topper09er

Here is a game where Jesse Orosco played P-RF-P-RF and Roger McDowell played P-RF-LF-P, 2 different pitchers pitching 2 different times each in the same game! http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CIN/CIN198607220.shtml

OK, I think the guy I am talking about is Chuck McElroy (remember the glasses) with the 1999 Mets. In one game he came on to pitch and then played LF for the backup outfielder Matt Franco who then pitched. McElroy never came back in to pitch but I think this may have happened another time when he did re-enter although if the other guy did not record an out there is no record of McElroy playing at another position so it will be tough to find. The link is to the game I mentioned above: http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/NYN/NYN199908080.shtml

Im pretty sure that only applies to a relief pitcher. I think the starter cannot re-enter as pitcher to avoid the little league tactic of using your ace agasint the top of the order and resting him for the bottom so he can face the good hitters more often. I think I remember Bobby Valentine bringing in some lefty to get an out, putting him in LF for a righty and then bringing him back in for the next lefty and I seem to remember an explanation that this would not be allowed for the starting pitcher. I cant find a mention of this in the rulebook so maybe you are correct.

Just for fun although I would hate to see 4 divisions in each league, what would they be? 1 possibility: In the NL move Houston and Colorado to the AL for Tampa Bay and add a franchise in Charlottle East: PHIL, NYM, PIT, WASH, North: MIL, CHC, STL, CIN, West: LAD, SF, SD, AZ, South: FLA, TB, ATL, CHAR In the AL move Tampa Bay to the NL and get Houston and Colorado and add a team in Portland: East: NYY, BOS, BAL, TOR, North: CHW, CLE, MINN, DET, South: HOU, COL, TEX, KC, West: LAA, SEA, OAK, PORT

Not to get too serious in the middle of this important discussion, but Im pretty sure you are not allowed to re-enter the starting pitcher on the mound if he changes positions.

Which brewers would we want to represent us in a brawl? I would say the top few would be McClung (obvious), Cameron (obvious, hes listed at 205# but I mean come on) and then im not sure. A gut reaction may be prince because of obvious reasons but I think he is soft. Another good choice would be Coffey. If we are looking for a scrappy guy who could hold his own against a bigger man I have a feeling about Kendall, Bush or Weeks. I would say some wild cards would be Julio, Hart or Rivera who are bigger but Im not sure how they would do. Also it would be fun to watch Counsell vs David Eckstein.

When I bring up the 100+ years crap my overall point is that (I think) some of changes that have happened are good for the game like playing night games or adding more teams and some are bad like the DH or astroturf, so if we are going to change something that has remained the same for the past 100+ years (and has worked) we better be careful and consider if it is worth it and whether it makes the game better or worse. I think replay changes the gameplay too much and makes the game worse and opens the door for more replay which will make the game even worse. Also, I do not think it is a bad arguement to say that because something has been around for a long time it should not be changed, again because we are not talking about life or death or whether people will get their paycheck on friday. We are talking about a game, and has absolutely no NEED for any change of any kind ever. I honestly think the opposite is true, that it is a bad arguement to say that just because we can implement robots to make some calls we should do it. This is a sport, the reason I follow baseball and like to watch it is because I played it when I was younger and I enjoy watching people play it at a high level because I can appreciate how difficult it is, and because I follow the brewers because they are my home team so I watch all of their games and want them to win. The only thing that really matters is whether or not the brewers win the world series, period. They made the playoffs last year which was exciting but they went home with the same result as every non Philadelphia team. The only plus was that we can be more opptomistic about this year because they were good last year, but they didnt win the world series so my goal as a fan was not reached. OK, my whole point this story is that any bad call by an umpire will never actually change who the wins the world series so as a fan we should not be concerned with fixing any bad call because no team has ever been screwed out of a world series because of 1 call and never will. (The outcome of the 1985 WS was NOT affected by the bad call in game 6).

Framing pitches is a skill that catchers need to learn just like throwing out runners or calling pitches. How do you know that the game wasnt meant to be that way, you are assuming that if they had instant replay in 1876 they would have implemented it. You dont know that, they could have made a rule that a manager could ask for an appeal on a call from some other umpire than the one who made the call as a form of 19th century instant but they didnt? Why, who knows, maybe they wanted the unpires to be in charge of the game and not let the managers and players dicatate how it is officiated. Maybe they wanted umpires to have be so in charge of the game that they could interpret some rules, you cant say the only reason there are umpires today is because they didnt have computers in 1876. You are assuming that every time some robot could make a call but doesnt it is some limitation of technology instead of an intended design of how the game is called and played. Blocking the plate as a cather is totally illegal, everytime the catcher is sitting on the plate without the ball obstruction should be called and the runner should be safe, but umpires ignore that rule because that is how the game evolved, like it or not that is part of baseball even though it is not in the rulebook and if you changed it so that it is called "correctly" you would change the game. The same is true of the strike zone, there is a definition in the rule book but the game has evolved in such a way that the strike zone is really up to the interpretation of the umpire. If you change that by having a robot enforce the rulebook you are changing the way baseball has been played for 100+ years and I dont like that or think it is necesary.

Like I said in an earlier post, this is not national defense here, this is a game. Just because you can make things more accurate by using a computer doesnt mean you should. Obviously, if we are talking about whether or not we should upgrade the US Army's standard issue rifle to the newest and best technology or leave it the same because the old gun is the traditional one that we won WWII with there is no debate. How can you compare scientific research like aviation to baseball? That is ridiculous and embarrassing. Did you read my post, I listed several reasons why it is impractical to have a robot call balls/strikes (because the hitters themselves do not know the striek zone that well) and other reasons why it removes some of the art from baseball which players learned and practiced since little league (like framing pitches as a catcher).

An umpire has never called a ball or strike wrong because whatever the umpire decides is a strike is a strike. This is how baseball works, I think it is a unique thing about the sport, the fact that there are different dimensions in every stadium and different strike zones for each umpire. As a baseball player you need to learn how to work the strike zone the umpire has. Another thing that has been lost here, at least about the balls/strikes, is that as a hitter you do not know the exact strike zone when you are standing up there. Major league hitters have good eyes and know their zone but over the course of the season there will be hundreds of pitches that may be a strike by an 1/8" or less. As a hitter you know whether a pitch is a ball, a strike, or close. No one is good enough to be able to tell always whether a pitch is definetly a strike or a ball. You cannot expect a hitter to have that good of an eye, that is why the strike zone needs to be umpired by a human since humans are playing with it. Umpires are needed for pitches that are close, not robots. A good hitter should understand that you need to pay attention to the game and get a feel for the umpires zone when you are not hitting so when you are up you know what to expect. If the guy is calling the low strike then dont be surpried if you get a low strike called, but also if it is borderline high you can expect a ball. If there are 2 strikes you better foul off everything close low because you are risking a K even it is a ball by 1" low. That is how baseball is played. Whenever people complain about an umpires performance (major league at least) it is that they are not consistant, not that they have a bad zone. Also, what about things like if a pitcher hits his spot and it is close then he gets the strike, or the catcher framing pitches? There are some things in baseball which are an art and taking those away in my opinion takes away from the game, and umpiring is an art. I personally enjoy the little things that make baseball unique and would rather have them be a part of the game no matter how many people complain because they see one bad call that affects their team and demand that it is fixed. Bad calls are part of baseball. Get used to it, there will never be any more replay than HR as long as Bud is in charge.

If you guys cant agree on OPS, which I dont understand because it is a good measure, maybe Runs Created which is a Jamesian stat that is pretty good. Right now Kendall has 3.0 Runs Created/game, which means a team with 9 jason kendall's hitting would score 3 runs per game (which seems high), and this team would have a .270 winning percentage assumsing average pitching and defense. Gallardo has 3.8 RC/G for a winning percentage of .370 as of now.

Sorry, you are right it is too much of a generalization, my point is that die-hard baseball fans like all aspects of the game including hitting for power, hitting for average, defense, umpiring, pitching strategy, managing strategy, etc., but the DH rule was only added for people who primarily care about scoring and homers and in my opinion has had an overall negative effect on the game and I see the same thing down the road if we allow instant replay. Also, I do not personally know anyone who I would consider a true baseball fan who prefers the DH over the national league style.

A glaring exception (and far more significant than using technology to increase the accuracy of umpires) being the abomination known as the DH. He already has allowed replay.Thank You!!!! I was waiting for someone to mention the DH?? So, who likes the (in your own words) abomination known as the DH? The answer is all of the dumb, annoying casual fans who do not really like or appreciate baseball and mostly like it when people hit dingers and their favorite team always changes to whoever is the best team at that time. And why was the DH added? Because runs were down and some of the casual fans who were too stupid to appriciate nice 3-2 games were getting bored because there were not enough dingers so the owners wanted to make more money so they ruined the beautiful game of baseball to appeice the casual fans and now real baseball fans prefer national league baseball over american league baseball hands down. How does everyone not see the same pattern with this replay crap? A bunch of casual fans get really mad when some bad calls hurt their team (which dont even cost them a game although lots of people attempt to make that claim) and they demand that this is fixed and say well if they can use instant they have to. Then they will start putting in replay on fair/foul, then there will be a bad call on a strike 3 and they will add that the next season, then they will add a catch/trap replay, then they will realize there are problems and change the system. Then they will give managers 2 challenges per game and if they lose a challenge they have to remove the pitcher. Then Ken Griffey III will break his wrist sliding and they will outlaw sliding (horsecollar rule in football). And 30 years from now people will be talking about the abomination of instant replay.

Is this a joke??? BEING ABLE TO RUN FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME DOES NOT MAKE YOU AN ATHLETE!!! Anyone can do it with training, endurance DOES NOT EQUAL athleticism. I hate how people assume that because NFL players would beat MLB players in a marathon or bench press they are better athletes...they arent. The greatest basketball player of all-time sucked at baseball, and he 2 years of pro ball and did not improve at all. Now, handling a soccer ball, dribbling, passing shooting, that takes a lot of talent, but I still dont think it is more difficult than hitting a 95 mph fastball after you just saw a 75 mph curveball.

The brewers had 2 outs and no one on base that inning and then walk, single, single, double, single. They lost the games themselves not because of the call. Plus how do you know Clark would not have hit a HR the next pitch or a double that was fair or walked and then the next guy hit a double or maybe he would have hit a triple or maybe he would have hit a ruitine ground ball and reached on an error? You cannot say that call cost them the game. My overall point is that it appears that a lot of people do understand/refuse to accept the fact that umpires and blown calls are part of the game of baseball, they have always been and we should not change the game now. Just because we can guarantee the right call every time (which is impossible as football, college or NFL, has shown over the last ~10 years) does not mean we should do it because that changes baseball. Baseball is often described as "timeless" because the game has essentially remained unchanged for 100+ and we can still try to debate who is better between Rogers Hornsby, Hank Aaron or Albert Pujols, players from 3 different generations. The umpires are the 3rd team on the field and they have an impact on the game. If you dont like this then you dont appreciate the uniqueness of baseball compared to all other sports. Thank god Bud will never allow this to happen, I just hope the next commish is not some young hotshot who trys to appeaise the majority of fans who are causual and change everything based on every whim just to make some more money.

Macha is showing very un-Ned like thinking with Counsell hitting 2...because Counsell is hot right now. He is 7 of his last 22 and for whatever reason he is seeing the ball well and playing above his career numbers. Same thing with Hardy hitting 7 now, he is struggling so move him down. Just like when Macha moved the red-hot Cameron to 5 over Hardy. This is SOOO refreshing to see a manager change around the lineup based on who is hot.

It is stupid because it is not a good reason, it is just a reason. The umpires are part of the game, they have their own strikes zones and it is part of the game of baseball to play while accounting for the umpires, if you dont like this then you dont like baseball because that is how it is. I would rather leave baseball the way it is then totally change it into some video game called by robots just so we can get fix the 1% of calls which are wrong.

I think he looks better at the plate this year and the same in the field. I think the reason it seems like he is having a better year than he actually has is because of his RISP stats which are very good so he seems like a "clutch" player so far this year: 7/18 (.389), 10 RBI.

If I was in belgium I'd be drinking a belgian beer that i was unable to get here. I support almost all of Wisconsin's microbreweries but this logic seems a bit crazy. If I was fortunate to be drinking in Europe, I'd hope I could find something that tastes better than a Miller product. The point is that it is not OK to drink Bud anywhere, not just the Miller Park parking lot. When I was in Germany I had all their local stuff and it was the best beer I have ever had in my life, but if all you have is a choice between all the big names you should always drink Miller...and I'm sorry but Miller does not taste bad.

Well I guess I am the only baseball purist here so I'll take the other side. I think the HR replay is OK since it doesnt interfere with the gameplay, but I am against ALL other replay. I can't believe some people on here want a computer to call strikes and balls and then replay it to the umps!!! Why don't we just play video games. The umpires are part of baseball, they do a good job and it is almost impossible that any call could affect the outcome of a game, plus there are 162 games in the season. I guess even if there is some bad call that hurts the brewers (like on Friday) my reaction is that it is part of the game, just like when Prince hit a grand slam against the cubs that was brought back over the wall or someone hits a line drive right at a defender. Bad break, o well, go get em next time. I think replay in the NFL is terrible, it causes the refs to be lazy, delays the game, and half of the time the result of the play is not even obvious after replay. How often to the commentators try to guess if the call will be reversed after watching the replay? A lot because things are not even obvious after many replays. I dont want the same thing in baseball. If there was replay on any in game call the umps would always have to err on the side of caution like how NFL refs are supposed (but still dont anyways) call everything a fumble so the play can be reviewed. That means every single fair/foul ball would have to be called fair so the play can continue and then need to be reviewed and possibly reversed. That would be rediculously slow and unnecesary. Or you would have to call every close play at a base safe so the other runners can continue and then review the call later and cause another delay. Or things like catch/trapped balls, what do you even do. What if you have a runner on 3rd with 1 out and an outfielder dives and maybe catches the ball or maybe trapped it? If you call it trap then the runner on third wont tag and score so what if you reverse it to a catch, is it just assumed the run would have scored or does the runner go back to third? What if there is a runner on 2nd, you call it a trap and he goes to 3nd and then it is reviewed and called an out? Does that runner just have to go back, what if the defense could have doubled him up, does he get a chance to tag up? Too many assumptions and too much delay. I really dont like the arguement that just because the technology is there it must be used, that is stupid. We are not talking about national defense here, this is a sport that has tradition and beauty and should be left alone. Using replay does not decide life or death outcomes. There are metal bats now, better technology than wood, why dont we use metal bats in the majors? Players can take HGH and never age and have 20 year long primes, this is better technology than our natural bodies, why dont we just legalize all steroids? I just feel like true baseball fans can understand how a bad call is OK because it is part of the game and some people get so mad when they see one bad call against their team they just want replay because they think their team would have won the WS if there was replay or something.

?? I seem to remember Yo being left in to hit for himself in the bottom of the 7th when he hit a game winning HR and then pitching a scoreless 8th inning.

You cant "learn" how to be an infielder when you are in AAA and have been playing baseball your entire life. You either have the quick hands and strong arm or you dont. Clearly, Gamel is not good enough to play 3B and HE NEVER WILL BE. I think they should leave him in AAA and start getting him some reps at whatever his future position will be (Either 1B when we trade Prince or RF and we move Hart to CF) There is no point to leave Gamel at 3B in AAA or the majors.

I was once at a Cards game at Miller Park and some of their fans were line and asked me where the Bud Lite was...most informed/intelligent baseball fans of all time huh. Seriously though it has to be Miller Products or Wisconsin brewed products no matter where you are drinking in the world. If you are at some bar in Europe and they have a Bud special and regular priced Miller you better order the Miller and when they ask you why say because you are from Wisconsin.

The '59 Sox lost the WS to the Dodgers, but the '32 Yanks beat the Cubs in the WS (this was the series where Ruth "called his shot")

Braun is an extra base hit threat just because he is up. Now he gets another at bat but against a new pitcher. I just don't agree with running there. Braun has 4 extra base hits in 47 AB this season with 2 strikes, you cant just sit around and assume everyone will hit Homers or doubles every at-bat, especially with 2 strikes. Also, why do you want him to face a guy who has struck him out 3 times already?