Friday, February 2, 2018
The Guy Who Reviews Sports Books: Review of "The Baby Bombers"
The Guy Who Reviews Sports Books: Review of "The Baby Bombers": With a little less than two weeks before the magic words all baseball fans love to hear - "pitchers and catchers report" - I decid...
Sunday, August 3, 2014
Retaliation in Phoenix may not be over
Yet another escalation in retaliation for baseball
It seems that every few weeks baseball's unwritten rule of retaliation rears it's ugly head. Yesterday it happened in Phoenix at a game between the Diamondbacks and Pirates. The recipient of the pay back pitch was the Pirates best player, last years' MVP and current All-Star Andrew McCutchen. He was hit in the spine with a fast ball from Arizona"s reliever Randall Delgado in the ninth inning with the Pirates leading by four runs with one out in the ninth.
Why was McCutchen so sure the pitch was a deliberate attempt to hit and injure him? It just so happens that Arizona's arguably best player Paul Goldschmidt was hit in his left hand a day earlier by a Pirates reliever. The result was a fractured bone which led the Diamondback power hitting first sacker to the disabled list for a stint. Now the Arizona team is not exactly playoff bound but who knows whether a hand fracture will heal correctly and how much hand strength will Goldy lose as a result of the fracture? How long will it take for him to recover to full strength and will it affect even next season. The point is that Goldy is a big part of the Arizona franchise's future.
No doubt Delgado remembered the public scalding that Arizona's GM Kevin Towers gave the team's pitching staff last season for not protecting their hitters and failing to retaliate. Recall that Arizona had an infamous and ugly incident with the Dodgers and Zach Greinke last year over a similar retaliation escalation. So there was little doubt in anyone's mind, least of all McCutheon, that Delgado threw a deliberate purpose pitch. Of course Kirk Gibson Diamondbacks' skipper chalked it up to the usual "the ball just got away from him" defense".
And what's next? Well Clint Hurdle the Pirates manager observed that "the game takes care of itself". That is diplomatic double talk that means we will take care of our players too and there's more to come whether today or the next time the teams meet.
But I'm always left wondering when somebody will come down so hard on these tit for tat unwritten customs that pitchers will be loathe to hurt someone because they will suffer a 50 game suspension. Or as Dick Hayhurst suggested a few months ago, law enforcement may have to step in and prosecute one of these guys for assault and battery to end the cycle of violence.
And to take the point one step further, you may enjoy A Pitch for Justice my novel that imagines a criminal prosecution for murder after a retaliatory pitch. http://www.amazon.com/Pitch-Justice-H...
Why was McCutchen so sure the pitch was a deliberate attempt to hit and injure him? It just so happens that Arizona's arguably best player Paul Goldschmidt was hit in his left hand a day earlier by a Pirates reliever. The result was a fractured bone which led the Diamondback power hitting first sacker to the disabled list for a stint. Now the Arizona team is not exactly playoff bound but who knows whether a hand fracture will heal correctly and how much hand strength will Goldy lose as a result of the fracture? How long will it take for him to recover to full strength and will it affect even next season. The point is that Goldy is a big part of the Arizona franchise's future.
No doubt Delgado remembered the public scalding that Arizona's GM Kevin Towers gave the team's pitching staff last season for not protecting their hitters and failing to retaliate. Recall that Arizona had an infamous and ugly incident with the Dodgers and Zach Greinke last year over a similar retaliation escalation. So there was little doubt in anyone's mind, least of all McCutheon, that Delgado threw a deliberate purpose pitch. Of course Kirk Gibson Diamondbacks' skipper chalked it up to the usual "the ball just got away from him" defense".
And what's next? Well Clint Hurdle the Pirates manager observed that "the game takes care of itself". That is diplomatic double talk that means we will take care of our players too and there's more to come whether today or the next time the teams meet.
But I'm always left wondering when somebody will come down so hard on these tit for tat unwritten customs that pitchers will be loathe to hurt someone because they will suffer a 50 game suspension. Or as Dick Hayhurst suggested a few months ago, law enforcement may have to step in and prosecute one of these guys for assault and battery to end the cycle of violence.
And to take the point one step further, you may enjoy A Pitch for Justice my novel that imagines a criminal prosecution for murder after a retaliatory pitch. http://www.amazon.com/Pitch-Justice-H...
Friday, April 25, 2014
My novel A PITCH FOR JUSTICE is discounted for the next few days down from $3.99 to just .99 cents. This is a realistic and balanced novel about violence in sports and the accountability of players to the criminal justice system.
For any of you who haven't read my novel, it is on discount for the next few days at just .99 cents. Read the updated version for less than a buck.
amzn.to/My3Q0f A PITCH FOR JUSTICE
For any of you who haven't read my novel, it is on discount for the next few days at just .99 cents. Read the updated version for less than a buck.
amzn.to/My3Q0f A PITCH FOR JUSTICE
Monday, April 14, 2014
MLB's instant replay needs a make-over
MLB's instant replay needs revamping
I used to be a purist when it came to baseball. Then I accepted interleague play. I even got to enjoy it. I still don't like the DH but I can understand its popularity for fans and players(especially their union).
I was totally on board with the new instant replay rule that went into effect in 2014. I always felt that umpires were given too much deference in the game and very little supervision. Their union seemed impenetrable.
And now comes instant replay to remedy that imbalance right? Well, based on the games thus far, the answer is a resounding no. Noted baseball Ken Rosenthal writer expressed his dissatisfaction in an article today.
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/ne...
He referenced two instances where the replay officials were clearly wrong in the decision making process. I have personally seen two instances where I thought the on field decision should have been overturned but they weren't. Why? Because the standard of proof required to overturn the umpire's initial decision is too demanding.
It requires the four officials viewing the challenge to be persuaded by clear and convincing evidence that the call on the field was incorrect. In essence this gives undue deference to the umpire's initial decision once again. Why? My sense is that it lessens the failure rate of how many bad calls are really made on a daily basis. Sure it's a tough call on bang-bang plays but these guys get paid well.
If we are looking for the right decision,rather than preserving face for the umpires, the standard for review should be "whether there is a preponderance of evidence" to prove the initial call was in error.
That is the standard used every day in civil trials throughout the country. People's lives are greatly impacted by the decisions of juries and judges using that standard. It is a fair one. It simply means the fact finder is satisfied that the scales dip in favor of one side by 51%.
In my opinion that standard is what is needed to better utilize the tools of instant replay rather than assuage the umpires' union. Let's get the calls right for baseball and its MLB's instant replay needs revamping
I was totally on board with the new instant replay rule that went into effect in 2014. I always felt that umpires were given too much deference in the game and very little supervision. Their union seemed impenetrable.
And now comes instant replay to remedy that imbalance right? Well, based on the games thus far, the answer is a resounding no. Noted baseball Ken Rosenthal writer expressed his dissatisfaction in an article today.
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/ne...
He referenced two instances where the replay officials were clearly wrong in the decision making process. I have personally seen two instances where I thought the on field decision should have been overturned but they weren't. Why? Because the standard of proof required to overturn the umpire's initial decision is too demanding.
It requires the four officials viewing the challenge to be persuaded by clear and convincing evidence that the call on the field was incorrect. In essence this gives undue deference to the umpire's initial decision once again. Why? My sense is that it lessens the failure rate of how many bad calls are really made on a daily basis. Sure it's a tough call on bang-bang plays but these guys get paid well.
If we are looking for the right decision,rather than preserving face for the umpires, the standard for review should be "whether there is a preponderance of evidence" to prove the initial call was in error.
That is the standard used every day in civil trials throughout the country. People's lives are greatly impacted by the decisions of juries and judges using that standard. It is a fair one. It simply means the fact finder is satisfied that the scales dip in favor of one side by 51%.
In my opinion that standard is what is needed to better utilize the tools of instant replay rather than assuage the umpires' union. Let's get the calls right for baseball and its MLB's instant replay needs revamping
I used to be a purist when it came to baseball. Then I accepted interleague play. I even got to enjoy it. I still don't like the DH but I can understand its popularity for fans and players(especially their union).
I was totally on board with the new instant replay rule that went into effect in 2014. I always felt that umpires were given too much deference in the game and very little supervision. Their union seemed impenetrable.
And now comes instant replay to remedy that imbalance right? Well, based on the games thus far, the answer is a resounding no. Noted baseball writer expressed his dissatisfaction in an article today.
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/ne...
He referenced two instances where the replay officials were clearly wrong in the decision making process. I have personally seen two instances where I thought the on field decision should have been overturned but they weren't. Why? Because the standard of proof required to overturn the umpire's initial decision is too demanding.
It requires the four officials viewing the challenge to be persuaded by clear and convincing evidence that the call on the field was incorrect. In essence this gives undue deference to the umpire's initial decision once again. Why? My sense is that it lessens the failure rate of how many bad calls are really made on a daily basis. Sure it's a tough call on bang-bang plays but these guys get paid well.
If we are looking for the right decision,rather than preserving face for the umpires, the standard for review should be "whether there is a preponderance of evidence" to prove the initial call was in error.
That is the standard used every day in civil trials throughout the country. People's lives are greatly impacted by the decisions of juries and judges using that standard. It is a fair one. It simply means the fact finder is satisfied that the scales dip in favor of one side by 51%.
In my opinion that standard is what is needed to better utilize the tools of instant replay rather than assuage the umpires' union. Let's get the calls right for baseball and its fans.
I was totally on board with the new instant replay rule that went into effect in 2014. I always felt that umpires were given too much deference in the game and very little supervision. Their union seemed impenetrable.
And now comes instant replay to remedy that imbalance right? Well, based on the games thus far, the answer is a resounding no. Noted baseball writer expressed his dissatisfaction in an article today.
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/ne...
He referenced two instances where the replay officials were clearly wrong in the decision making process. I have personally seen two instances where I thought the on field decision should have been overturned but they weren't. Why? Because the standard of proof required to overturn the umpire's initial decision is too demanding.
It requires the four officials viewing the challenge to be persuaded by clear and convincing evidence that the call on the field was incorrect. In essence this gives undue deference to the umpire's initial decision once again. Why? My sense is that it lessens the failure rate of how many bad calls are really made on a daily basis. Sure it's a tough call on bang-bang plays but these guys get paid well.
If we are looking for the right decision,rather than preserving face for the umpires, the standard for review should be "whether there is a preponderance of evidence" to prove the initial call was in error.
That is the standard used every day in civil trials throughout the country. People's lives are greatly impacted by the decisions of juries and judges using that standard. It is a fair one. It simply means the fact finder is satisfied that the scales dip in favor of one side by 51%.
In my opinion that standard is what is needed to better utilize the tools of instant replay rather than assuage the umpires' union. Let's get the calls right for baseball and its fans.
Friday, April 11, 2014
FORMER WORLD SERIES PITCHER IS IN FEDERAL COURT CASE
If you aren't a baseball fan, it's unlikely you will recall Brandon Backe. He had a relatively brief and undistinguished career in the majors. Originally a second baseman, he converted to pitching in 2002.
He rose to national prominence in 2004 when he was the winning pitcher for the Houston Astros on the last day of the season and beat the Braves. That gave the Astros a spot in the playoffs.
In game 5 of the NL Championship series he had a no hitter for 6 innings but settled for a one hit eight inning performance and the win. (But the Cardinals went on to become the NL Champs in 2004). Backe also had a win in game 4 of the 2005 World Series but the Astros lost to the Chicago White Sox.
By 2009 Backe's performance was below par, after a series of arm and shoulder ailments, and he was released by the Astros in early 2009.
Yet Backe is back in the news. He and 11 other people were arrested after an Oct. 5, 2008, altercation at a resort's swimming pool bar in Galveston during a wedding reception. Backe was charged with interfering with a police officer and resisting arrest. ( A grand jury later declined to indict him in 2009.
Backe is suing the Galveston police department in Houston federal court for a violation of his civil rights. He testified recently that the police used excessive force against him and that he sustained severe shoulder injuries from kicking and shoving by the police.
Backe is arguing that those injuries prevent him from doing the most simple tasks such as tucking his shirt into his pants. He attributes his release from baseball to that incident in 2008 because of his inability to pitch.
Backe is seeking 15 million dollars( a nice tidy figure)for redress. But he may have a hard time proving his case. Even if the jury is convinced that the police used excessive force, he still has to prove a causal relationship between that episode and his pitching woes.
That is the difficult hurdle for him because his record as a pitcher shows in 2006,after two starts, he went onto the disabled list for three months. He returned in late July, but on August 19 he sprained a ligament in his right elbow. This injury required Tommy John surgery, which was successfully performed on September 7, 2006. So he missed most of 2006.
In 2007 he didn't pitch again until September but he did win four starts. Then in 2008 he had an awful year despite being healthy. He won 9 and lost 14 and had a 6.05 ERA. He also led the league in giving up 36 home runs. Then the Galveston incident took place in October of that year. He was age 30 at that time.
So the jury will have to find that excessive force was used, that Backe at age 30 still had plenty of good years left in his arm and shoulder, and that but for the injuries he would have earned large sums as a professional pitcher. Those will be hard for a jury to find.Stay tuned
If you aren't a baseball fan, it's unlikely you will recall Brandon Backe. He had a relatively brief and undistinguished career in the majors. Originally a second baseman, he converted to pitching in 2002.
He rose to national prominence in 2004 when he was the winning pitcher for the Houston Astros on the last day of the season and beat the Braves. That gave the Astros a spot in the playoffs.
In game 5 of the NL Championship series he had a no hitter for 6 innings but settled for a one hit eight inning performance and the win. (But the Cardinals went on to become the NL Champs in 2004). Backe also had a win in game 4 of the 2005 World Series but the Astros lost to the Chicago White Sox.
By 2009 Backe's performance was below par, after a series of arm and shoulder ailments, and he was released by the Astros in early 2009.
Yet Backe is back in the news. He and 11 other people were arrested after an Oct. 5, 2008, altercation at a resort's swimming pool bar in Galveston during a wedding reception. Backe was charged with interfering with a police officer and resisting arrest. ( A grand jury later declined to indict him in 2009.
Backe is suing the Galveston police department in Houston federal court for a violation of his civil rights. He testified recently that the police used excessive force against him and that he sustained severe shoulder injuries from kicking and shoving by the police.
Backe is arguing that those injuries prevent him from doing the most simple tasks such as tucking his shirt into his pants. He attributes his release from baseball to that incident in 2008 because of his inability to pitch.
Backe is seeking 15 million dollars( a nice tidy figure)for redress. But he may have a hard time proving his case. Even if the jury is convinced that the police used excessive force, he still has to prove a causal relationship between that episode and his pitching woes.
That is the difficult hurdle for him because his record as a pitcher shows in 2006,after two starts, he went onto the disabled list for three months. He returned in late July, but on August 19 he sprained a ligament in his right elbow. This injury required Tommy John surgery, which was successfully performed on September 7, 2006. So he missed most of 2006.
In 2007 he didn't pitch again until September but he did win four starts. Then in 2008 he had an awful year despite being healthy. He won 9 and lost 14 and had a 6.05 ERA. He also led the league in giving up 36 home runs. Then the Galveston incident took place in October of that year. He was age 30 at that time.
So the jury will have to find that excessive force was used, that Backe at age 30 still had plenty of good years left in his arm and shoulder, and that but for the injuries he would have earned large sums as a professional pitcher. Those will be hard for a jury to find.Stay tuned
Wednesday, March 26, 2014
College pitcher cleared of crime in beaning incident
I came across these three articles as a result of a baseball Facebook discussion of my book A Pitch For Justice amzn.to/My3Q0f
A highly touted Wichita State pitcher allegedly threw a 92 MPH fastball at an opposing player who was apparently trying to "time" the pitcher. Anthony Molina was 24 feet from home plate as Ben Christensen was warming up on the mound.
Molina's dream of playing baseball came to a crushing halt. He suffered debilitating injuries to his face and was blinded in one eye. He has had multiple operations for over 10 years.
http://www.pantagraph.com/sports/coll...
A Kansas District attorney somehow declined to prosecute criminally. This is what the D.A's report stated "even as distasteful and unsportsmanlike as it may seem, Christensen believed as he had been coached, that it was acceptable, justifiable and appropriate to respond to Molina's perceived rules violation and encroachment by throwing a brush-back." The report added that information gathered on Christensen indicated "he is not the type of person who would try to harm another.
I don't know what you think but I think that is a total disregard of the law. Imagine allowing a custom of baseball to be accepted as a total defense for an aggravated assault. I can't.
A civil suit was filed and in 2002 a significant monetary settlement was made for the "custom". Christensen signed with the Cubs for a 1 million dollar bonus. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/base...
Christensen was released in 2004 from the minor league roster.
If this concept interests you, please read my novel which imagines a fatal bean ball in the context of a retaliatory pitch which leads to a prosecution for murder
A highly touted Wichita State pitcher allegedly threw a 92 MPH fastball at an opposing player who was apparently trying to "time" the pitcher. Anthony Molina was 24 feet from home plate as Ben Christensen was warming up on the mound.
Molina's dream of playing baseball came to a crushing halt. He suffered debilitating injuries to his face and was blinded in one eye. He has had multiple operations for over 10 years.
http://www.pantagraph.com/sports/coll...
A Kansas District attorney somehow declined to prosecute criminally. This is what the D.A's report stated "even as distasteful and unsportsmanlike as it may seem, Christensen believed as he had been coached, that it was acceptable, justifiable and appropriate to respond to Molina's perceived rules violation and encroachment by throwing a brush-back." The report added that information gathered on Christensen indicated "he is not the type of person who would try to harm another.
I don't know what you think but I think that is a total disregard of the law. Imagine allowing a custom of baseball to be accepted as a total defense for an aggravated assault. I can't.
A civil suit was filed and in 2002 a significant monetary settlement was made for the "custom". Christensen signed with the Cubs for a 1 million dollar bonus. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/base...
Christensen was released in 2004 from the minor league roster.
If this concept interests you, please read my novel which imagines a fatal bean ball in the context of a retaliatory pitch which leads to a prosecution for murder
Tuesday, December 3, 2013
Will A.J. Pierzynski's signing destroy the Red Sox team chemistry?
There is no disputing the fact that the Boston Red Sox were low in most experts' opinions to win their division let alone the World Series. Team chemistry seems to have played a big role. But now what will happen to that chemistry?
The Boston Red Sox today signed catcher A.J. Pierzynski to a one year contract. He will replace the departing free agent Jarrod Saltalamacchia. (he with the longest name in baseball history). The question of economics is understandably a significant reason in the signing. Salty is 28 and is looking for a long term contract. Brian McCann nabbed 85 million in his Yankee signing. Although Salty may not put up McCann's power numbers, Saltalamacchia posted a .338 OBP, good for sixth among starting catchers. He also hit 54 of the 70 extra base hits for the Red Sox in 2013.
Clearly the 8.5 million spent for A.J. will be peanuts compared to what Salty gets. The point is Boston has two prospects that may be major league ready in 2015 so management wanted to find a spot for one of them so A.J. is a short term fix. Or is it? His former manager of the 2006 Chicago White Sox Ozzie Guillen said, "If you play against him, you hate him. If you play with him, you hate him a bit less." He has been dubbed " The Captain of Chaos" by former teammate Paul Konerko. The big platinum haired blonde, former quasi pro wrestler wanna be, is widely regarded as baseball's bad guy. In June 2012 he was voted baseball's # 1 most hated player in the game by Men's Journal.
He has been accused of being "mean" to guys on his own pitching staff and treating players with less than 5 years of experience as peasants. In 2006 he had a famous collision and fight with then Cubs catcher Michael Barrett in which A.J. was deemed the aggressor. On May 28, 2007, in a game versus the Minnesota Twins, Pierzynski twice ran down the first base line with his feet on the inside of the base, likely making contact with Twins first baseman Justin Morneau's foot with his spikes. The Twins were outraged but A.J. was not ejected.
All of this begs the question whether this volatile personality will ruin the chemistry on the Sox team. In my humble opinion, the answer is a resounding no. Has he matured? I don't know but his appearances as a baseball analyst seemed to have curtailed some of his bravado. More importantly, it must be emphasized that A.J. played an enormous role in his White Sox winning the 2006 World Series. He was an All-Star catcher that season. Players don't have to love one another to win. Just ask the Oakland A's of the early 70's or the Yankees of the late 70's. Chemistry often comes from winning or trying to out do the guys on the team that you don't like.
A.J. at 36 is not the same man as he was in 2006 or even 2012 when he won the Silver Slugger award. Last year he had his lowest OPB at .297 largely because of his paltry walk percentage. But the man is durable, a leader, and a guy who loves to win.
So my answer is no to the question I posed. He is not the reason the Sox will not repeat. The loss of Napoli, Drew, and Ellsbury will be the primary reasons. Sure there is great promise in Jackie Bradley Jr. and Xander Bogaerts, and maybe even Furcal will sign, but the losses are too great. And the competition is better in Texas and maybe even Detroit. If the Sox don't win it again, it won't be because they lost their chemistry. It's because they are now a team in transition and a bit old in the tooth.
The Boston Red Sox today signed catcher A.J. Pierzynski to a one year contract. He will replace the departing free agent Jarrod Saltalamacchia. (he with the longest name in baseball history). The question of economics is understandably a significant reason in the signing. Salty is 28 and is looking for a long term contract. Brian McCann nabbed 85 million in his Yankee signing. Although Salty may not put up McCann's power numbers, Saltalamacchia posted a .338 OBP, good for sixth among starting catchers. He also hit 54 of the 70 extra base hits for the Red Sox in 2013.
Clearly the 8.5 million spent for A.J. will be peanuts compared to what Salty gets. The point is Boston has two prospects that may be major league ready in 2015 so management wanted to find a spot for one of them so A.J. is a short term fix. Or is it? His former manager of the 2006 Chicago White Sox Ozzie Guillen said, "If you play against him, you hate him. If you play with him, you hate him a bit less." He has been dubbed " The Captain of Chaos" by former teammate Paul Konerko. The big platinum haired blonde, former quasi pro wrestler wanna be, is widely regarded as baseball's bad guy. In June 2012 he was voted baseball's # 1 most hated player in the game by Men's Journal.
He has been accused of being "mean" to guys on his own pitching staff and treating players with less than 5 years of experience as peasants. In 2006 he had a famous collision and fight with then Cubs catcher Michael Barrett in which A.J. was deemed the aggressor. On May 28, 2007, in a game versus the Minnesota Twins, Pierzynski twice ran down the first base line with his feet on the inside of the base, likely making contact with Twins first baseman Justin Morneau's foot with his spikes. The Twins were outraged but A.J. was not ejected.
All of this begs the question whether this volatile personality will ruin the chemistry on the Sox team. In my humble opinion, the answer is a resounding no. Has he matured? I don't know but his appearances as a baseball analyst seemed to have curtailed some of his bravado. More importantly, it must be emphasized that A.J. played an enormous role in his White Sox winning the 2006 World Series. He was an All-Star catcher that season. Players don't have to love one another to win. Just ask the Oakland A's of the early 70's or the Yankees of the late 70's. Chemistry often comes from winning or trying to out do the guys on the team that you don't like.
A.J. at 36 is not the same man as he was in 2006 or even 2012 when he won the Silver Slugger award. Last year he had his lowest OPB at .297 largely because of his paltry walk percentage. But the man is durable, a leader, and a guy who loves to win.
So my answer is no to the question I posed. He is not the reason the Sox will not repeat. The loss of Napoli, Drew, and Ellsbury will be the primary reasons. Sure there is great promise in Jackie Bradley Jr. and Xander Bogaerts, and maybe even Furcal will sign, but the losses are too great. And the competition is better in Texas and maybe even Detroit. If the Sox don't win it again, it won't be because they lost their chemistry. It's because they are now a team in transition and a bit old in the tooth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)