Baseball Toaster was unplugged on February 4, 2009.
Joe Girardi and Don Zimmer are close friends but they disagree about what went down the other day at the end of the Yankee-Rays exhibition game. Over the past three or four seasons, the Rays have occasionally been pesky against the Yanks, though there has never seemed to be any hard feelings between the two teams, not like the ones the Rays have developed with the Red Sox. But it is never too late to start. Who knows? This could be the year. I see that many experts expect the Rays to be much-improved. Maybe this'll keep Zimmer on-point, poised and ready to rustle up another serving of his inimitable brand of moral indignation.
"What it does is it opens another chapter of intensity in the spring training ballgames," Duncan said Sunday about the incident in Saturday's game between the Yankees and Rays. "They showed what is acceptable to them and how they're going to play the game, so we're going to go out there to match their intensity - or even exceed it."
I think we are already seeing a change in the Yankees attitude thanks to the transition from Torre to Girardi.
Was he in the God Father?
As for two wrongs not making a right, well, if the Rays have no problem with homeplate collisions in the Spring, what's the problem? This isn't about turning the cheek. If an opponent changes the playing field, you have to change with them. This isn't Thomas Moore and the loyalty oath...principles can be twisted to meet the tactics of an adversary.
Regarding the first part: there has absolutely been a change in attitude on the team stemming from Girardi, you're right about that, but Duncan's statement is not representative of that because it contradicts what his manager has been saying about the same incident. Both think it was a horseshit play, but Duncan wants to retaliate and Girardi is smarter than that.
What, Jeter and Posada are going to suddenly start playing like the Hanson Brother goons, and Pettitte and Mo will start plunking guys avenging Yankee hitters left and right - because Shelley says so? No.
Girardi is speaking his mind, and trying to protect his players. Torre also would have questioned the play though he wouldn't have pushed it as far as his successor. This doesn't change who the Yankees are or how they play.
The Rays can try to make more of this than what it is, but if I'm a Yankee player I'm moving on without any hunger for revenge.
Get well soon, Cervelli.
2) Awfully quiet on the Bonds front- smells like collusion to me. Sign him before someone else wises up.
I think you are missing my point on Duncan's statement. It doesn't really matter whether Duncan and Girardi agree on substance...what impresses me more is both expressed strong opinions. It's nice to see the Yankee manager not worry about being diplomatic, and even more refreshing to see a individual player not feeling like has to agree with him.
I also don't agree that Duncan's comment is at odds with Girardi. Joe G. has made it clear he thinks homeplate collisions in ST are bush, but I maybe he feels differently about Duncan sliding hard into 2B to break up a DP?
6 The mere fact that any player expressed a strong opinion represents an attitude change to me. More relevant, however, is what Girardi said. I think the Yankees will benefit from a less diplomatic general and look forward to a more "firey" bunch this season.
8 Three weeks before Opening Day, Bonds is awfully tempting, isn't he?
9 I think Shelley would have been just as outspoken under Torre, but he wouldn't have scored as many points with the manager as he might under Girardi (not that I believe he was trying to score points with Joe G). And if you ask me, fire is not what the Yanks have lacked in recent years, it's the ability to get batters out. If more fire means more outs I'm all for it, but I don't think that's the case.
Hopefully the Yankee scrubs decide to play the game that way against the Rays. You know, just trying to impress the ballclub. It's important to show you can lay a real good hit on the opposing catcher.
I need some advice. I'm trying to plan a trip to my first Yankee game this year.
1. Where is the best place to buy tickets?
2. Any advice on the best seats to watch a game ($100-150 range).
3. I'm looking at a day-game during the week (possibly KC on June 9th). Is this a bad choice?
4. Any other advice for planning my first trip to Yankee Stadium would be appreciated.
Sorry for the newbie-type questions, but I thought you guys would be the best source. Thanks in advance for any responses.
"You block the plate. What happens if our man slides in with the plate being blocked and breaks his leg?"
Isn't that why you try to slide around the catcher? How often has what Zimmer described actually happened? I've got to believe the odds of the catcher getting hurt are significantly greater.
I think you targeted a good date for a matinee. Day games even early in the season are usually packed, but on that date the schools are mostly still in session, so you won't have to contend with camps and other big groups for seats.
Other than that, best advice I can offer is don't drive to the Stadium. Parking is an expensive nightmare. Take the subway.
Good luck, Bama!
I also really like the mid-week day games, so the Monday game against KC is a good choice. Also, if you stick around until Tuesday, you can take the full Stadium tour because the team heads out on a road trip.
There are 2 points: First, who is a to blame for the action? I think it is clearly the Tampa 3b coach and manager and not the player. I watched the play when it happened; he was waived in. Second, How do we act in a way that facilitates winning at the ML level during the regular season? I think we should recognize that the Rays intend to play the game a certain way and we need to match that with a no quarter style of our own. We should slide hard. Bunt and tag-up with a big lead. Pitch inside. We should not barrel roll infielders and catchers, intentionally head hunt, slide spikes up. In short we should play hard and rough but do it within the rules. Our goal should be to sweep these SOB's; that would be the best revenge.
I see it as an insurance policy. If Mats, Giambi and everyobe else avoid major injury, he will be a tight squeeze, but as soon as one spot opens, he could be very valuable.
Bond was/is a juicer. Giambi was a juicer. God knows how many others there have been who are now still helping their teams to win. I really don't see Bonds that much differently, other then he has had tremendous success as a ballplayer.
I mean, I think Bonds would be proud to be a Yankee. I don't know if I can say that for RJ and some others who have at one time worn pinstripes.
22 You can pretty much bring in any food as long as it is in a clear plastic bag. Drinks are limited to plastic bottles and less than 20 oz. Definitely bring your own food...the prices and quality of YS concessions are high and low, respectively.
For the last two seasons diaper bags have definitely been OK. We've brought one to each game we've attended with the little one.
I've sat downstairs down the line and have to agree that upstairs behind home plate is preferable. We're in Tier 3 and have a great window to all the action.
Enjoy!
Also, remember that 3-7pm is rush hour traffic; even on the subway, where it will be sardine-packed. Don't know if your itinerary says come and go the same day, but if you can avoid traveling during rush hour, I would (fantasy talk, probably).
And just for the hell of it, go to the subway booths and get bus maps (not subway map unless you want to use it as a tablecloth or parachute or something); the bus maps list not only the bus routes, but the subway routes and streets with names as well. You can likely only get a Bronx map (and maybe a Manhattan map) in the Bronx, but you won't get lost with these. If nothing else, remember to leave us something for the Bronx Banter Hall of Fame >;)
Don't bring a backpack, btw. They'll turn you away or tell you to leave it at Stan's (for a price). Highly annoying, but it is what it is.
It's the attitude that matters, Duncan's talk of "matching their intensity," whatever that means.
Under Joe, it always seemed to be about "doing our thing, playing our game, going out there and winning on the field, etc."
I like Duncan's embrace of the fiery, competitive element. Under Joe, that was always, always downplayed, at least for public consumption, in favor of an even-keel, steady-eddy ethos.
We'll see how deep it goes, but I definitely had the same response as you.
(rinse, repeat)
I once saw the Yanks play in Chicago and was amazed by how different the experience was, in terms of intimacy.
Back when I was a kid, I'd always move down to the seats behind the Yanks' dugout, but at some point they began posting sentinels there to prevent such behavior.
Dirty pool, if you ask me; if there are free seats, fans should be allowed to occupy them.
And it's a bush-league play on the Rays' part. But I agree with Cliff that there's no reason to lose Shelly's bat because he tears something trying to prove how tough he is.
Do you guys not recommend the bleachers? Stubhub has some nice tickets available in the third row of the Creatures section, for the same price as sections 1-6. Which would give a better experience?
I usually couldn't give a rat's arse about this sort of thing but a hockey game and not a ball game? That just doesn't feel right.
And if that hockey game happens in 2009, and so extends the Stadium's life into one more year (even just a little bit), all the better.
Nor to Wrigley.
I'd love to go to Fenway, but man, to do that I'd have to go to Boston.
Who wants to go to Boston?
At the risk of getting all philosophical and stuff, 'we play this game every day' is just about the truest mantra of the sport, the distinction between football and baseball, in a key fashion.
It MAY be that Torre's laid-back even keel that allowed last year's team to surge so brilliantly from a truly wretched injury-plagued start with the media (and fans) all OVER them, is ALSO the same set of traits that make it harder to crank up 'fiery competitiveness' (read: panic?) in short playoff series. That the formula for year-long success doesn't work in a 5 (or 7) game series. I can see it, I have even argued it myself ... but have never been entirely sure of my own arguments (I know william, it happens!).
I think the plate collision is MUCH more likely to be a youngster trying to make sure his manager knows he has 'the right stuff'. I mean, this is Elliot 'ThunderOnThePath' Johnson, guys. How many shots he get to be noticed this month? It was well received in the dugout not because he injured someone (really!) but because he hustled. Tampa has a LONG tradition of playing slack, 'we're gonna lose' baseball. I can easily see them having a vested interest in guys showing hustle. They just traded a flat-out stud because he was also a dogger (among other pretty features).
Me, I think Girardi's using this to send signals to the media as much as anything, and I don't actually mind, but until the rule is changed (and I wouldn't object at all if it was) I think the outrage is a bit of posturing. I mean, if someone throws inside in the next game and hits and injures someone ... is this good?
I am open to persuasion on one aspect of this (so far): the idea that spring training should be treated like an All-Star game in hockey or basketball ... no one tries too hard, even the rookies. This mean no breaking up double plays too? There seems to be some debate as to just what the unwritten rule is ... that always tells me it isn't actually agreed on.
Reminds me of (a pet topic) the idea that stealing signs from 2nd base is so expected that teams change signals, but if a batter glances back to see the catcher set up he's gonna be in the dirt next pitch. When and how did the one become 'sort of okay' and the other beyond forgiveness?
July 8, 2008 7:05 PM vs Tampa Bay
Section 331, Row F (field level, fair territory right field)... $85 each.
Is this a fair price?
Admittedly, it was more fun pre-2004 - because you could get good tickets at reasonable prices many times during the season, by walking up to the ticket window on gameday (obviously not when the Yanks were in town, but still). Now? HA!
I eagerly await a (couple of?) losing season(s) by the Sox, just so getting tickets to Fenway will be easier (and cheaper).
And on top of everything else, it was the game where Schilling came out of the bullpen for the first time, and ARod beat him with a big HR.
55 It's a fair price ($15 more per ticket than gameday) for a foul pole view. Certainly good seats for batting practice, warmups, and Abreu fans.
Plus, you'd be well-situated to jump on the field if one of those classic (anticipated?) Yanks-Rays donnybrooks erupts. Kidding aside, I have friends who have seats out that way and love them. Binoculars would be helpful in each set of seats you're considering.
Thanks for all the help!
But for god's sake, take the T. Don't drive and try to park there.
Best example I've ever witnessed personally was Justice's dinger in Game 6 ALCS against the Mariners. The Mets had clinched the NL a day prior, so we were 56,000 people watching the Subway Series actually come to fruition.
Regarding the Rangers game- doesn't bother me, as long as the last real baseball event there is a Yankee game, preferably ending with the Sinatra version in late October. What does bug me is the Yanks close out the regular season on the road, in Boston, a week after they finish at YS. It's not a huge deal, but it's crap and could have been avoided. When they finally tear down Fenway (and in the words of David Wells, "I'll push the button"), I hope the Sox play their last game there on September 10, and have a 3 week road trip to close out the season.
The closest I got to Fenway was the parking lot during the '86 Series. Treked over from Albany with a bunch of Mets fans in a rented cargo van, with a beer ball. As a college kid, I didn't have the money to go inside. As a Yankee fan, I didn't feel compelled to. I might check it out one of these years, but probably not.
The food at Fenway kills the dog food at the Stadium.
So basically, if the throw beats the runner home, the catcher should be able to stand in the baseline and tag the runner out. If the throw has not arrived, he should concede the base path to the runner. Yes, occasionally there will be collisions as runner and ball arrive at the same time. But the practice now is for the runner, who is out by 20 feet, to lower his should and try to steamroll the catcher.
Johnson had no remorse: "From my point of view, I'm trying to score a run. His left foot was right there blocking the plate. My options were to hook around and slide and I thought that would take too much time and I would be out," he said.
This indicates that Johnson thought he would be out, so he knew the throw would beat him. Now, one could argue that the catcher had violated Rule 7.06b:
NOTE: The catcher, without the ball in his possession, has no right to block the pathway of the runner attempting to score. The base line belongs to the runner and the catcher should be there only when he is fielding a ball or when he already has the ball in his hand.
That is a plausible explanation. Whatever the case, the "adults" (meaning the coaches) shouldn't have to worry about policing this type of play. The rules are explicit; the umpires simply need to call the game the way it is in the rule book. If Cervelli is blocking the plate without the ball, it's interference. If he has the ball, the runner is out and should not be allowed to plow him over. Instead, everyone has allowed this silly play to become part of "hard nose" baseball, meaning that it is subject to arcane, unwritten rules about when in the season (or preseason) it's ok to break someone's arm or give them a concussion.
This is simply bad luck on a close play, a play that is currently within the rules of the game -- though as I said before, maybe it shouldn't be. And the very debate about whether it is an unwritten spring rule NOT to go bang-bang suggests there's no agreement, and therefore no rule.
I'll ask it again: do we 'ban' breaking up double plays in spring, too? Maybe we should, I can see a case, but unless and until that's made clear (to Carl Crawford, too!) I remain puzzled by the outrage.
And why has no one mentioned Pete Rose here yet? Oh. I just did.
The problem, obviously, is that this is not a force play. Nothing has been 'allowed' to change the game, though I do agree the bang-bang play is an anomaly in baseball.
Nor am I clear on how the umpire calling it right affects a collision. The right call doesn't fix a fracture.
The 'change' you talk about would be a changed rule: a runner is tossed and suspended for doing more than a clever slide, for deliberately initiating contact. (And some slides will break legs or sprain ankles, anyhow.)
Hell, if the base coaches are wearing helmets now, the mood may be right for a change.
The right call in this case would not affect the fracture. That's not the point. The whole "collision at home kill the catcher play" has developed because the proper rules are never enforced. If the umpires would simply call all of those runners out, the incentive for running over the catcher would disappear. Likewise, if the umps called fielder interference every time the catchers blocked home without the ball, they fielder would be less likely to do so. So, in my mind, if the umps just called the rules, there would not have been a collision to begin with (or at least such occurrences would be lessened), and hence no fracture.
there is no need for a rule change to impose a suspension--the league could do that already within the framework of the rules.
78 That quote indicates to me that Johnson felt if he used a hook slide that he would have been out and that if he was going to score the run he needed to go through the catcher. Take a look at the play regular speed you'll see how bang bang it was. Going through the catcher in that manner is a time honored tradition from back yard baseball to Ponce De Leon let alone the big leagues.
We scored a run earlier on a play were our guy was out by 10 feet. But their catcher (smart) didn't get anywhere near the tag. The play looked dumb at the time, but whatdoyaknow....
Well, I guess this is where we have to agree to disagree. Just because it is a time honored tradition (though Rob Neyer did a piece on this a bunch of years back showing that it is NOT that old of a tradition) doesn't make it right or good or even within the rules.
In the end, this is all academic. The play will keep happening until someone is paralyzed, or a money-generating star player (maybe A-Rod, 12 HRs shy of the record) has his career cut short because of an injury.
Is it compensation for illegal plate blocking? As in, the ump allows the C to be hammered if he illegally blocks the plate? Nah. Too many collisions are with a C who has GOT the ball and is waiting to tag. It doesn't make sense, even for umps!
I'd like to see the Neyer piece - is it archived anywhere that anyone knows? This perplexes me, I confess. I have always seen home plate as a defined exception to the non-contact nature of the sport. (2nd base dp breakups another, to a lesser degree). My understanding was that since the runner owned the path, if the C has the ball and blocks him the runner need not slow, deviate, do anything at all but run, assert his 'ownership' ... and the C has to risk a hit to make the tag.
On further reflection, wouldn't a catcher WITH the ball blocking the plate be violating the runner-owns-the-basepath rule?
Alright, I'll quit talking(writing) like a California boy now.
Again, use the parallel situation at another base. If a runner between 1st and 2nd is thrown out by a mile at second base, and the fielder is sort of standing there waiting for him, the runner can't punch the fielder in the throat or slap the ball out of his glove or run him over, right?
It's not quite accurate to say that the runner owns the base path. According to Rule 7.08 a 1:
"[A runner is out when] He runs more than three feet away from his baseline to avoid being tagged unless his action is to avoid interference with a fielder fielding a batted ball. A runner's baseline is established when the tag attempt occurs and is a straight line from the runner to the base he is attempting to reach safely."
So, the rule gives the runner the base path only if the fielder does not have the ball. If, however, the fielder has the ball and is going to make the tag the runner cannot run out of the base paths (or knock the ball out of his glove). Similarly, if the fielder is making a play on the batted ball, the runner must allow him to. In other words, in these two circumstances the fielder has the right to the base path.
I take your point about crashing into a baseman to try to disrupt a tag attempt - it never happens. But what rule makes it illegal? Because whatever makes it illegal SHOULD make ramming a C illegal too.
Man could this at bat get any longer. Just K ya bastad
Nice hit by Godziller, weeping would be proud.
-------------------------------------------
Can you post a link with driving directions to your house?
Great fastball, sick change.
Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.