Lets try a new way of doing this:
Offensive player of the game: ?? (either team)
Defensive Player of the game: ?? (either team)
THE player of the game: ?? (and here, this is the guy who’s team has won)
Players of the Game for October 23, 2005
-
Baseball=Life
- Baseball Deity
- Posts: 1031
- Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 11:16 pm
- Location: SF, CA
I can't say anything about POTGs (yet) but from what I saw, the other team's (i.e. the team I wasn't on, i.e. scott, peter, dave and paul's team) umpires really brought the business end of their strike zone stick. I didn't say much during the game (as I wouldn't argue strike calls agaisnt me, it seemed odd to argue ball calls against me), but I know I took a 2-0 pitch down the pipe that was called ball three, and while on base or coaching I saw some knee area strikes called high and other oddities.
On the other end of the spectrum, I heard a lot of complaining from batters while I was catching and I didn't appreciate it. Were there a lot of questionable calls? Yes, there were... there always are and there always will be and I've always had the mentality that if it's questionable it should be called a strike. But, there were very few truly bad calls... maybe two or three, maybe four or five. None of the ones (i noticed) were a strike three or a ball four (called a strike)... those of us at or over 6 feet tall need to remember that we have very tall strike zones (especially if we stand straight up, which most of us do).
I think people started getting frustrated late in the game and making bad decisions, and that coupled with a more or less "undeserved" series of walks in the 6th or 7th gave us the advantage we needed to win the game.
Anyway.... that's my piece... post the box scores so I can boost my post count
On the other end of the spectrum, I heard a lot of complaining from batters while I was catching and I didn't appreciate it. Were there a lot of questionable calls? Yes, there were... there always are and there always will be and I've always had the mentality that if it's questionable it should be called a strike. But, there were very few truly bad calls... maybe two or three, maybe four or five. None of the ones (i noticed) were a strike three or a ball four (called a strike)... those of us at or over 6 feet tall need to remember that we have very tall strike zones (especially if we stand straight up, which most of us do).
I think people started getting frustrated late in the game and making bad decisions, and that coupled with a more or less "undeserved" series of walks in the 6th or 7th gave us the advantage we needed to win the game.
Anyway.... that's my piece... post the box scores so I can boost my post count
-
Baseball=Life
- Baseball Deity
- Posts: 1031
- Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 11:16 pm
- Location: SF, CA
Well, i would agree, and I was verbaly upset at some of the calls. But there are two things going on, both relate to the level of experiance we have with this.
1.) We are not used to having to worry about strikes and balls, as batters.
2.) Being an ump is a very different and new experiance for most people.
Also, the umps kept changing, which is ok for our needs for now. However, it did mean that the strike zone kept changing from at-bat to at-bat.
1.) We are not used to having to worry about strikes and balls, as batters.
2.) Being an ump is a very different and new experiance for most people.
Also, the umps kept changing, which is ok for our needs for now. However, it did mean that the strike zone kept changing from at-bat to at-bat.
-
Baseball=Life
- Baseball Deity
- Posts: 1031
- Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 11:16 pm
- Location: SF, CA
See what I mean?
Ta-da! another post!
Actually, I did want to say that the boxscore is taking me longer than I expected, so please bear with me. I hate to say it, but we may need to implement some simple changes to live-game scoring so we can make them more accurate. That's why it's taking me so long---ie how can you steal a base when you actually struck out and never reached base in that inning? Etc. What I need are benchmarks, or indicators that put into context the other stats and numbers. This could be achieved simply by circling the at-bat that was the final one in an inning, even if it didn't result in the out... So if Dave L. was up and got a hit but the 3rd out was made at home on the play, you'd circle Dave L.'s at-bat to indicate that's the final batter of that inning.
Anyway, I will get this figured out and will post it later tonight.
One last thing... as for umpiring.... well that's part of baseball, calls aren't going to be right all of the time. People just need to accept the fact that we are using amateur umpires. It's especially hard to do a good job when you're not umpiring for the whole game. When you umpire a whole game, you get into a rhythm that makes you much more accurate than if you were just out there for an inning or two umpiring.
At the very most the only change to umpiring should be guidelines as to whom does the umpiring when, ie the defensive/pitching team can or can't umpire for themselves, or it always should be the person DH'ing, or it should be the person who made last out, etc. or whatever.
That's a discussion worth having to come up with a system that maximizes the objectivity of whoever is umpiring. The truth is even when one sets out to be objective, the end result can be subjective. We can take steps designed to maximize the objectivity, and to increase some continuity so people aren't behind the plate for such short peroids of time.
Another crazy idea would be to rotate the umpiring responsibilities, ie two people have to umpire the whole game (one home plate ump, one field ump). You switch off who has to do the umpiring each week. This would result in the most objective, and probably the most consistent umpiring. Of course the drawback is we'd all have to sacrifice playing in the game on rare occasions to do the umpiring when it was our turn.
All right, back to working on the boxscore.
Ta-da! another post!
Actually, I did want to say that the boxscore is taking me longer than I expected, so please bear with me. I hate to say it, but we may need to implement some simple changes to live-game scoring so we can make them more accurate. That's why it's taking me so long---ie how can you steal a base when you actually struck out and never reached base in that inning? Etc. What I need are benchmarks, or indicators that put into context the other stats and numbers. This could be achieved simply by circling the at-bat that was the final one in an inning, even if it didn't result in the out... So if Dave L. was up and got a hit but the 3rd out was made at home on the play, you'd circle Dave L.'s at-bat to indicate that's the final batter of that inning.
Anyway, I will get this figured out and will post it later tonight.
One last thing... as for umpiring.... well that's part of baseball, calls aren't going to be right all of the time. People just need to accept the fact that we are using amateur umpires. It's especially hard to do a good job when you're not umpiring for the whole game. When you umpire a whole game, you get into a rhythm that makes you much more accurate than if you were just out there for an inning or two umpiring.
At the very most the only change to umpiring should be guidelines as to whom does the umpiring when, ie the defensive/pitching team can or can't umpire for themselves, or it always should be the person DH'ing, or it should be the person who made last out, etc. or whatever.
That's a discussion worth having to come up with a system that maximizes the objectivity of whoever is umpiring. The truth is even when one sets out to be objective, the end result can be subjective. We can take steps designed to maximize the objectivity, and to increase some continuity so people aren't behind the plate for such short peroids of time.
Another crazy idea would be to rotate the umpiring responsibilities, ie two people have to umpire the whole game (one home plate ump, one field ump). You switch off who has to do the umpiring each week. This would result in the most objective, and probably the most consistent umpiring. Of course the drawback is we'd all have to sacrifice playing in the game on rare occasions to do the umpiring when it was our turn.
All right, back to working on the boxscore.
"Baseball is like church, many attend, few understand"
- Leo Durocher
- Leo Durocher
This is pretty much what I was thinking. I think this would work best. I don't know if we really need two umpires though.Baseball=Life wrote: Another crazy idea would be to rotate the umpiring responsibilities, ie two people have to umpire the whole game (one home plate ump, one field ump). You switch off who has to do the umpiring each week. This would result in the most objective, and probably the most consistent umpiring. Of course the drawback is we'd all have to sacrifice playing in the game on rare occasions to do the umpiring when it was our turn.
-
Baseball=Life
- Baseball Deity
- Posts: 1031
- Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 11:16 pm
- Location: SF, CA
If we are serious about this, then I would definitely consider being home plate umpire next Sunday. But, only if there are others who will confirm their willingness to follow suit in the future. I don't want to give up a whole game if it's going to be the only time we have it.
So, who else would also consider doing it? I'll volunteer if we can get, say, three or more others to put into a rotation.
With better umpiring we'll all enjoy the live games more, and maybe we could play more of them. I think we all aspire to play full-on rules, don't we?
So, who else would also consider doing it? I'll volunteer if we can get, say, three or more others to put into a rotation.
With better umpiring we'll all enjoy the live games more, and maybe we could play more of them. I think we all aspire to play full-on rules, don't we?
Rule Britannia!
-
Baseball=Life
- Baseball Deity
- Posts: 1031
- Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 11:16 pm
- Location: SF, CA
PLAYER(S) of the GAME - 10/23/05 - LIVE - CURT FLOOD
PLAYER(S) of the GAME - 10/23/05 - LIVE - CURT FLOOD
Well, there were 20 people playing.
Ken D. and Chad C. both reached base 5 times
(Ken 3/4 + 2 walks, Chad 4/4 + walk).
Tai S. reached 5 times too, with the help of a ROE (he was 3/4, 2 walks, the ROE, 3 stolen bases).
Nick W. went 4/5 but also had the straight steal of home, and 2 RBI.
Richard J. went 1/3, but it was the big 2-run Home Run in the 7th.
Rich B. was 0/3 with 2 walks but had the game-winning RBI in the 8th with a solid, situational 4-3 RBI groundout to get Pablo home from 3rd. I think the Caught Stealing rules him out as player of the game though.
Dave L. was 3/4 with a walk, and a clutch 2-out 2-RBI double in the 9th, though he did have the pickoff in the 4th.
Daniel R. jumps out a bit too with his 2/3 with 2 walks and 3 stolen bases... he was the SS for the lineout double play in the 5th off Paul C.
I don't know. It was kind of one of those games with such mediocre pitching that no one's individual performance really jumps out.
If I had to pick someone, I'd probably go with Ken D. for going 3/4 with 4 runs scored, a double, two walks, and 4 stolen bases, including home.
Well, there were 20 people playing.
Ken D. and Chad C. both reached base 5 times
(Ken 3/4 + 2 walks, Chad 4/4 + walk).
Tai S. reached 5 times too, with the help of a ROE (he was 3/4, 2 walks, the ROE, 3 stolen bases).
Nick W. went 4/5 but also had the straight steal of home, and 2 RBI.
Richard J. went 1/3, but it was the big 2-run Home Run in the 7th.
Rich B. was 0/3 with 2 walks but had the game-winning RBI in the 8th with a solid, situational 4-3 RBI groundout to get Pablo home from 3rd. I think the Caught Stealing rules him out as player of the game though.
Dave L. was 3/4 with a walk, and a clutch 2-out 2-RBI double in the 9th, though he did have the pickoff in the 4th.
Daniel R. jumps out a bit too with his 2/3 with 2 walks and 3 stolen bases... he was the SS for the lineout double play in the 5th off Paul C.
I don't know. It was kind of one of those games with such mediocre pitching that no one's individual performance really jumps out.
If I had to pick someone, I'd probably go with Ken D. for going 3/4 with 4 runs scored, a double, two walks, and 4 stolen bases, including home.
"Baseball is like church, many attend, few understand"
- Leo Durocher
- Leo Durocher
Offensively I think I put up the best numbers, getting on base 5 times and scoring 4 times, but Nick Warwick, Chad and Dave also put up good numbers.
Defensively I echo Scott's sentiment that Dan's performance stood out, but not only because of the double play he turned, but more because he was our team's vocal leader in the field. This game quite literally came down to unearned runs (on a technical level you guys out pitched us) and on top of making his share of big plays, Daniel stopped our defense from making some of the mistakes that our opponents were guilty of.
Overall, I'm gonna give the honor to dan, on top of his forementioned defensive performance he went 2/3 with 2 runs.
Defensively I echo Scott's sentiment that Dan's performance stood out, but not only because of the double play he turned, but more because he was our team's vocal leader in the field. This game quite literally came down to unearned runs (on a technical level you guys out pitched us) and on top of making his share of big plays, Daniel stopped our defense from making some of the mistakes that our opponents were guilty of.
Overall, I'm gonna give the honor to dan, on top of his forementioned defensive performance he went 2/3 with 2 runs.
-
Southpaw Slim
- Kenesaw Mountain Landis
- Posts: 610
- Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 7:36 pm
- Location: Oakland, CA
- Contact:
I know that this is far away from an issue anymore, but after reviewing it this time I see there's no mention of Dan's pitching performance. Having faced him several times, I'd have to say he's one of the hardest pitchers I've faced in this league so far.
I intended to write something to remind everybody of my superior prowess.
Did everyone forget about Andrew? He got a little frazzled in his last start, but he's been pretty solid... i think he's pitched in every game so far. He has great heat (especially for a kid!) and an absolutely disgusting slider... I remember when Sean bailed out on called strike three... yuck!
Not to take anything away from danny...
Not to take anything away from danny...