chasfh

I’ll give up my bottle of weed killer when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.

The judges would have also accepted “Schmertification standards.”

The new stadium is very, very Dallas.

They tried a few things like the flagpole in the field of play, but they bailed on the super deep left field fence after just one year, I think. Brilliant move by the organization to essentially trade the farm for Juan Gonzalez and then put him in a place where he couldn’t do the one thing they signed for to do.

I clearly remember my first Tiger game at Tiger Stadium. It was my eleventh birthday, a night game in the middle of July. It wasn’t my first time there. I had gone to a Lions game before, in November. It was about 15 degrees, I was a skinny little kid, and I froze my tuchus off. I barely remember the experience. I guess I’m largely blocking it from my memory. The two things I remember most about the stadium: (1) how colorful it was, mostly the green, for a kid who saw games only in black and white on TV at home. Coming through the tunnel to the seats was magic. And (2) the overwhelming smell of cigars. You could tell this was a place for men. That made me feel more grown up at the time. Also notable about that game is that it was the only one I ever went to in which Ted Williams had a duty to perform. He was manager of the Rangers that season. The game itself was pretty exciting. After going down 3-0 in the first, the Tigers came back for the win. There was also a controversial bunt single attempt in the ninth that may have single-handedly sealed the division win for OBT that season. There’s a write-up about that game here: https://sabr.org/gamesproj/game/july-11-1972-tigers-win-critical-game-on-close-call-in-ninth/

Where’s the top of the video strike box, though? Pretty much right at the belt. It’s certainly not as high as “the midpoint between a batter's shoulders and the top of the uniform pants”. If they consistently called strikes as high as the book says to, I would think hitters would have to adjust their swing planes and their results on balls hit from that area would improve at least back to 2008 levels.

Tying run to the plate. Man, these guys are fighters.

Absolutely horrific read, from an insider who saw and knows. If only we could do something, anything, to stop it.

Everyone who watches the game with any regularity knows that practically no umpire regularly calls practically any strikes from the belt up, never mind up around any "midpoint". Any called strike up there is an anomaly that gets Blue an eyeful from the batter, if not an earful along with it. I'm wondering whether the lowered top of the zone that has evolved has also contributed to the launch angle revolution. Hear me out: In order to get launch, hitters swing up on an angle (i.e., uppercut) so that the ball they barrel is already rising at the optimum 20 to 30 degrees. For that to happen, they need the ball pitched down to a certain part of the zone—that is, from knees at the bottom of the zone to the pecker, which is now toward the top of the called zone. Hitters don't have to swing at balls above the belt because they know they won't be rung up, and since they know this, they have cultivated uppercut swings for the area they know would be called strikes, so they can try to take the pitcher out of the park. Pitchers with great velocity know that fastballs above the zone can get swing and miss most of the time, basically because hitters can't effectively swing with their normal uppercut swings to do damage to that ball. They either try to get to it with that uppercut they've been practicing for years and wave through under it, or they need to tryusing a suboptimal level swing, something they don't practice, and hit flares, pop ups, or fouls. The data bear this out. In 2008, the batting average on balls down the middle of the plate between 3.5 and 4 feet off the ground was about .220 or .230. By 2011 that average had dropped onto the Interstate; this year it's right around .155. This is not an outlier—it's a continuation, or at least a culmination, of a trend that started with the juicing of the ball, ever-increasing pitch velocity, and new and absurd H- and V- pitch movements (that last one perhaps due to the icky sticky). (By the way, 3.5 feet is not high off the ground at all to an adult man. It's right around my own belly button, a scant inch or two above my waist, and I'm only 5' 10". For a major league hitter who's maybe 6'2" or 6'3" on average, 3.5 feet is probably slightly below his waist—and yet, still, .155!) Anyhow, tldr; my idea: if umpires—or robot umpires—were to start calling that pitch up close to the armpits a strike instead of a ball, wouldn't most hitters have to adjust their swings, basically flattening it, in order to get to the high pitch that today's flamethrowers would now get called strikes on? That could mean a flattening out of average swing plane, which could lead to more line drives and better wOBA on pitches up in the zone, which could lead to more swings up there, which could lead to more balls in play, shorter at bats, perhaps fewer strikeouts, maybe even shorter games? Not by a lot, maybe, but who knows? Who knew that a 15-second pitch clock could cut low-A game times by 20 minutes? Either way, I think calling the high strike could be a contributor I still think the #1 thing that needs to be done is deadening the ball, though.

I've been saying here ... er, on MTS ... for years that these misspellings and malapropisms are intentional, and serve as a way to feed their insatiable need to be publicly recognized as victims of "liberal elitism", or whatever, in order to strengthen the bond between the Republican cons and their hapless red-hatted marks. Glad to see practically everyone else has come around to that idea. And yes, @djhutch: I too believe the strategy, if not always the output, emanated from overseas. And I think we all know which sea it came over from.

Doxx that m*****f*****.

You're a smart guy, you've always been a smart guy, and you yourself fell in thrall to an idiot like this. And because you're a smart guy, you were able to reason yourself out of it. What chance do people of modest intellect have?

Family values, baby.

I heard Pedro Martinez on Baseball Tonight insisting Lange meant to hit Abreu. I like Pedro, but I think he's all wet on this one, for the reasons you state. The Tigers had just scored five in the bottom of the eighth to put themselves within shouting distance of a win, and Lange is going to put an opposing hitter on base for free in the top of the ninth? And on an 0-2? If he wanted to plunk Abreu, wouldn't he have done so on the first and second pitch? Yet those first two pitches were away from Abreu, who swung and missed on them: Why would Lange go and and plunk Abreu—who hangs out over the plate enough to rank third in the league in HBPs—at that point? Pedro's hypothesis doesn't pass the smell test.

Two outs and down a run in the ninth and here comes Niko batting LH. Oh boy …

Hope so! I’ll be there Friday and Saturday!

Just waiting for Abreu to tag the runner at first in the face on a pickoff throw …

Candelario swinging at everything high trying to tie the game early in the at bat, then works Hendriks into a favorable location for the much-needed lead off single.

Abreu went into second to make a point.

Fight! Fight! Fight!

Right. There are just too many misspellings and malapropisms, and the practice is too persistent, for them to be all strictly accidental. I mean, sure, they're relatively stupid people, but really: "Imeach"? Come on ...

Here's hoping there are enough yous to sink that whole fascist cabal in 2022 and 2024. 🥂

What are the chances the new owners could be prevailed upon to allow us to obtain the MTS archives for history's sake? I'd throw a couple bucks against that venture, if that's what's needed.

No to term limits. All that would get us a a revolving door of transactional business assholes looking to swoop in, make some quick bucks off taxpayers and lobbyists, and then steal away with Washington connections in hand for future graft opportunities. It's bad enough that our system allows too many of those people as it is. Cementing it in legislation would drive out the remaining people who are dedicated civil servants and turn it into a true swamp, 100%.