« we had joy, we had fun | Main | running at the mouth »

game 4

The Clemens era comes to an end as the Jeff Weaver era drags on.

That's all I have to say about that.


Listed below are links to weblogs that reference game 4:

» No Sympathy from "Bawstin" Sports Pundits
I have no sympathy for Yankees fans. I hope Weaver brings them down the toilet for years to come.... [Read More]

» Baseball from Beth's Contradictory Brain
I've left a couple of comments on Michele's site about watching the world series. Might as well talk about it [Read More]


Here we go Yankees, here we go. Here we go Yankees, here we go. Here we go Yankees, here we go.

Oh, that's right. They LOST last night in the 12th inning and the Sausage King aka Clemens, didn't walk off with a win. Oh, what a shame.

It was a terrific game. The Yankees put on a great rally in the ninth, Clemens did a tremendous job of pitching after the first, and the Marlins bullpen other than Urbina was amazing as well. That's what the fall classic is supposed to be about.

The whole "last game ever" thing was a complete albatross. It clearly affected Clemens in both games and inspired the Marlins hitters in the first inning. The effect it had nearly cost the Yankees the ALCS and probably cost them the game last night. All I need to know is that the third Marlins run came on an RBI single by Lowell on a pitch that was 6 inches outside and 6 inches off the ground. For whatever reason, I think the Clemens hype, the Marlins were dialed in in the first inning. Hell, the Cabrera home run looked like he flicked his bat at the pitch, and it freakin' carries out of the hardest park in baseball to hit a home run in ?

Oy! Boomer goes tonight and on full rest will baffled the young fish.

Great game last night. Good to see Marlins win. Any suprise when you saw Weaver on the mound that the Marlins were going to win?

whispers GO MARLINS - GO PUDGDE! :-) The stupid announcers and even worse Fox promotionals are about to ruin watching the games for me. For everything past the 9th inning I had it on mute.

So, why in the world does the National League make pitchers hit? No, I don't need a history of baseball - I need a logical reason for a given out every time the pitcher comes to the plate. How many runners are left on base for the sake of tradition?

Say what you will, it was a great game. Had a little bit of baseball everything.

As for the pithcers batting in the National League, why shouldn't they? They are playing arent they? They are on the field, no? Why should they be any different?

Beth, no doubt. The Fox production of these games is an embarassment. Shaun Cassidy sang "God Bless America" for one reason - he is going to guest star on Malcom in the Middle. Are you freakin' kidding me ? What a joke!

Joe Buck and Tim McCarver are two of the biggest idiots going and the whole of their idiocy is greater than the sum of their parts. Somebody please put them out of their misery.

The in-game cell phone call is the last straw. The fact they called Simon from American Idol is pathetic. I cannot think of anything more ridiculous and stupid.

It's bad enough when your team loses. At least if the broadcast weren't so horrifically bad maybe you could enjoy the games for what they are, regardless of who wins or loses. Oh well.

Beth, were you watching the game last night?
Roger Clemens - an American League lifer - actually got a hit. He made an effort, and he was rewarded for his effort. Why on earth shouldn't pitchers hit for themselves? Hitting and playing in the field are both part of the game of baseball, pure and simple.

The Designated Hitter is a cheap gimmick - always has been and alway will be. Instead of focusing on the pitchers who can't hit, why not think about all the pitchers who are good hitters? A significant part of the legacy of great pitchers like Bob Gibson and Greg Maddux is that they were/are complete players. Opposing pitchers take them for granted at their own peril.

And even if a certain pitcher is a naturally poor hitter, there's plenty he can do to help his team win. Bunting, moving runners over, baserunning are all critical skills that can be learned through hard work.

Baseball is not improved by a gimmick like the DH, any more than it would be improved by titanium alloy bats or day-glo orange balls.

Who says he can't come back in game 7? I'd like to see him come in as a reliever...when's the last time THAT happened? Of course, I'd also like to see the result be a blown save.

"...as the Jeff Weaver era drags on."

Michele, given that you have a guy who is probably the best closer in the history of closers, it kinda seems like bad form to gripe about your other relief pitchers. ;-)

Ok, so you can argue for purity of the game the pitcher should have to hit. I won't disagree with that. But the reality of it sucks. And, if they have to hit, why the hell are they so bad at it? I don't care if they are only playing one in every three, four or five games, they should be able to hit. That only a handful of them are worth mentioning tells a lot.

OMG Yes, that call to Simon was horrible. That they had the cast of the new series Skin sitting in great seats - shameless. The stupid new aol character used all the time.

A significant part of the legacy of great pitchers like Bob Gibson and Greg Maddux is that they were/are complete players. Opposing pitchers take them for granted at their own peril.

Lifetime batting averages:

Bob Gibson - .206
Greg Maddux - .179 (through 2002)

Doesn't look like taking them for granted is that perilous....


It is perilous. A team can opt to walk the 8th batter with the bases loaded and 2 outs just to get to the pitcher. Easy strike out right? Unless of course, he happens to pound one out or just deep enough for two runners to score. I belive Dontrell Willis popped one out this season, as did one of the Chicago pitchers.

Having the pithcer bat adds a little something to the game.

Mark Belanger's career batting average: .228

Batting average is not the full measure of a ballplayer. It's everything he does taken together as a whole.

In 1969, Bob Gibson hit .246 and personally scored 11 runs, while only allowing 84 runs (76 earned) to be scored against him over the entire season.

In 2003, I count 31 Major League catchers with at least 50 at-bats who hit over .250 for the season, while 33 hit .250 or less. Guess we need another DH for those poor catchers.

Heck, with so many outfielders throwing to the wrong base and failing to hit the cut-off man these days, maybe we need Designated Fielders too...

You're funny MikeR. Yes, baseball is a statiticians wet dream. It's been played long enough there are stats for every possible outcome ever, because almost all of them have happened at least once.

But you'll never convince me that letting pitchers hit doesn't make the game a lot more boring 99% of the time!

Come on, guys. There is one and only one argument in favor of making the pitcher hit, and that is the baseball purist argument that it forces twice as much managerial strategy as the use of the DH requires.

Anyone who argues in favor of the pitcher hitting vs. a DH on the basis of the hitting ability of a pitcher is either a) an idiot, or b) full of crap. Yeah, some pitchers can hit a little. Kerry Wood is one of them. But there is no comparison to the use of a DH from a hitting or offensive stanpoint. 95% of pitchers in the NL ARE an offensive hitting liability. But both teams are under the same liability, so that's irrelevant.

Pitchers don't hit. They are not expected to. They don't practice hitting. At the plate they are only expected to do the "little things" that can sometimes be helpful in certain situations - which all hitters are expected to do. Pitchers are nearly an automatic out at the plate. A waste of a plate appearance. Managerial Strategy? blah. Taking a pitcher out of a game for the sake of a pinch hitter when a pitcher is doing well (like Clemans was last night) only hurts the team in the long run. Do pinch hitters have a better rate of success than a pitcher? Marginally I'd bet, but it would be an interesting study. What about bullpen pitchers.. are they better than the starters? not likely. Clemans was throwing harder in the last inning than any other. He should have been left in.

Is ASV an appropriate forum for a DH argument. Probably not. But for me, I like pitchers vs. hitters, not pitchers vs. pitchers trying to hit.

Um, there's always ESPN radio, folks. Jon Miller and Joe Morgan are broadcasting the games, so mute the tube if you can't stand Buck and McCarver. Baseball's better suited for radio anyway.

I'm no statistical guru. I'm really not a knee-jerk purist, either. Whenever changes can be made that don't negatively impact the fundamental nature of the sport, I'm all for it (for instance, I think it might not be a bad idea for the NHL to try allowing two-line passes). I just don't think the DH falls in that category.

A significant part of the legacy of great pitchers like Bob Gibson and Greg Maddux is that they were/are complete players. Opposing pitchers take them for granted at their own peril.

Lifetime batting averages:

Bob Gibson - .206
Greg Maddux - .179 (through 2002)

Doesn't look like taking them for granted is that perilous....

Babe Ruth was a pitcher.....


Bring on "dream" Weaver! LOL!