Comments on: Recap Lite: Monday 8/29/2011 This and that about baseball stats. Tue, 16 Jul 2013 17:01:55 +0000 hourly 1 By: nightfly Wed, 31 Aug 2011 07:09:31 +0000 @38 - thanks for the update on Tartabull. I can return the favor and confirm your excellent memory. The third pair of identical surnames was indeed Nelson: Dave Nelson finishing the string for the Royals, and the one and only Don Nelson doing the same for the Celtics. (Don is much better known now for his lengthy coaching and GM career.)

As a bonus - in 76-77, after Don Nelson left Boston, there was, briefly, a different third pair of matching last names: a part-timer named Bobby Wilson for the Celtics, and a speedy rookie named Willie Wilson for KC.

By: Brett Wed, 31 Aug 2011 07:02:50 +0000 Thanks John for finding the rules specific to my questions.
Here is the 2011 version, also on

The 2011 document includes changes made to the rules in December of 2010 and February of 2011. I have not clue what they were!
From the bottom of page 2: "Lake Buena Vista, Fla., December 8, 2010; Teleconference, February 16, 2011."

I wonder if the Brewers can protest the game. Betancourt was up with men on 1st and 2nd, nobody out, trailing 2-1 in the 9th.

Had Betancourt's bunt attempt been correctly ruled a strike, the count would have been 0-2. A third attempt to bunt the runners over may have been successful although more likely not attempted with 2 strikes. Also, perhaps a weak ground ball would have yielded no play except at 1st. A base hit with no runners thrown out would have, at the minimum, loaded the bases with no outs.

Instead, the game ended when the next batter, Mark kotsay, grounded into a double play.

By: John Autin Wed, 31 Aug 2011 04:28:07 +0000 Brett -- You'll find all the answers (ha-ha!) in the MLB rules, available online.

Rule 6.08(b) makes clear (sort of) that a ball that hits a batter's hand while he is trying to bunt is a strike, and a dead ball.

The second situation is covered clearly by the Rule 10.06(f) Comment. Ground-rule doubles are not an exception to the rule that credits the batter with only as many bases as the winning runner needs to score.

By: Brett Wed, 31 Aug 2011 03:31:40 +0000 Just saw Yuniesky Betancourt bunt a ball off his fingers - ouch! But what is the correct ruling on a play like this? Cardinals got the lead runner out a third, but shouldn't this have been ruled a strike or foul ball? If a hit batter is swinging, it's a strike. If a pitch hits the batter and then the bat, it's a foul ball as long as he is still in the batter's box.

Also, wondering about Ryan Adam's walk-off ground-rule single. If he ran all the way to second base, would he have gotten credit for a double? The rule book says the batter is permitted take as many bases on a game winning hit as the winning runner takes to score, but in this case the winning run was on 3rd. Homeruns are a known exception to this rule, but what about ground-rule doubles?

By: DoubleDiamond Wed, 31 Aug 2011 03:00:12 +0000 @16 - Tartabull fouled a ball off his foot in the first series of the season. He went on the DL with what was thought to be a minor injury. But his injury was apparently worse than originally thought, and his DL stint got longer and longer until the season was over. I guess no one wanted him any more after that season.

@7 - I remember that the Boston Celtics, with a comparatively small active roster of 12 players, and the Kansas City Royals had three common last names at one point in the 1970s. Cowens (Dave and Al) was one of these names, and White (JoJo and Frank) was another. I believe the third may have been Nelson (Roger on KC?).

Around the same time, in 1974, the short-lived Maryland Arrows of a short-lived indoor box lacrosse league had three players who shared names with guys then wearing the uniform of the Chicago White Sox - Pat Kelly, Wayne Granger, and Chuck Tanner. The White Sox's Chuck Tanner was their manager at the time.

By: Jimbo Wed, 31 Aug 2011 02:15:20 +0000 When the Giants signed Tejada I knew instantly it was a terrible signing. It should've been clear watching Tejada that he was done. He's getting older, his age was a lie and he was a steroid user. Put him in an extreme pitchers park and what do you expect? 26 RBI's and a .270 OBP is about right.

By: pauley Tue, 30 Aug 2011 23:49:40 +0000 The Giants have gone in a month from struggling to score runs to struggling just to get a hit. Bochy pressed all the right buttons last year and a bunch of old guys- Huff, Burrell, Uribe, Renteria came through. The button broke down this year. Still, I think if Bochy didn't put players in the batting order where it seems like they should be, I think they might have more success, something like: 1) Beltran 2) Sandoval 3) Belt 4)Torres 5)Keppinger 6) Huff 7) Whiteside 8) Anyone but O-Cab or Tejada at SS. (Just arranged in order of OBP) And once you get past the first three guys, you bunt immediately any time someone gets on base. Rallys just won't happen with this team, and it's a shame that Lincy, Cain and Bumgarner keep wasting their precious arms for nothing.

By: Cheese Tue, 30 Aug 2011 22:40:20 +0000 Unfortunately, all of the Giants issues now are mental.

Watching last nights game Lincecum looked solid. He was back to his windup, but then he gave up a homerun to soriano and you can tell he increasingly got frustrated after that (although losing 2 1-0 games in about a week would probably do that to you).

Add to that that the last homerun (a 3 run shot) barely made it over the 309ft wall in right (to be fair it is 25+ feet tall) right after Cabrera booted a sure double-play and you can see it must not be fun being a giants pitcher right now. Cain, Lincecum and Bumgarner all in top-5 NL in lowest run support.

And lastly, it is never good when the announcers are saying, 'And that is the best pitching performance (result) of Wells' career, ever! ( Including college and I think high school, but that may have been hyperbole...I mean it was Jon Miller 🙂 )

By: Jimbo Tue, 30 Aug 2011 20:55:57 +0000 @6

Damon isn't really slowing down. It's just the league that has a lower offense now.

Damon's last 4 years have featured OPS+ of 118, 118, 107, and 109. His career OPS+ is only 105. So there isn't any true evidence that Damon has declined. It would seem the pitching and/or the ballparks has just gotten tougher.

I wonder how many players have been affected in the past by offensive league-wide changes in a specific way. The league offense drops, and so does theirs, and thus they are deemed to be declining and decide it is time to retire. I know Mantle had injuries and was 36, but in 1968 when he batted .237 and had 18 homers and surely looked like an old and depleted player in people's eyes, his OPS+ was still 142. Meaning he was still a great hitter despite how it appeared he had rapidly declined.

Willie Mays also was in his late 30's in the late 60's. His numbers rapidly declined. But all across the league, numbers were way down, and Mays was in fact a VERY productive player right up to and including his age 41 season, when he posted an OPS+ of 131.

My point is that players who were in their late 30's during transition periods from hitters era to pitchers era will have numbers that fall off much more rapidly than what is really representative of their decline. This may cause them to doubt themselves, press to hard, or retire early.

I'm sure there are some pitcher's who appeared to decline rapidly during the steroid era, when in fact they had barely declined and were really just facing much tougher hitters (roiders in small ballparks). Not sure who would be the best example.

By: kingcrab Tue, 30 Aug 2011 20:07:51 +0000 jeff, wells, myers, happ, sosa, lyles...they are not average pitchers, they are bad pitchers. 3 earned runs against that lot in 39 innings is inexcusable.

tim is having a great year and it is not getting marred. he will be recognized for it as was the case with felix last year. probably not with a cy young but he should be getting a few first place votes and finish near the top.