was a great season to be a fan. Wish I could go to the parade today!
JackK2019 must have been watching some other sport.
Nats, Nats, Nats, WOOOOOOOOOOO.
mrbuck
Date: Sat Nov 2 17:43:51 2019
User: joeygray
Message:I must say that I have never ever cared whether somebody was American born, or any of numerous other irrelevancies, when deciding to enjoy a spectator sport. Russian chess players? Who cares. Jewish basketball players? Don't know, don't care. A family from Cleveland on family feud? Why even bother me with such stuff as that.
Date: Sat Nov 2 18:53:24 2019
User: TNmountainman
Message:Absolutely. The only exception to that, and only grudgingly so, is the Olympics - and I don't buy into a high degree of rah-rah even there.
Date: Sun Nov 3 16:04:03 2019
User: Klepp
Message:This Nationals team could be remembered and revered like the '69 Mets...c'mon, they were 19-31 around June 1, weren't they?...I truly did expect them to reach the finals, but lose to the Astros in five...only hard-core baseball fans saw their September surge...as a Brewers' fan, I did...as the Brewers surged, they couldn't catch the Nats or Cards...but oh how sweet to watch CHC fold and circle the toilet late September...I though this post-season was effing spectacular.
Date: Sun Nov 3 17:15:59 2019
User: TNmountainman
Message:You know.............I hadn't thought of that, but they really kinda were like the '69 Mets - except the Expos/Nats are really a better baseball team than that Mets team. This Nats team was great for over 100 games. Those (Amazin') Mets were great for many fewer.
I was pulling for the Brew Crew to make it in. And these 1-game playoffs are totally detestable.
Date: Mon Nov 4 11:13:02 2019
User: mrbuck
Message:The 69 Mets won 100 games and were 21 and 23 at the start of June. The 1914 Miracle Braves were 10 and 22 to start June. So the Nats fall somewhere between the two.
Now begins the roster reassemble time. The Nats had 16 possible free agents but picked up the options on Doolittle and Eaton.
The team could look very very very different in 2020.
mrbuck
Date: Mon Nov 4 13:03:49 2019
User: TNmountainman
Message:But those '69 Mets feasted on the brand-new expansion teams of the Padres, and.....................those Expos. (I almost added that detail in my earlier post.) The Mets went 24-6 against those two teams, somewhat skewing their record (imo). I'm not saying that team wasn't a good one - only that I think this Nats/Expos one is better. Surely the resemblance is there, with the superb rest-of-the-season performance by both teams.
Date: Wed Oct 14 03:10:41 2020
User: TNmountainman
Message:This is only moderately crazy, but I think it borderline qualifies.
Link: HR tag team
Date: Sun Oct 25 02:16:29 2020
User: TNmountainman
Message:Tonight's Game 4 was insane. Or very certainly the ending. "You can't make that stuff up."
Date: Sun Oct 25 12:32:52 2020
User: BuzzClik
Message:Endings like that are normally associated with players under 5 feet tall.
Everything in the entire game up to the point where the throw from the outfield crossed the base path was outstanding. Everything after that was not great. (How many topflight athletes fell down while running this week for no apparent reason?). And, yeah, it's more productive to attempt a tag if the ball is actually in your glove.
Gratefully, I have no team in this one.
This certainly sets up an entertaining game 5.
Date: Sun Oct 25 12:52:49 2020
User: TNmountainman
Message:Unless one is somehow LA-centric, geographically.............it's clear that one should root for the Rays. They've never won one in their short existence, whereas the Dodgers have won 5 or 6. And yes, altho it's apparently not been since 1988, they've been close so many times that that fact is hard to grasp (for me, at least). Spread the wealth around, as I always say: socialized baseball for all. Helps the game to have success spread around. Why, in another decade or so, it might even be time for Snowguy's Pirates to have another chance. But first, let's let the Brewers, White Sox, Rockies, Seattle, etc. have some turns at the top.
Date: Sun Oct 25 15:42:50 2020
User: Klepp
Message:I'm a true-blue Brew Crew fan, but I wouldn't terribly mind seeing that flashy young Padres team go all the way, at least just begin dominating hated rival LA.
But yeah, "Maverick" air-planing in the spotlight was legendary baseball cool (especially if the Rays do take it now).
Date: Sun Oct 25 17:30:37 2020
User: JackStraw
Message:I see an error has correctly been given to the catcher.
This morning only the outfielder had an error.
Arozarena was able to good to 3rd due to the outfield error
but without the catcher's error would have been out at the plate.
Date: Sun Oct 25 19:17:27 2020
User: TNmountainman
Message:That's a mighty tough call, but I think correct. The catcher thought he had to rush, but that's part of it. He probably should have taken his mask off, but that's a tough decision, too.
So great to see grown men act like joyous kids again while playing a kid's game.
Arozarena laying there slapping home plate should be the upcoming SI cover.
Post follow-up