"A New York Treasure" --Village Voice

Straighten it Out


Joba’s on the hill tonight as the Yanks look to sweep the Rays.

The kid needs a good outing. Here’s hoping he comes through this evening.

Let’s Go Yan-Kees.

Share: Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via email %PRINT_TEXT


Show/Hide Comments 1-100
1 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 5:28 pm

Jeter SS
Damon LF
Teixeira 1B
Rodriguez 3B
Matsui DH
Swisher RH
Cano 2B
Gardner CF
Molina C

2 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 5:29 pm

What does our boy Cervelli have to do to get a start now and again!?

3 Chyll Will   ~  Sep 9, 2009 5:57 pm

Backstage passes to a Rockettes show, probably. But he'll probably start most if not all the games after the Yanks clinch home field, for what that's worth.

4 Just Fair   ~  Sep 9, 2009 7:09 pm

I told one of my students at open house this morning that she had to surrender her hat. The only B want to see in my class is from my pen. : D Great start. Eff you, Bartlett.

5 cult of basebaal   ~  Sep 9, 2009 7:14 pm

another lovely start from teh Jobber.

6 Raf   ~  Sep 9, 2009 7:22 pm

Got the k, but missed his spot badly

7 cult of basebaal   ~  Sep 9, 2009 7:31 pm

now THAT'S a bunt I wanted to see!

Nice spot Jetes!

8 The Hawk   ~  Sep 9, 2009 7:33 pm

monkeypants, I replied to your last post in "Jugglin'". I just thought I'd let you know because it might be important in helping you turn your life around.

Also it's long and I'd hate to feel like all that effort will just disappear into the void.

Go Joba! (?)

9 Raf   ~  Sep 9, 2009 7:37 pm

What if one player was hurt? What if one was off his game for unusual reasons for an extended period of time?

It would show up in the stats :)

10 weeping for brunnhilde   ~  Sep 9, 2009 7:38 pm

Not near a tv tonight, but consulting my box score, wtf is up with Joba?

11 Raf   ~  Sep 9, 2009 7:42 pm

[10] Same ol' same, walking too many batters. FWIW, he is going to the fastball more

12 Raf   ~  Sep 9, 2009 7:42 pm

[11] not walking, but falling behind in the count

13 Mr. OK Jazz TOKYO   ~  Sep 9, 2009 7:45 pm

Is it worth going back to read the 61 comments on the Joba-in-the-pen post?

Nice to read the Todd Drew post, thanks for that.

Kay and Flaherty enjoying their "9" conversation...I am not...

14 cult of basebaal   ~  Sep 9, 2009 7:46 pm

sure, that looked outish, with a squint ...

works for me.

15 Mr. OK Jazz TOKYO   ~  Sep 9, 2009 7:49 pm

Jayzuz Kay, can you stop mentioning all the d-list celebrities in the crowd?? Thankfully the tv camera work here is for NHK so don't have to see them..(instead we get random Japanese fans in the crowd, taking pictures when Matsui is at bat..not much more exciting..)

16 cult of basebaal   ~  Sep 9, 2009 7:52 pm

wow, last 81 games, we're 60-21.


17 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 7:53 pm

that was a nice hit robbie

the rays must be hoping that this year is an aberration for bossman junior

18 cult of basebaal   ~  Sep 9, 2009 7:53 pm

hot dog THIS Bossman.

19 cult of basebaal   ~  Sep 9, 2009 7:55 pm

well, Longoria made as good a play as BJ's was lousy.


20 Raf   ~  Sep 9, 2009 7:56 pm

Is it worth going back to read the 61 comments on the Joba-in-the-pen post?

Sure, it'll give you something to do between innings :)

21 Just Fair   ~  Sep 9, 2009 7:57 pm

The Rays are doing Joba a big favor by getting outs on the first pitch. Keep it up.

22 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:00 pm

[8] Interesting. I just got home and replied to your last post. I'll repost here, so you can turn your life around.

[61] No – if there’s a phenomena that is observable but not measured, then someone better get busy measuring it.

You are operating from, I think, a position of logical fallacy. If something is observable, it is measurable. If you say that someone is “intimidating,” the onus is you to support that observation. How do YOU measure intimidation? Did you see several players quake or soil themselves? if so, by all means report that measurement. Maybe the “intimidation factor” could be as simple as “quotient of players who trembled at the sight of X player.”

Byt if you claim to observe something, then the very fact means that there is something to measure. Now YOU go and figure out how to quantify it.

I don’t think comparing straight numbers out of context – as you are doing with Chamberlain and Hughes – necessarily ought to bring about a clear verdict.

What numbers are out of context? I merely cited the quantitative data and analyzed it. And I agree, there are SO many variables, that we can only look at the results and draw conclusions from those. Appeals to nebulous and, apparently, unprovable factors only get in the way.

Finally, I would point out that it is YOU who made a clear assertion–that Hughes in no way is as intimidating as Joba was. I only pointed out that there is no evidence to support this, and that from the evidence that we have it appears that Hughes was about as effective–if not more so–than Joba.

23 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:00 pm

fake michael kay is going to find the reading of that promo quite unacceptable

24 The Hawk   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:02 pm

[9] Exactly, but it wouldn't be reflective of what the player was like uninjured. Hence, a potentially misleading set of numbers.

25 seamus   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:02 pm

kind of quiet here.

26 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:06 pm

man up fans - that was not close to being a hit

27 seamus   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:06 pm

[26] they're just eager and excited. I'd probably have gotten excited to.

28 Raf   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:07 pm

[24] Not necessarily. There are all kinds of metrics and measurements. If a player, in our case a pitcher suffers an injury, it will show in the stats. Velocity would be down, hitters would be making more contact. Maybe more walks. So on and so forth.

29 seamus   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:07 pm

btw, I kind of found the stadium gaudy watching the games early this season. but i'm starting to adjust to it. and i like it now.

30 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:09 pm

damn shift

31 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:10 pm

Only had the game on for a few minutes, but this sure has been frustratin' to watch!

32 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:10 pm

Like weeping, I haven't seen a pitch (just tuning in now). I heard Jeter's single called by Sterling (he and Suzyn were just gurgling over how Jeterian it was).
But how could Joba have stuff good enough to K the side, and yet give up two singles a walk and a homer??? Seems to have been fine since then.

33 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:13 pm

[32] Low intimidation factor.
I kid, I kid. : )

Ok, enough of that. Let's go, boys!

34 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:13 pm

it's hard to really judge joba in these abbreviated starts
i missed the 1st inning (which doesn't seem too hot), but his other 2 innings were pretty good

35 Mr. OK Jazz TOKYO   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:14 pm

day off here, was excited to watch the game but..kind of boring...not as boring as a discussion about metrics, but still..

36 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:16 pm

[34] I know! When does he get to throw four innings??

37 Raf   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:17 pm

But how could Joba have stuff good enough to K the side, and yet give up two singles a walk and a homer???

It happens; a hitter can get a hold of a fastball if he guesses and times it right. Randy Johnson once struck out 19 batters but lost. McGwire got a hold of one that almost went through the Kingdome wall.

38 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:18 pm

[37] I know it happens, Raf, I want an explanation! Jeez. Where are all the know-it-alls this evening?

39 Just Fair   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:19 pm

[29] Feeling any excitement for tomorrow? Say @ 8:30 pm? : )

40 The Hawk   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:19 pm

[22] I may have made a clear assertion according to you, but I didn't say what I was asserting was clear. You using the word "clear" to describe my assertion isn't the same as me using the same word during the assertion.

Anyway, again - I am quite happy - and I don't want to repeat this too many times - to not quantify things. I'm content to talk about things like intimidation without having a number attached to it. So it is certainly not my responsibility to figure out how to quantify it. Why would I go to that trouble when I don't have a problem with discussing it as is?

Those that need everything quantified are solely responsible for fulfilling themselves. I won't have you people denying the existence of things just because you haven't figured out these essential complexities. That's why the first assignment is so important - and has been completed! Sort of. We are henceforth using the "soiled pants" metric in determining intimidation in baseball pitchers. Unfortunately, access to batters' undergarments has proven thus far to be surprisingly limited, so right now everyone has an Intimidation Factor of 0%. All subsequent discussion then must adhere to the fact that no-one intimidates anyone, ever. Also, the lack of skid marks identifies a trait in major league ballplayers heretofore hinted at but only now confirmed: Fear does not affect them.

Yes, indeed, the Yanks are nine games up in the American League East.

41 seamus   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:19 pm

[39] no. Giants fan here. :)

42 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:19 pm

[38] Sorry, I used up all my know-it-all-ness on the last thread discussion. I'm just a fan tonight!

43 seamus   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:20 pm

[38] oh, you called? actually I thought his pitches looked flat before the last two ks but i missed the first k and first hit or two.

44 The Hawk   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:21 pm

[33] You kid, but Flaherty was talking about just that a couple months ago.

45 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:23 pm

[43] Oh, good, seamus, I knew I could count on you.
So, you thought his pitches looked flat before the two K, but then looked better? He was coming around? (I'm looking for a bright side here.)

46 Just Fair   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:23 pm

[41] Bah. Yinz should be ashamed of yourself. : D I'm psyched but since this isn't Steelers Banter I'll leave it at that for now.

47 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:24 pm

[36] with tonight's game he has thrown 139.2 innings - so let's just say 140.
i think mk said he has 4 starts left (which sounds right if gaudin and mitre stay in the rotation). so 3 innings per start would put him at 152, and 4 innings per start at 156. if they want him to go around 6 in the playoffs i would think they need to get him to at least 5 before the season is out.

48 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:26 pm

[45] flash said he looked more aggressive after the 1st inning and the booth companions think the captain said something to him

49 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:26 pm

[47] Hm, so maybe four next start, then another four, then five, then five or six...

50 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:27 pm

[40] Anyway, again – I am quite happy – and I don’t want to repeat this too many times – to not quantify things. I’m content to talk about things like intimidation without having a number attached to it.

That's an interesting perspective. I don't agree, but it's interesting. In effect, I could claim something like, say: Derek Jeter is the greatest player in baseball history because he has awesomeness. I would be safe in making this assertion, and it would up to someone else a) not to disprove my thesis using numbers such as slugging percentage or on base percentage, but rather to b) to find the data to prove the existence of awesomeness.

I guess we approach things differently.

Enjoy the game.

51 cult of basebaal   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:29 pm

wow, BJ hot dogging *another* ball tonite ... that takes some doing.

52 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:30 pm

[50] Derek Jeter is the greatest player in baseball history because he has awesomeness.

You misspelled "grittiness".

53 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:31 pm

[52] Well, you know I have a penchant and reputation for typos and misspelling. ; )

54 Raf   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:31 pm

I won’t have you people denying the existence of things just because you haven’t figured out these essential complexities.

I'm still trying to figure out how Santa Clause visited when I lived in the projects. Did he climb through the window? The front door? The chimney leads to the incinerator so I don't think he would've gone through there. And how does no one notice a sled and 8 reindeer parked @ Wilwood Gardens?


55 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:31 pm

I've had about enough of Flash. Until this series I had absolutely no problem with him. Now I feel like he's become Joe Morganesque.

56 seamus   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:31 pm

[46] tomorrow will be kind of annoying around here with all the Steelers craziness. my facebook feed should be boring as all frack.

57 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:32 pm

[53] You told me so yourself! Well, the penchant part.

[54] You can't fool me. There ain't no sanity clause.

58 seamus   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:32 pm

[55] does it help to go "Flash! oh ohhhhhh Savior of the Universe!!!"

59 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:34 pm

[55] oh flash says plenty of goofy things. and for awhile he was bringing the yankees a lot of bad luck (which pj first noticed - i hope he returns here soon)

60 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:35 pm

[50] mp you don't think everything has to be quantifiable to have value do you?

61 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:36 pm

[56] The Patriots have already driven all Red Sox stuff off the pages and airwaves of the sports media.
Fortunately, I do not despise the Patriots. I actually like watching them, a lot. I'm not nearly interested enough to hear endless analysis of what a freaking genius Belicheck is for trading Richard Seymour, but at least I don't find it excruciating.

[58] Yes, it does! I love Queen.

62 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:38 pm

[56] Yeah. I loke the NFL, well sort of. BUt I dread the start of the NFL season. I don't have to deal with local Steeler craziness of the like (fortunately), but ESPN, FOX, etc become even more unwatchable when football season comes around. Was it just last week when, during the FOX Saturday game, THE national broadcast of MLB, the announcers were going on about their fantasy football teams?

63 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:39 pm

[60] No. But that is a loaded question--what do you mean, precisely?

64 cult of basebaal   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:39 pm

One of the best things about LA ... no NFL team.

We've still got UCLA and USC, which tends to fill the void, but it seems like baseball's climax gets more of the attention it deserves than in other places.

65 seamus   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:39 pm

[61] i don't hate the steelers either. I watch now and then. also, a great time to go shopping!!

66 cult of basebaal   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:40 pm

damn you Bartlett!

67 seamus   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:40 pm

[62] i love, love football!! damn nice play. ouch. anyway, back to football. i just love this time o fyear. baseball pennant/playoffs, football starts, beautiful forests!!

68 Just Fair   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:42 pm

[62] "loke" Is that more of that French-Candadian nonsense? Mon Dieu! : D

69 seamus   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:43 pm

woo hoo! was upton jogging?

70 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:43 pm

Was Upton totally fooled on that hit? It looked like he thought it was out of the park...or is he just playing so shallow that he knew he had no chance?

71 Raf   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:44 pm

hmmmmm, I think Upton may be looking @ a benching...

72 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:44 pm

[68] Yep. It's "like" with a French-Canadian lilt.

73 seamus   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:44 pm

you can't lose the first set every time right? crazy.

74 Chyll Will   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:45 pm

Yo! What's up with Upton?? He didn't even try to go after that and let it bounce over the wall. Who does he think he is, Manny?

75 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:46 pm

I don't watch many games. Do opposing teams use any sort of reverse-shift when Teix bats RH?

76 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:49 pm

[63] yeah i jusr re-read the question, sorry to phrase it that way.

i am mostly referring to this statement:

b) to find the data to prove the existence of awesomeness.

i know there is some tongue and cheek to this example with the idea of "awesomeness," but some concepts or traits or whatever may not have quantitaive data to prove their existence or capture their significance.

77 Chyll Will   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:49 pm

[74] I'm in the kitchen cooking beef stew, so I'm watching but away from the computer. If I seem a bit disjointed or such, that's why >;)

78 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:49 pm

[75] no - just lh

79 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:50 pm

I hate to be annoying (false, as you all know), but observable isn't the same as quantifiable.

80 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:51 pm

[77] Yum. Perfect for a cool September day. Lots of onions, I hope.

81 Just Fair   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:54 pm

Was there any word on Robertson today?

82 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:54 pm

burrell is quite slow - i was a wee bit worried the yanks wold sign him in the off-season - thank cashman they didn't and ended up with swsiher and tex instead

83 Chyll Will   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:54 pm

[80] Sorry, not a lot. Onions and I don't necessarily agree, but we do have an understanding. Still, I'd put my beef stew up against anyone else.

84 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:55 pm

[81] he's not seeing andrews until tomorrow

85 Chyll Will   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:56 pm

[82] Still a bit surprised the Mutts didn't get Ibanez, but that will wear off completely by the end of the week...

86 Mr. OK Jazz TOKYO   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:57 pm

NFL...yawn....not a more revolting breed on earth than "genius" football coaches..

Upton yanked from the game!

Think it's nap time here..

87 Just Fair   ~  Sep 9, 2009 8:57 pm

[84] Thanks. I definitely have my fingers crossed.

88 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:02 pm

[76] My example was aimed at a prior discussion with Hawk, in which (s)he stated that Hughes was in no way as intimidating as Joba as a reliever. Now, in and of itself this is an innocuous claim. But it was lodged in a larger discussion of the proper role of each pitcher.

In cases such as this--where a (baseball) policy decision is tied to the claim (e.g., moving Joba to the pen, or starting Nady over Swisher, or trading away A-Rod, etc)--I think that it is incumbent on the claimant to justify the claim. Or, more importantly, to justify the decision that may derive largely from the claim.

So, I have no problem with someone claiming that Jeter is more awesome than A-Rod, or that (s)he feels that Joba is more intimidating than Hughes, or whatever. Hell, my favorite player of all time is Mattingly. But I also believe that if I make a claim, such as Mattingly is better than McGwire, I have an obligation to defend that statement with more than just "because I think so". And if I promote a particular personnel decision (Hughes should be a starter because he is cool), I am doubly obligated to define "cool" and its effects, and prove those effects exist.

[79] Technically true. But when we are talking baseball, especially on this site with the very clever folks who post, either the observable is quantifiable (how many HRs has A-Rod hit) or its effects are quantifiable (CC is a tough pitcher, demonstrated by his low batting average against)...or at the very least, the expected effects of an observation can be quantified (winning big creates momentum, so we might expect teams to have a higher win % in games after winning a blowout).

89 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:04 pm

[75] I know that shifts are harder against RH batters, because you need to keep the 1B at home. Still, it seems that extreme shifts are far more common against LH than RH. I wonder why? I wonder if LH have more pronounced pull tendencies, because they face more opposite hand pitchers or the like?

90 The Hawk   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:08 pm

[54] Ha! I know your story is a fake - because you misspelled "Santa Claus". Try again, saboteur!

91 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:08 pm

[88] Right, in a baseball context, I wouldn't really insist on the distinction.
A simple, maybe oversimplified way to state the main point: if something (awesomeness, intimidation, grit, ...) has effects that make a difference we care about, then there should be no problem in principle quantifying those effects. They're going to be in the form of runs, runs prevented, stuff like that.

92 Chyll Will   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:09 pm

[86] Not surprised they pulled Upton, but I missed it; did Maddon pinch-hit for him or did he do a Billy and yank him after the play?

93 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:10 pm

[89] I'm almost sure that lefties do have more pronounced pull tendencies, though I don't know exactly why. All the famous shifts have been against lefties. And you're right, leaving the 1B home doesn't explain enough, since e.g. the Rays shifted against Teix with Jeter on second (so they had to leave Longoria near third).

94 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:12 pm

Chyll, my stew involves large quantities of onions. (It's basically whatever I remember and feel like doing from Julia Child's recipe.)

95 The Hawk   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:12 pm

[50] Using "awesomeness" there really amounts to a straw man argument. It seems condescending, at least. Then you say "I guess we approach things differently"! Yeah "differently": I'm an airhead valley girl and you're a rocket scientist, right? ; )

96 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:13 pm

[93] In the old days, they used to say that lefties tended to be more low ball hitters. Again, I never understood why, though maybe the two are related.

I might speculate that it has something to do with more lefties being self-taught as opposed to natural LH batters? If so, would having your dominant (natural) hand on the bottom of the bat create more of a "pull" swing?

97 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:14 pm

[89] [93] isn't the "hot zone" for most lefties low and inside - which would be a location that lends itself to pulling the ball

98 Chyll Will   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:15 pm

Blimpie's just doesn't look like real food. It's like Subway Light®... (and I won't even begin on Subway...)

99 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:18 pm

Hello, Lou!

100 Just Fair   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:18 pm

Cheers, Captain. : D

Show/Hide Comments 101-200
101 cult of basebaal   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:19 pm

::stands ... applaudes::

102 Chyll Will   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:19 pm

A solid hit, too.

103 The Hawk   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:19 pm

[76] See, I think all those things are quantifiable. No-one has figured it out, but if it exists, it's measurable. Some people seem to think if it hasn't been measured already, then it must not exist, or at least must not be important. I just think it would be such an incredibly complex thing to quantify, no-one's going to bother. Stat heads are content to dismiss these things, and people like me are content to discuss them without stats. This dynamic has been demonstrated tonight, in fact.

104 seamus   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:20 pm


105 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:20 pm

[95] Using “awesomeness” there really amounts to a straw man argument. It seems condescending, at least.

Condescending, perhaps. But more or less parallel to intimidation as an analytical term, which was my point.

Then you say “I guess we approach things differently”! Yeah “differently”: I’m an airhead valley girl and you’re a rocket scientist, right? ; )

Not at all. I pointed out the difference: you feel that a person who makes a claim is less obligated to defend the claim (the burden of proof is on other people to find the proof). I tend to see the burden of proof falling on the claimant. You seem to start from a premise or claim, and assume that there must be evidence out there to support it, if only one looks hard enough. If the evidence at hand does not support the claim, then the evidence is flawed in some way. Yours is largely deductive reasoning. I tend to start with the evidence at hand and draw conclusions from that. Mine is largely inductive reasoning.

Simply different ways of approaching a problem.

106 Just Fair   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:21 pm

Now it's time to finish being shut out by this doofus. N(ew)ieman!!!!

107 Chyll Will   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:23 pm

Bring em in, guys!

108 Just Fair   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:23 pm

Damon should steal.

109 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:25 pm

[103] I don't think that's right. When stat heads think about something that nobody has quantified, and they wonder whether it's real, they try to measure it. (For example, the "clutch" factor.)

I think that's very admirable. The converse, "I just know it and I don't have to investigate further," I find depressing.

It's also really important to remember (and this is what I think monkeypants was pointing out with the "awesomeness" example) that although there are plenty of real qualities that nobody's measured, there are also plenty of bullshit concepts that people use honestly thinking they're talking about something real. The stat heads of the world are the people who work to see which is which.

110 Chyll Will   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:26 pm


111 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:26 pm

[88] thanks for your take mp. i appreciate where you are coming from and i believe i have a healthy respect for numbers and stats. hell i have used econometric modelling enough to back-up my theories and have appreciated being able to quantitatevly discuss certain concepts; but i do think some concepts are more amorphous and are not necessarily quantifiable. though i will say that i think in baseball you are able to quantitatively measure a vast bulk of things.

112 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:27 pm

I guess that [109] was my official Why I Like Geeks comment.

113 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:27 pm

[103] That is a strawman argument. You assume a priorithat such factors as "intimidation" exist (or, more to the specific case, that Joba was more intimidating than Hughes) even if there is no existing evidence. You did not pose it as a hypothesis. And when presented with counter-evidence, that evidence was dismissed along with the approach.

"Stat heads" (a pejorative term) are not uncurious or merely satisfied with existing data. At least not this one. In fact, the opposite. When presented with a claim (Joba intimidation > Hughes intimidation), I attempted to find evidence. If he was more intimidating, surely this would show up in K rates or ERA or opposing batting average. If not, then I drew the plausible conclusion that the premise was flawed.

But I still believe that the burden of proof falls on the claimant. It's not my job to find the evidence to prove your supposition, nor am I dismissive or uncurious if I do not feel that there is sufficient evidence to make the claim.

114 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:29 pm

[112] Can we be friends?

This game has been maddening!

115 Eirias   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:29 pm

I love that I am still amazed at how good Jeter is and has been. We all know he isn't the greatest of all time or anything, but he has been so consistently good, for so long, for only the Yankees that, every once in awhile, I'm just astonished about how lucky we are as fans to have #2.

116 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:32 pm


i heard the hit on the radio in the car. i saw the quick replay at the end of the inning. i hope to catch the full AB and reaction later, either online or a tv highlight.

his next hit is even bigger! : )

how'd Joba do? i'm just getting in and will catch up soon. who'll be the walk-off hero tonight?!

117 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:34 pm

I saw a link someplace to an article about how Jeter's swing changed after his 2003 injury...does anyone know what site that was on?

118 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:34 pm

albie always finds a way to sucker me back

119 Just Fair   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:35 pm

[116] Jeter in the 10th. Why not, right?

120 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:36 pm

This is a loss (assuming it is) I can stand, actually. Plenty of good news and feel-good stuff, including a head-scratchingly good bullpen performance, and maybe Joba is starting to find his way. And Jeter.

121 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:36 pm

[119] I like your thinking!

122 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:38 pm

i don't think this is chess, maybe checkers?

123 Chyll Will   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:39 pm

[122] Maybe because he realizes his lefty sucks?

124 Just Fair   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:40 pm

[121] Prove it. ; )

125 Just Fair   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:41 pm

Pinch runner. Bring on Pena.

126 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:41 pm

crown matsui

127 The Hawk   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:41 pm

[105] "Awesomeness" is a parallel to intimidation only on the most technical level. I don't know what you mean precisely by "analytical" but "awesomeness" is used as a general good/bad, thumbs up/thumbs down value indicator. It is also a discrete descriptor; it does not necessitate anything from any other party except the one saying "awesome". (To say someone is "intimidating" suggests an effect on other parties.)

Not only that but "awesomeness" has a clear connotation of thoughtlessness, having been used in countless valley girl/Wayne's World type of jokes, etc. It's brainless teenage slang, or at least that's its pedigree.

I don't think the two words are at all comparable for the terms of the discussion, except to be condescending and make the other person's argument look like something other than what it is, hence my accurate use of the term "straw man".

I think your second paragraph really shows the crux of a misunderstanding. I certainly do not make claims assuming there must be evidence. Why would I make a claim if I didn't see evidence for it already? There would be nothing to motivate such a claim. No, the difference in approach is you want premises or claims to adhere to your chosen form of evidence. I find that form of evidence to be insufficient to come to certain conclusions, for various reasons, depending on the case.

128 Chyll Will   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:42 pm

Please don't bunt...

129 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:42 pm

[124] Well played [polite tennis applause].

: )

130 Just Fair   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:43 pm

Or Jr. As long as old creaky knees is resting. Holy shit. Go dye your hair Maddon.

131 randym77   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:43 pm

I would love to see Jeter pass Pete Rose for all-time hits.

132 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:43 pm

suh-weet!!! : )

133 Shaun P.   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:44 pm

He threw it away! He threw it away!

Gosh, I think I picked the right time to turn this game on. =)

134 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:44 pm

i almost feel sorry for the rays with how things are going for them this year and possibly, repeat possibly trending

135 Chyll Will   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:45 pm

[123] Wait for it...

136 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:45 pm

[120] I humbly bow before the baseball gods, even though I did say "assuming". I prostrate myself before Nick Swisher (which seems kind of dangerous now that I think of it). I beg the Captain's forgiveness.

Let's get the W! SCORE TRUCK TIME!

137 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:46 pm

[127] No, the difference in approach is you want premises or claims to adhere to your chosen form of evidence.

No. I a) want premises to be adhere to some, any form of evidence (that is not self-referential), and b) do not feel the burden of proof falls on the audience but rather on the claimant.

138 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:46 pm

[122] Maybe tic-tac-toe. I think checkers is a little over their heads, honestly.

139 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:47 pm

[131] me too!

today won't mean a thing to Derek unless we win...

let's WIN !!!

140 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:48 pm


141 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:48 pm

Oh shut up, Michael.


142 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:49 pm


Oh, hey, smart move! Now it's checkers.

143 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:49 pm


do it up, Jorge!!!

144 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:49 pm

Shithouse out

Ball Four in

145 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:50 pm

[142] wait maddon with a move - maybe now it's connect 4

146 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:50 pm

My son just pointed out that it might be smarter to let Brett bat, because he's unlikely to GIDP.

147 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:51 pm

[145] Oh let's face it, it's just scissor-paper-rock.

148 OldYanksFan   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:51 pm

This game is on ESPN. After Jeters hit, miraculously, none of the commentators said a word. They allowed the picture with just the crowd noise for quite a while. A nice moment from the (usually) butchers at ESPN.

149 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:51 pm

[147] You sunk my battleship!

150 OldYanksFan   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:52 pm

[146] Interesting point.

151 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:53 pm

not sure why, but this feels like October to me.

i guess it's good practice...

152 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:53 pm

[146] Does he play chess?

; )

153 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:54 pm

[152] Does he ever.

Come on, Jorgie!!

154 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:54 pm

[148] i hope they show the entire highlight later. and that kruk doesn't ruin it...

[147] Mille Bornes!!! ; )

155 The Hawk   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:55 pm

[103] That is a strawman argument. You assume a priorithat such factors as “intimidation” exist (or, more to the specific case, that Joba was more intimidating than Hughes) even if there is no existing evidence. You did not pose it as a hypothesis. And when presented with counter-evidence, that evidence was dismissed along with the approach.

It sounds an awful lot like you are claiming that intimidation doesn't factor into performance. I don't know what kind of evidence you require, but I don't feel compelled to rethink that particular point. Call it an assumption if you want but intimidation exists and means something in the game of baseball. There is tons of anecdotal evidence of this, and if you haven't heard anyone talk or write about it in general, I don't know what to tell you. As far as Chamberlain's intimidation factor (and subsequent lack thereof), that has been written and talked about as well.

I don't think there was any evidence provided that contradicted the idea that Chamberlain is more intimidating than Hughes out of the bullpen, so I couldn't have dismissed it. And even if I had dismissed it, that would not be a straw man argument. A straw man argument would require me to reframe your argument in a disingenuous, easily refutable way. I didn't do that, I don't think.

Stat head is only a pejorative term for those who are wrapped up in its orthodoxy. I don't have a problem with statistics nor statisticians. I have Baseball Reference bookmarked and everything.

156 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:56 pm

jorge jorge hip hip

157 Just Fair   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:56 pm

Unfuckingbelievable. Whoo-hoo.

158 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:56 pm


159 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:56 pm

[154] Coup-Fourré!!

160 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:56 pm

King Me! er, Check Mate!, uh...Gin!

161 OldYanksFan   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:56 pm

HIP HIP !!!!!!!!!!!!!

162 Chyll Will   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:56 pm


163 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:56 pm

i fucking LOVE this team!!!

now, his buddy Derek can enjoy his achievement!!! : )

164 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:57 pm

jorge posada in the stadium with the bat

165 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:57 pm

[157] Perfect. Unbefuckinglievable.

Now, co-pie tonight???

166 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:57 pm

[159] nice, dude! i'll have to go thru those cards when i go home to NY for Turkey Day.

ooh, i really hope Derek gets it here. i wanna see it!!!

167 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:57 pm

[164] A fucking lead pipe, baby.

168 Just Fair   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:57 pm

If they weren't winning I would not be suprised to see him lay down another bunt. C'mon Jeter.

169 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:57 pm

i'm standing

170 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 9:59 pm

float one up there for him!

171 OldYanksFan   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:00 pm

The Baltimore BP does it again. Sox up 7-4.

172 The Hawk   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:00 pm

[137] Well there ya go! My bad, I should have mentioned the evidence, which I refer to in [155]. I honestly don't think evidence was actually requested, but now everyone's on the same page - sweet.

173 The Hawk   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:00 pm

Boo-ing a walk, hahaha.

174 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:00 pm


175 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:01 pm

[171] fuck.

176 Chyll Will   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:01 pm

Worst. Walk. Ever...

177 Just Fair   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:03 pm

Shit. Off day tomorrow. Rats. Friday @ 7:25 sounds good. This team hasn't lost much lately. Wow. This is the first game I've watched on a school night since June. Things weren't as rosy back then. Awesome.

178 edoubletrouble   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:04 pm

So very exciting ... Jeter makes me love this game. I'll admit it.

179 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:04 pm

I'm kind of happy about that walk, myself. There's something nice about having Jeter share with Lou for a day (at least).

180 Mr. OK Jazz TOKYO   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:06 pm

saw Jorgie's home run, then Jeter's walk. now NHK-tv here has cut to Mariners-Angels...double yawn! Oh well, am sure Mo will close it out. will watch Ichiro lead off then get to that important nap!

181 The Hawk   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:06 pm

Man they are really overselling this hits record thing, throwing Jeter's face up next to Gehrig, Ruth. I love Jeter and all but come on now.

182 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:07 pm

bruney time

183 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:07 pm

[155] There is tons of anecdotal evidence of this, and if you haven’t heard anyone talk or write about it in general, I don’t know what to tell you.

Ah, but did not claim that Joba was intimidating...you claimed he was MORE intimidating than Hughes. One would expect this intimidation factor to show up, but (as I demonstrated) it does not seem to.

So, I will willingly grant that intimidation exists. I will not, however, grant that Joba-Reliever is more Intimidating than Hughes-Reliever, unless a compelling case can be made. Most importantly, I would not advocate making decisions about their relative roles based until the burden of proof is met.


As for the larger point: yes, there is plenty of anecdotal evidence that intimidation exists, or that A-Rod is not clutch, or that bunting is winning baseball, that HRs kill rallies, that walks clog the bases, Jeter is a great defensive short stop, and so forth. Some widely held assumptions--for which there is lots of anecdotal evidence (e.g. Joe Morgan says so, or I saw Jeter make a jump throw)--are shown to be tenuous at best, and often simply wrong, when non-anecdotal evidence is examined.

Returning one last time to our case study, intimidation: I suspect that Hughes is every bit as intimidating as Joba, and this shows up in their equal levels of success on the field as reliever.s I suspect that the greater amount of anecdotal evidence about Joba's intimidation is due to the dramatic way in which he was dropped into the bullpen in 2007, the infamous Joba Rules, the T-Shirts, etc. There is, I suspect, more legend than reality involved.

184 Mattpat11   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:08 pm

Why is Brian Bruney in a close game?

185 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:08 pm

[179] i hear ya, but i wanted to see it live. that won't happen now...

Ace & Albie sure did kick some major ass tonight!

huh, it's Bruney. fasten your seatbelts, people!

186 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:08 pm

[181] On this, I agree with you entirely! Assuming the game ends as expected, they get to milk this for another game!

187 Chyll Will   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:08 pm

[179] Next game is gonna be Standing Room Only. The media here will be insufferable. Traffic will be unbelievable.

Yummy! >;)

188 Just Fair   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:08 pm

Hey it's Buzz Kill Bruney. Seriously, dude. WTF!!!!!

189 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:08 pm

wait a minute, Jeter got his 300th stolen base tonight?!?!?! how come no one told me?!

he has 25 this season. i think that's his 300th. WOW!!! love it!!! :)

fuck you, BB

190 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:09 pm

whew. scary.

191 Mattpat11   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:10 pm

[179] And I'm going to the game on Friday, so I get to see it

192 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:11 pm

[189] Suzyn announced the 300th.

Girardi adopts the unusual tactic of racing his king out to the middle of the board.
Oddly, it appears to be working!

193 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:11 pm

1 more.


it's Cokey

194 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:11 pm

Seriously, why is Mo not in this game? Anybody? Did I miss something?

195 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:12 pm

[193] Creve!

196 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:12 pm

[194] nothing has been said yet - my speculation is maybe they don't want to use him back-to-back yet

197 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:12 pm

[194] I think it has to do with not being able to castle through check?

198 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:14 pm

[192] that's HUGE!!! only 155 players have ever amassed 300 SB's. A-Rod & Mike Cameron on super close. believe it or not, Edgar Renteria is next in line. Beltran and Figgins are kinds close, too...

Jeter 1 of 15 to accrue 200 HR, 300 SB, 2,000 Hits (A-Rod soon. 300-300 for him, also)

199 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:15 pm

my mk you are a twit sometimes - every other player than gehrig has been in his rear view for some time now

200 Just Fair   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:15 pm

Joba picked a good start to be rather mediocre. again. harrumph.

Show/Hide Comments 201-243
201 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:16 pm

[194] all they said is that he worked last night. no word from Petey. prolly nothing...

ugh. please end this...NOW! i'm hungry.

202 Chyll Will   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:16 pm

Dude, seriously? Just throw a strike.

203 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:16 pm


204 The Hawk   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:17 pm

[183] There is, I suspect, more legend than reality involved.


Interesting. But you can't prove it.

205 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:17 pm


206 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:17 pm

blew it by him. game over!

41 over .500

207 ms october   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:17 pm

yeah nice win team - good night for the yankees and jeter- i even feel good about joba's last 2 innings

and cokey with the save - hopefully he gets interviewed

208 Chyll Will   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:17 pm

[202] Thank you. Geez!

209 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:18 pm

my hair is still longer than Manny's. and MUCH cleaner! : )

wish they were showing BBTN, so i could see the Jeter reel, but it's LAD-ARI.

210 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:19 pm

[204] You're right...and that's why I used the word "suspect." But I can show that Joba's performance as a reliever was no better than Hughes' as a reliever, and in fact I have already done so.

211 Chyll Will   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:19 pm

[201] Ha! I was thinking the same exact thing. I have a bowl of homemade stew waiting for me. Excuuuuuuse me! >;)

212 The Hawk   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:20 pm

[183] One would expect this intimidation factor to show up, but (as I demonstrated) it does not seem to.

Sure but it's not as if it shows up in the numbers with other pitchers elsewhere, either. Trying to glean what successes are derived from some kind of intimidation factor would be like reading tea leaves. Or worse.

213 The Hawk   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:22 pm

[210] I know why you used the word "suspect". What I'm saying is what is the point of discussion suspicions that you can't prove? Why even mention it without evidence?

214 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:22 pm

[211] i'm headed to my traditional Wed night pizza with the baseball paper (usa today sports weekly) and ipod! : )

215 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:23 pm

[212] OK, this is an interesting line of discussion. If gleaning the intimidation factor from other factors in a pitcher's success is virtually impossible, why should intimidation be invoked as a key criterion for determining that a pitcher should be a reliever or starter, which is where this whole debate started? It seems that pretty much all we have to go one is performance.

216 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:23 pm

Hey, look who's pitching for the Orioles: it's Sean Henn!

217 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:27 pm

[216] i saw the transaction at MLBTR last nite. O's had a slight thread against Bard last inning and...nuthin'.

i'm now starving. gotta eat and practice/compose.

218 The Hawk   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:28 pm

[215] It seems that pretty much all we have to go on is performance.

I agree with that wholeheartedly.

219 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:32 pm

[217] I thought it was against Papelbon.

Enjoy your pizza.

220 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:33 pm

By the way, kudos to Joe Maddon for pulling BJ Upton. That was an embarrassing performance and Maddon did the right thing.

Also props to the Rays for their reaction (applause) to Jeter's third hit of the night.

221 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:33 pm

[213] We can discuss the unprovable (or perhaps better, the less provable); indeed it is interesting and fun, and typically involves positing theories and invoking evidence--albeit inconclusive--in pursuit of explanations. I say I suspect that the legend is greater than reality, and I then cite relative pitching performances based on empirical evidence (k rates, batting averages against, etc.). This seems to account for both the anecdotal evidence (Flash said so) and the empirical data. You make a counter claim, that Joba is the ultimate intimidator, and cite anecdotal evidence (Flash said so), and reject empirical present data as incomplete. That's a fine discussion.

222 The Hawk   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:35 pm

[215] I don't know where the debate started exactly, but my original assertion was Hughes isn't as intimidating a as pitcher as Chamberlain. That's about it.

I didn't say I want Joba in the bullpen; in fact I said the opposite.

223 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:35 pm

[218] Well, maybe this is a good place to agree to leave off for a while. I have work to do tonight and an early day tomorrow.

224 The Hawk   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:36 pm

[221] Then I guess we just had a fine discussion.

225 The Hawk   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:37 pm

[223] Nope - [222] was better and [224] even better still!

This one is showing a decline from that peak, I suspect.

226 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:43 pm

[222] Then I misunderstood the thrust of your claim--I thought that you said (or implied) that you HAD preferred Joba in the pen (presumably because he was so intimidating) but now that the ship had sailed, so you preferred him in the rotation.

I still question the whole intimidation thing (i.e., that Joba was more intimidating than Hughes). It is true, as you say, that I tend to trust empirical data over anecdotal observation. I think there is a good deal of evidence to show that anecdotal evidence, such as announcers' observations, are more likely to be skewed or distorted than "the numbers" (on this, I tend to subscribe to the Neyer/James/Goldman school).

227 monkeypants   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:44 pm

[225] Drat, I ruined it! Say something final, quick!

228 RIYank   ~  Sep 9, 2009 10:54 pm

From Suzyn Waldman's report:

When Posada came in to pinch hit, Jeter said to Pettitte, "This guy [Balfour] loves his fastball, Jorge's gonna hit one out on him."

Later the Yankees were kidding him: "Oh, nice, you steal the spotlight from your best friend on his big night by hitting a game-winning homer."

Mo: the ovation from the fans was great, but it's the least they can do after what Jeter gave them.

229 jeaner   ~  Sep 9, 2009 11:01 pm

Awesome game!
And, how appropriate for Derek to set the record against the team of Cal Ripken! It was Derek ( I can attest, having been there) who led the Yankees to the top of the dugout to applaud Cal when he sat out the game and set the new record for consecutive games, besting Lou Gehrig.; now it will be Derek bettering a record of Lou Gehrig's.


230 Chyll Will   ~  Sep 9, 2009 11:23 pm

[220] From TampaBay.com:

Rays centerfielder B.J. Upton was pulled from the game in the sixth inning because his sprained left ankle was bothering him. "We're going to have to rest him for a bit," manager Joe Maddon said.

So far the response has been "Bullshit!", but if it really was the case, Maddon's a fool for not being more cautious in the first place.

231 Mr. OK Jazz TOKYO   ~  Sep 9, 2009 11:47 pm

[229] ???

232 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 11:52 pm

[231] i saw your follow up on the Horace bit. would be cool if your friend was part of that entourage!

i love derek jeter! : )

233 thelarmis   ~  Sep 9, 2009 11:55 pm

Andy, CC & AJ this weekend vs. the Oreo's.

man, i wish we were playing tomorrow. maybe i'll drink beer instead...

234 Mr. OK Jazz TOKYO   ~  Sep 9, 2009 11:56 pm

[232] Will let you know! Watching M's-Angels now..the nap didn't take

[229] I was rude, I should have said "Hallo, jeaner! Welcome to the Banter, think you are new here? And you may be confused..I don't recall Ripken ever playing for Tampa..but you are right about Jeter!"

235 Diane Firstman   ~  Sep 10, 2009 12:10 am

So .... anybody have 2 extra tix for Friday .... I'm willing to pay decent money for them ...

236 williamnyy23   ~  Sep 10, 2009 12:23 am

[234] I think jeaner meant it will be appropriate for Jeter to break the record against Baltimore this weekend. It would be kind of cool if Cal Ripken was at the game. Not only is there the SS link, but the Gehrig one as well.

[235] I don't have extras, but do have tickets to Friday's game. Needless to say, for the first time ever, I was rooting against Jeter in the bottom of the 8th.

237 Mr. OK Jazz TOKYO   ~  Sep 10, 2009 12:31 am

[236] Multiple apologies to jeaner! I must work on my reading comprehension skills...I blame this dreadfully boring M's-Angels game on tv..think a trip to a jazz cafe will be on the menu now, enjoy the rare afternoon off!. Enjoy the game tomorrow, william!

238 Boatzilla   ~  Sep 10, 2009 12:33 am

[86] FYI guys and gals, Upton was playing with a sprained ankle. Those dopes in the booth should have better information. Anyway, that's why he was taken out, he simply couldn't run at full speed. So they spend the whole game questioning his character (not so subtle racism? Cadillacing? Come on). Can you imagine if Jeter loped after a ball....it would be like "Something must be wrong with Derek."

239 williamnyy23   ~  Sep 10, 2009 6:17 am

[238] A sprained ankle had nothing to do with Upton trying to make a basket catch on a ball he could have camped under. Upton has a history of putting style over substance and was repeatedly disciplined by Maddon last year. Criticism of him yesterday was fair.

240 Boatzilla   ~  Sep 10, 2009 6:27 am

[239] How would you know what caused him to make the play that way? Nobody knows. I never played center field with a sprained ankle, but I imagine it's not easy. The dude could probably not run at top speed. Why not give him the benefit of the doubt?

241 Raf   ~  Sep 10, 2009 10:19 am

How would you know what caused him to make the play that way?

Because he's done it before?

While that botch in CF was inexcusable for the most part, Upton has a habit of catching the ball that way. It caught up to him last night. I suspect he won't change. I don't think he should.

242 williamnyy23   ~  Sep 10, 2009 10:23 am

[240] Nothing caused him to catch it that way...as [241] notes, that is how he catches most balls. If the Rays are fine with him doing that on every ball, then they have to live with plays like last night. I suspect that they would prefer Upton get in better position to field balls that hang up in the air for so long.

243 Raf   ~  Sep 10, 2009 10:32 am

As a matter of fact, YES aired a replay where he made a catch like that in Tampa

feed Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via email
"This ain't football. We do this every day."
--Earl Weaver