Meet a Baseball Fan (Welcome to Anyone)
DanDietrich said:
I think he's going to be out next year.
Ohtani did play last night and hit a 115 MPH double.
Yes, but I think he will need surgery with recovery time, even though it's his throwing arm.
After seeing at least 7/9 of the Mets lose track of the amount of outs I was wondering if any of you lost track of the amount of outs when playing. It's so odd to me that they can lose track when it's plastered all over the scoreboards.
jfinnegan said:
After seeing at least 7/9 of the Mets lose track of the amount of outs I was wondering if any of you lost track of the amount of outs when playing. It's so odd to me that they can lose track when it's plastered all over the scoreboards.
I never played beyond Little League. If my team ever completed a double play as smooth as that one, I would have passed out and, in that condition, lost track of the outs.
DaveSchmidt said:
I never played beyond Little League. If my team ever completed a double play as smooth as that one, I would have passed out and, in that condition, lost track of the outs.
I played in Little League and recreationally in college and then in softball leagues with friends on Saturday mornings and in leagues with work. In one work league I played SS and the pitcher told me to yell at the LF for not hitting me on a cutoff. I wasn't about to yell at the company CFO to hit the cutoff. If people are concerned about fundamentals in a softball rec league major leaguers should probably know the amount of outs. Then again a lot of them don't seem to know where to throw the ball to a lot of the time.
jfinnegan said:
I wasn't about to yell at the company CFO to hit the cutoff.
Yes, major leaguers should know how many outs there are. On this thread, I can say it: LOL Mets.
Finally ready to jump in; 1. After watching most of this season, I have come to like the pitch and batter clock. 2 For many years, I have liked the home plate strike/ball virtual box. It leads to lots of fun as we either congratulate the ump or berate him. Same with the replay calls. Baseball is supposed to be fun. I hope robots do not replace umps.
RobertRoe said:
Finally ready to jump in; 1. After watching most of this season, I have come to like the pitch and batter clock. 2 For many years, I have liked the home plate strike/ball virtual box. It leads to lots of fun as we either congratulate the ump or berate him. Same with the replay calls. Baseball is supposed to be fun. I hope robots do not replace umps.
I agree until I see Angel Hernandez doing the game. At least Joe West finally retired.
jfinnegan said:
RobertRoe said:
Finally ready to jump in; 1. After watching most of this season, I have come to like the pitch and batter clock. 2 For many years, I have liked the home plate strike/ball virtual box. It leads to lots of fun as we either congratulate the ump or berate him. Same with the replay calls. Baseball is supposed to be fun. I hope robots do not replace umps.
I agree until I see Angel Hernandez doing the game. At least Joe West finally retired.
1. Games are too fast for me. But I realize I’m a cult of one.
2. In addition to fun, baseball is about the persistence of human fallibility as much as, if not more than, the triumph of athletic excellence. Efforts to eliminate imperfection dismay and (when replay interrupts the game) irritate me. However, egregious ball/strike calls also drive me crazy. I don’t know what goes on behind the scenes to discipline umpires when they screw up, but I’d rather exhaust that side of enforcement and improvement before turning the zone over to the robos.
DaveSchmidt said:
1. Games are too fast for me. But I realize I’m a cult of one.
2. In addition to fun, baseball is about the persistence of human fallibility as much as, if not more than, the triumph of athletic excellence. Efforts to eliminate imperfection dismay and (when replay interrupts the game) irritate me. However, egregious ball/strike calls also drive me crazy. I don’t know what goes on behind the scenes to discipline umpires when they screw up, but I’d rather exhaust that side of enforcement and improvement before turning the zone over to the robos.
I agree with both comments. I never had an issue with the time of the game. It will be interesting to see if these moves do actually increase ratings and cause more young people to be interested.
With regards to the umps, I don't want robots, but they don't have any repercussions for poor umpires. Jerry West landed on a player a few years back and was unable to get off of him without assistance from somebody else. He clearly should not have been umpiring.
Have you ever been asked to volunteer ump a game that is not in a really formal league? (I am not trained, just a long-time player; and I do not know all the finer points of the rules.) Umping is really hard and calling balls and strikes is very very hard. Sometimes I would forget the pitch count and simply hope the batter hit the next pitch. Even worse, I sometimes had to ask team managers what the count was or how many outs when all else failed. It is also important to anticipate the play and get into the right position to make a good call. Obviously, professional umps should be much better, but my little experience with informal leagues taught me how hard good umping is. Baseball and softball are very cool games and yes human fallibility of players and umps makes the game even more fun. Sometimes I will see a game going on in the park and simply watch for a few innings and enjoy the play.
Have you ever watched an outfielder chase down a long-fly ball or sinking line drive? It is a thing of beauty. If you tried to do the math equations of the fielder having to react to the hit ball, run at the right speed to the right spot, and use their glove to catch the ball, it would take a whole lot of equations. The same goes for pitchers and hitters and all the fielders. Sometimes even when an opposing hitter hit the ball really far over the fence, I had to admire the power of hitting. Baseball/softball is a beautiful thing.
One more thought and I step aside for the next batter: I really liked the Kevin Kostner baseball movies. A third one he made," For Love of the Game", was not as well known. In it, he is a pitcher pitching in what is probably his last game after a long good career. The best part is the rambling thoughts that go through his head as he tries to concentrate on pitching. No doubt, pitching is at least half mental.
I have been a baseball fan since the 60s. And maybe that's why I did have an issue with the increasing length of games. In the 60s, 70s, and 80s the game moved along at a nice pace. And it wasn't how long games had become, it was how much dead time there was between pitches. Watching Chris Bassett hold the ball for 40 seconds before a pitch is excruciating. And the hitters adjusting thr gloves, then meditating for 15 seconds was just as bad.
I am a big fan of the pitch clock. The limit on pickoff moves, not so much.
And don't get me started on the free runner in extra innings. Worst rule change in any sport during my lifetime.
RobertRoe said:
One more thought and I step aside for the next batter: I really liked the Kevin Kostner baseball movies. A third one he made," For Love of the Game", was not as well known. In it, he is a pitcher pitching in what is probably his last game after a long good career. The best part is the rambling thoughts that go through his head as he tries to concentrate on pitching. No doubt, pitching is at least half mental.
I think the race among baseball movies is for second place, because Bull Durham is the easy winner. My vote would probably go to the original Angels in the Outfield, with Paul Douglas and Janet Leigh, followed closely by Eight Men Out and, if it’s still as entertaining as I remember it from many, many years ago, Bingo Long. The original Bad News Bears is up there, too.
Field of Dreams is one of my least favorites. But, again, I’m a cult of one.
I’ve never seen For the Love of the Game. I’ll put it on (a crowded) deck.
RobertRoe said:
One more thought and I step aside for the next batter: I really liked the Kevin Kostner baseball movies. A third one he made," For Love of the Game", was not as well known. In it, he is a pitcher pitching in what is probably his last game after a long good career. The best part is the rambling thoughts that go through his head as he tries to concentrate on pitching. No doubt, pitching is at least half mental.
I was watching the Mets game yesterday and Darling was talking abut how one of the hardest things to do is to stay focused on every play for 3 hours and seemed to think the Mets' pitcher lost focus for a few pitches and it caused him to give up a couple of homeruns.
ml1 said:
I have been a baseball fan since the 60s. And maybe that's why I did have an issue with the increasing length of games. In the 60s, 70s, and 80s the game moved along at a nice pace. And it wasn't how long games had become, it was how much dead time there was between pitches. Watching Chris Bassett hold the ball for 40 seconds before a pitch is excruciating. And the hitters adjusting thr gloves, then meditating for 15 seconds was just as bad.
I am a big fan of the pitch clock. The limit on pickoff moves, not so much.
And don't get me started on the free runner in extra innings. Worst rule change in any sport during my lifetime.
Great set yesterday! I hope you had an ice cold beer waiting for you. I was just standing there for half an hour doing nothing and I was breaking into a sweat.
DaveSchmidt said:
I think the race among baseball movies is for second place, because Bull Durham is the easy winner. My vote would probably go to the original Angels in the Outfield, with Paul Douglas and Janet Leigh, followed closely by Eight Men Out and, if it’s still as entertaining as I remember it from many, many years ago, Bingo Long. The original Bad News Bears is up there, too.
Field of Dreams is one of my least favorites. But, again, I’m a cult of one.
I’ve never seen For the Love of the Game. I’ll put it on (a crowded) deck.
I know it's corny, but I always enjoy Major League. My now brother-in-law and sister took me to see Eight Men Out. He isn't a baseball fan. I enjoyed it despite the snoring going on next to me.
jfinnegan said:
I know it's corny, but I always enjoy Major League. My now brother-in-law and sister took me to see Eight Men Out. He isn't a baseball fan. I enjoyed it despite the snoring going on next to me.
Audiences at John Sayles movies can be divided into two groups: His fans, and the snorers they dragged with them.
Major League is more fun than its script has any right to be. I always enjoy it, too.
And I neglected to mention another contender: Moneyball.
Tie game, bottom of the ninth, runner on third, one out. Do you catch this deep foul ball?
https://twitter.com/Phillies/status/1704572188739702813
My first thought, like John Kruk’s in the booth, is a hard no. It took a so-so jump by the runner and a perfect throw to work. But then again … let it drop and you still need things to go just right on a 2-2 count, with Acuña on deck, to survive.
DaveSchmidt said:
Tie game, bottom of the ninth, runner on third, one out. Do you catch this deep foul ball?
https://twitter.com/Phillies/status/1704572188739702813
My first thought, like John Kruk’s in the booth, is a hard no. It took a so-so jump by the runner and a perfect throw to work. But then again … let it drop and you still need things to go just right on a 2-2 count, with Acuña on deck, to survive.
Just like they teach it! What was the catcher doing?
jfinnegan said:
What was the catcher doing?
Other than making sure he couldn’t be called for blocking the plate? Do you mean you’d want him on the other side of the line, cutting the throw off sooner and swiping back to tag?
DaveSchmidt said:
Other than making sure he couldn’t be called for blocking the plate? Do you mean you’d want him on the other side of the line, cutting the throw off sooner and swiping back to tag?
Yes. It ended up working out well, but he should have been on the other side of the plate. If the runner slid to the inside he would have been safe.
Phillies clinch the NL East.
W L Pct. GB
Philadelphia 88 69 .561 —
Chicago 82 75 .522 6
Pittsburgh 74 83 .471 14
New York 71 85 .455 16.5
St. Louis 69 88 .439 19
Montreal 69 89 .437 19.5
The best thing about those standings is that the Braves aren't in them. Congratulations on making the playoffs again this year.
DanDietrich said:
The best thing about those standings is that the Braves aren't in them. Congratulations on making the playoffs again this year.
Thanks, Dan. The current format is a crapshoot, but an exciting one.
DaveSchmidt said:
Phillies clinch the NL East.
W L Pct. GB
Philadelphia 88 69 .561 —
Chicago 82 75 .522 6
Pittsburgh 74 83 .471 14
New York 71 85 .455 16.5
St. Louis 69 88 .439 19
Montreal 69 89 .437 19.5
For some reason your post made me think about the respective NL East shortstops of my early baseball (and baseball card) affection -- mainly Larry Bowa, Don Kessinger, Frank Tavares, Bud Harrelson, Dal Maxvill and Tim Foli. I did a little time-wasting on the googlesphere, and was surprised to be reminded of all the divisional incest. Bowa played for the Phils, Cubs and Mets, Buddy for the Mets and Phils, Kessinger for the Cubs and Cards, Maxvill for the Cards and Pirates. And Foli played for the Expos, Pirates and Mets, as did Tavares. Kinda fun when you think about it. Ahhh...baseball.
Sidebar: Apparently during that era the Cardinals had a starting SS for a few years named Mike Tyson. I have no memory of that guy or his baseball card.
Both incredible and clueless.