chasfh Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 I'm on Central time, and I can't stay awake for some of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edman85 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 55 minutes ago, oblong said: That call to Eovaldi is not as horrible as I thought it would be based on the reaction I read. If it's the pitch I think it is, the green one touching the upper right solid box. You can play the woulda coulda shoulda game in perpituity. Also, the strike zone is 3D. So assuming that is the front of the plate, a curveball is going to have vertical break and spend a lot of time in the strike zone. The umpire does and should have some leeway on balls that don't spend all the time over the plate in or out of the zone. Graphics like above are misleading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Useful Idiot Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 1 hour ago, chasfh said: . Baseball is a game of events that lead to later events. Just an interesting what if possibility. Keying your graphic into the earlier discussion we had about evolving strike zone, it appears the umps are calling strikes above the belt...which I believe some critics here insisted was the exception? I guess if one follows those critics POV, then the Eovaldi pitch was high? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 1 hour ago, gehringer_2 said: The one call on JD was about as bad as I have seen this season. It seems pretty clear to me that the league has instructed umps to call wide this year - particularly to the outside, which seems to just to re-inforce all the worst trends in the game. It strongly favors sliders, which are the hardest pitch on pitcher's arms, it increases Ks and thus adds to the all or nothing aspect of the hitting, and it injects another huge dose of random outcome noise into a game already has enough built into it. My thing is that there was a ball off the plate four ball widths to Aledmys Diaz (one batter prior to Castro) that went the Red Sox way as well that was pretty critical in terms of how that AB played out as well. Had the the inning ended tied, would the Astros have had reason to be pissed at that too? That's my only point.... Diaz wasn't picking on the Red Sox or anything like that, he's just not good at his job. And the only reason we are talking about that particular call is because of what came after. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casimir Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 23 minutes ago, Edman85 said: Also, the strike zone is 3D. So assuming that is the front of the plate, a curveball is going to have vertical break and spend a lot of time in the strike zone. The umpire does and should have some leeway on balls that don't spend all the time over the plate in or out of the zone. Graphics like above are misleading. The umpires aren't calling a 3D strike zone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archie Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 Just bring on the computers or robo- umps to call balls and strike. It will make a uniform zone for everyone. It will be the umps own fault for so many poor calls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 1 hour ago, Edman85 said: Also, the strike zone is 3D. So assuming that is the front of the plate, a curveball is going to have vertical break and spend a lot of time in the strike zone. The umpire does and should have some leeway on balls that don't spend all the time over the plate in or out of the zone. Graphics like above are misleading. If a ball breaks even 3 feet across 55 feet (which is a huge breaking ball) , it only breaks about 1" in the 18 inches across the plate. The ump may be fooled by the break but not by the amount it's breaking while it's over the plate. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 (edited) 8 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: If a ball breaks even 3 feet across 55 feet (which is a huge breaking ball) , it only breaks about 1" in the 18 inches across the plate. The ump may be fooled by the break but not by the amount it's breaking while it's over the plate. they showed the overhead shot of the call on JD and the ball was two diameters wide the whole way. (and yeah - I know, it's 17" but I calculated 1.5 feet for simplicity) Edited October 20, 2021 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, mtutiger said: That's my only point.... Diaz wasn't picking on the Red Sox or anything like that, he's just not good at his job. Sure - that is the overall issue. But what comes after in a particular case does bring the significance of him not being good at his job into higher relief. But the other question is: "Is he really bad at his job?" He's only bad at ball and strikes if he is not calling the zone he intends to call, and judging by the nearly universal trend toward an increase in balls wide to the outside being called strikes across the league I have an increasingly hard time believing this is not an intentional outcome. Edited October 20, 2021 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 4 hours ago, Useful Idiot said: Keying your graphic into the earlier discussion we had about evolving strike zone, it appears the umps are calling strikes above the belt...which I believe some critics here insisted was the exception? I guess if one follows those critics POV, then the Eovaldi pitch was high? This may not be exactly to scale. 😏 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 3 hours ago, casimir said: The umpires aren't calling a 3D strike zone. And to this point of yours, I believe the current thinking on actual implementation of "robot umpires" is that the pitch will be recorded when it passes the middle depth line of the plate, basically, 8½" deep. I think this makes a lot of sense and would help mitigate the 3-D effects that Edman85 is referring to, i.e., a hard downward-breaking curve that might clip the bottom front electronic border of a 3-D zone and actually bounce off the ground before reaching the catcher; or an eephus pitch scraping the very top back of a 3-D zone that only a batter with a tennis racket could get to. I think this will be the best way to handle it, and pretty obvious as I think more about it. After all, I believe one of the goals of ESZ is to get more balls in play, and allowing hard-breaking pitches that ESZ would call a strike in a 3-D zone which are practically unhittable would undermine that goal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Useful Idiot Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 3 hours ago, gehringer_2 said: If a ball breaks even 3 feet across 55 feet (which is a huge breaking ball) , it only breaks about 1" in the 18 inches across the plate. The ump may be fooled by the break but not by the amount it's breaking while it's over the plate. Isn't it true that some pitches "break late"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 (edited) Different controversy, but I've kinda felt that TBS has had a slight pro-Braves bent all postseason.... right down to putting Frenchy in the booth for both of their series. They've been a superior broadcast over FOX regardless, but just calling it like I see it. Edited October 20, 2021 by mtutiger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Useful Idiot Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 25 minutes ago, chasfh said: This may not be exactly to scale. 😏 The point I had hoped you might draw, is that people will support the conclusions that suit them, and labor long and hard to defend their preferred perspective. In that earlier thread, there were some of us who INSISTED the strike zone was only enforced knees to the belt. IF THEIR CLAIMS ARE TRUE, then the pitch was clearly well above the belt. Now, I happen to personally believe the claim that strikes are only enforced between the knees and belt, is in error...and that Evovaldi got robbed on the pitch in question (agreeing with the commentator who furnished the "out of scale" illustration) But my point is that different people are gonna have different views, with each being resolute that they have it "right", while any and all who might disagree, are simply either dishonest, incompetent, or otherwise mistaken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Cowan Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 6 hours ago, Tiger337 said: Speaking of gambling: https://www.golfdigest.com/story/report-details-criminal-record-of-james-adducci-the-gambler-who-won-dollar12-million-on-tiger-woods-masters-victory That's not him though. Our Jim Adduci would never allow himself to be caught. Remember when Michael said this to his idiot brother-in-law, Carlo, to let him know that Michael was aware that Carlo had deliberately helped to set up Sonny at the causeway toll booth: "You have to answer for Santino, Carlo". Answer for. Nothing specific there, but you fear the worst. No matter what other trouble this James Adducci ever gets into for the rest of his life, it pales into insignificance compared to this: he has to answer for attempting to impersonate Jim Adduci. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 44 minutes ago, Useful Idiot said: The point I had hoped you might draw, is that people will support the conclusions that suit them, and labor long and hard to defend their preferred perspective. In that earlier thread, there were some of us who INSISTED the strike zone was only enforced knees to the belt. IF THEIR CLAIMS ARE TRUE, then the pitch was clearly well above the belt. Now, I happen to personally believe the claim that strikes are only enforced between the knees and belt, is in error...and that Evovaldi got robbed on the pitch in question (agreeing with the commentator who furnished the "out of scale" illustration) But my point is that different people are gonna have different views, with each being resolute that they have it "right", while any and all who might disagree, are simply either dishonest, incompetent, or otherwise mistaken. I understand the point you had hoped I might draw. I just don't think this was the best evidence you could have provided. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Useful Idiot Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 8 minutes ago, chasfh said: I just don't think this was the best evidence you could have provided. I was just working with the graphic that you provided. Sorry, I'll try to do better next time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Useful Idiot Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 Can we at least agree that all who insist that particular pitch was a strike, are affirming that the top of the strike zone is more than a ball diameter above the belt? 👀 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 6 hours ago, Useful Idiot said: Keying your graphic into the earlier discussion we had about evolving strike zone, it appears the umps are calling strikes above the belt...which I believe some critics here insisted was the exception? I guess if one follows those critics POV, then the Eovaldi pitch was high? they started calling above the waist a number of years ago - about the same time that they started getting guys out on the swing and miss high fastball. The two things are directly related. A batter never has to swing at a ball above the waist 20yr ago because they were not called strikes. They have to swing now because the zone is called up higher - which the graphic demonstrates. The high strike was also called back in the 60's, in part because of the umpires position with the external balloon chest protector. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 (edited) Amazing how different the Astros-Sox series looks 24 hours later... Edited October 20, 2021 by mtutiger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted October 21, 2021 Share Posted October 21, 2021 3 hours ago, Useful Idiot said: I was just working with the graphic that you provided. Sorry, I'll try to do better next time. That’s a stretch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casimir Posted October 21, 2021 Share Posted October 21, 2021 1 hour ago, mtutiger said: Amazing how different the Astros-Sox series looks 24 hours later... It is kind of silly, isn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Useful Idiot Posted October 21, 2021 Share Posted October 21, 2021 39 minutes ago, chasfh said: That’s a stretch. Actually, I think that whoever created that graphic in the first place tailored it to emphasize the story they wanted to tell/.....your observation about it being out of scale was correct. But it was a graphic that you sourced. I didn't just pull it out of my ear. Rough figuring, if we ballpark the silhouette figures to be 6 foot tall, then the home plate as drawn would be roughly 26 inches wide (relative to player height) SO, I think it was more of a scrunch, than a stretch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Useful Idiot Posted October 21, 2021 Share Posted October 21, 2021 2 hours ago, mtutiger said: Amazing how different the Astros-Sox series looks 24 hours later... Considering the way the Astros got their heads beat in during the first game in Boston, I believe they have demonstrated remarkable resilience. It will be fun watching Boston in a do-or-die situation once back in Houston. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted October 21, 2021 Share Posted October 21, 2021 1 hour ago, Useful Idiot said: Considering the way the Astros got their heads beat in during the first game in Boston, I believe they have demonstrated remarkable resilience. It will be fun watching Boston in a do-or-die situation once back in Houston. The start by Framber today was massive... gave the bullpen a huge rest after getting taxed in Games 2-4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.