High Heat Simulation League
The HHSL was established in April of 2001 using the award winning High Heat franchise as a simulation engine. Several 3rd party
season FA signings, Waivers for demoted players and Trades. The league is always looking for good owners and new ideas to help keep
The site is www.hhsl.org
I don't believe it is a time-intensive league, but is more of a matter of being able to manage your team and adjust the roster based on matchups on a weekly basis. If anyone wants more information, you can email me or ask me in the comments. You can also go to the site provided and get some more information if you would like any.
-I like Bert Blyleven, believe it or not. He doesn't seem like a bad guy, but I do like to take some enjoyment out of what he writes for his weekly column for NBC Sports and how it always ties things back to what he did as a player. Today Bert takes a shot at giving Javier Vazquez some advice that isn't, "go back to the National League," though that may be the best advice at this point. Bert also tries to figure out the problem that Vazquez is having so that he can have success. Unfortunately, I am not sure if he comes up with anything too productive.
Javier Vazquez
That's probably because he is nearly the same pitcher as he was the second half of the season in 2004.
2nd half 2004: 4-5, 6.92 ERA, 1.487 WHIP, 6.2 SO/9, 1.96 SO/BB
April 2010: 1-3, 9.78 ERA, 2.043 WHIP, 7.8 SO/9, 1.33 SO/BB
It looks like in the second half of 2004 he lost his control, quit striking out batters, and started giving up hits. The amount of home runs he gave up didn't change significantly, but he started getting wild and giving up hits. He's doing that same thing this year for the Yankees.
So how do we explain Vazquez’s problems? Are they physical, where he just has to iron out his mechanics? Or are they mental woes enhanced by the pressure of playing in New York? Could it be a little bit of both?
I vote it is a little bit of both. It seems like Vazquez has a problem pitching in New York, but there is also something wrong with the way he is pitching. One thing we need to make clear is that Vazquez is not a really great pitcher. Last year with the Braves was a surprise, because he hadn't been quite that good in a while. He is a guy who will give his team 200 innings, 10-15 wins, and a chance to stay in every game (usually). There is nothing wrong with that, but he gives up home runs, and has tended lately to have a fairly high ERA.
He's had good years in the American League (2007) and he has had bad years in the American League (2004). He's had good years in the National League (2009) and he has had bad years in the National League (2005). It is not like he is a stud pitcher who can't handle New York, because he has handled New York before. He is a pretty inconsistent guy from season to season.
As part of my lifelong crusade against wins, I want to point out you can see that Vazquez actually has a better winning percentage in the American League over his career than in the National League. This is despite the fact he is considered a better pitcher in the National League, though if you look closely at his splits I just linked, his peripheral numbers like H/9, strikeouts, and SO/9 aren't that different in each league. It just so happens Vazquez pitched for two good teams in the American League and pitched for the Expos for a while in the National League...hence his winning percentage is better in the AL.
Somehow he has "pitched well enough to win the game" in the American League despite the fact they have (generally) stronger hitters and he doesn't actually pitch quite as well when compared to him being in the National League. I thought that was kind of interesting that a guy who is considered to be a National League pitcher has a better winning percentage in the American League. There is another variable in there that gives him those wins...I think it may be the offense for the team he is plays on, but I would have to double check that with Joe Morgan to see if it is true.
Now Bert talks about himself for a bit:
Not only can it be tougher to play for certain teams in certain cities, but sometimes you struggle against certain teams as well.
Vazquez seems to struggle against the entire American League, so it isn't about "certain cities" or teams that cause him problems.
I always did well against Kansas City (34-22, 2.59 ERA) and Anaheim (28-14, 2.45 ERA), so I always went into those games with a positive frame of mind.
So he just needs to pretend he is pitching to National League hitters. Be positive, therefore the increased control and the decrease in home runs given up will follow? I am all for some positivity, but I don't know how much this can really help. He needs to take a different approach on the mound.
Cleveland (16-17, 4.40 ERA), however, had some hitters who saw me well, and they knew it. They probably wanted to send a limo for me just to make sure I arrived at the ballpark safe and sound. When you’re dealing with that kind of situation, you can’t do a whole lot about it, but you can’t dwell on it either.
So right now considering the entire league is hitting Vazquez well, how does he not dwell on this? This is great advice when playing certain teams, but the entire American League is destroying Vazquez right now. He would be booed in nearly every single MLB city for his performance.
The little devil in your mind is saying, “you’ve stunk against them before, and you’re going to stink today.” You have to fight that devil and tell him you’re going to shut these guys out today.
Again, great advice if Vazquez only knew how to do this. What happens when the devil keeps hanging curveballs and putting fastballs over the middle of the plate? Maybe Vazquez is mentally defeated, but I don't believe it is just a matter of pitching in New York. He's had success in the city before...unless it is wearing the Yankees jersey that causes him to pitch poorly.
His career numbers at Shea Stadium and old Yankee Stadium are pretty good. He had a 3.53 ERA, 1.248 WHIP and tOPS+ 95 at Shea Stadium. At old Yankee Stadium he had a 4.68 ERA, 1.153 WHIP, and a tOPS+ 96. He wasn't terrible, so I don't know if pitching in New York is the problem or not.
Sometimes players put pressure on themselves when playing in a big market, and the pressure can be even greater when that team is expected to win 100 games like the Yankees are.
This very well may be it, but recognizing the problem and fixing the problem are two different things. How does he fix this?
Yankee fans and Boston fans are intense. They’re not like Midwest fans who are a little easier. A Midwest fan is more likely to tell you “hey, we know you’re struggling, but you’ll get better.” But a Yankee fan might simply say “you suck.”
I am pretty sure a Chicago White Sox fan would tell Vazquez he sucks also, so I wouldn't sell them short on this. That's the only Midwest-type team he has pitched for. He has also pitched in Arizona, Montreal, and Atlanta, none of those cities are known for rabid fans. Maybe Vazquez's problem is the fans and the pressure he feels in the certain American League cities he plays in. I don't think it is a matter of the AL being a more difficult league.
The team spends big bucks on its players and the fans don’t have much patience when a guy is struggling. Carl Pavano went through that during four miserable seasons in New York.
Carl Pavano is a terrible example to use. He had miserable years in New York because he faked injuries, lied about injuries and generally just wanted to collect a paycheck and not be a part of the team. What killed Pavano was signing a long-term contract where he didn't have to earn his next one.
He was highly paid, and because of injuries he was unable to perform. Now he’s better off in the calmer environment in Minnesota.
A calmer environment that also doesn't involve a $40 million dollar contract. A calmer environment where he is no longer belatedly telling the team about an injury he has and a calmer environment where everyone in the locker room doesn't hate him because they think he is lazy.
Vazquez is going to make his 30-35 starts and pitch 200-plus innings.
Not if he keeps pitching this way. If he keeps pitching like he is then he will be lucky to make 10 starts and pitch 50 innings.
Even though the fans are going to ride him, he has to just take the ride and turn the fans onto his side rather than against him.
Gosh, that's all he has to do? It's so easy to do that in a heartbeat in New York! Why didn't he think of that earlier? Perhaps he should hand out cotton candy before and after games to the fans, come over to the season ticket holder's houses and walk their dogs or maybe just let the fans know he cares by taking out a billboard with a big heart on it that says, "I love Yankees fans." It's that easy and Yankees fans will just love him after that.
All he has to do is throw out three or four good starts in a row and they’ll be cheering for him again.
So here is Bert's advice for Javier Vazquez: You know that problem you are having with pitching one good start in a row? Just go out there and throw three or four good starts in a row and everything will be fine. Just pitch well and everything should be fine, so go ahead and start to pitch well now.
This is like telling a heroin addict the best way to recover is to just stop taking heroin. Yes, that solution would fix it, but it feels impossible to do. It is all well and good that he can get on the fan's good side by pitching three or four good starts in a row, but that's his entire problem...he hasn't been able to pitch one good start, much less three or four.
I would especially focus on control of the fastball. I would look at his balance point and his release. I wouldn’t even want to see the breaking ball or changeup, just the fastball,
I am not a pitching coach, but I am not sure if using his fastball (which is currently getting killed) more often is the answer. I remember him having success in Atlanta by mixing in his offspeed pitches and breaking pitches in fastball counts and keeping hitters off-balance. He is not keeping hitters off-balance at all, so turning him into a one-pitch pitcher doesn't seem like it fixes anything to me.
especially down and away to right-handers and down and away to left-handers.
This is great advice but Vazquez can't hit these spots right now. If he could do this, then he would, but the problem with this solution is that Vazquez currently can't do what it takes to create the solution.
The walks (5.9 per nine innings) are hurting him, so it’s most likely a matter of control.
Which is why telling him to hit certain spots isn't going to work right now nor is using his fastball more. If Vazquez aims down and away to a right-handed hitter with a fastball, misses his spot like he has been, and the ball is over the middle of the plate...and crushed by the hitter.
Once he gets that ironed out, he should be fine.
So just stay positive, throw more fastballs to spots you can't currently hit and stop walking people. He's not going to get the time to get this ironed out at this rate.
I might print out his stats and stick them in his locker. Highlight some of these good things. The wins, the innings pitched, etc. Tell him “you’ve done it before, you can do it again.”
"Javy, look at your career record of 143-142, ERA of 4.24, your ERA+ of 106, and 1.252 career WHIP. Your career is similar to that of Tim Belcher, Brad Radke, and Kevin Tapani. You are a slightly above average pitcher, so be that guy again. Oh yeah, everyone out there hates you so don't give up any runs early."
He has a great track record, particularly last season in Atlanta.
He really doesn't have a great track record, last season in Atlanta was his best year as a pitcher. He hasn't been great, excluding last year, since 2003. He's an above average pitcher, that's all. Sometimes I think there are unreal expectations for Vazquez. He is not a bad pitcher, but it is not like star pitcher or another guy who has been on a 2-3 year hot streak and is not pitching wel right now. There is some history for Vazquez to pitch badly or at least at an average level.
He’s won at least 10 ballgames in each of the last 10 seasons. He will give up the long ball, but he can also strike a lot guys out. He’s also very durable and pitches 200 innings almost every season. How many guys out there are like that?
Nobody is saying Vazquez is a bad pitcher or anything like that. It's just a matter of realizing he isn't an elite pitcher, but more a guy suited to play on a smaller market team or out of the spotlight. He can get batted around and his career ERA is over 4.00, which even given what else Bert said above isn't great.
When I pitched, I always figured there were 3-to-5 times a year I would pitch a shutout
This is a great philosophy for a guy like Bert Blyleven who is a Hall of Fame pitcher, but Javier Vazquez has 7 career shutouts and hasn't gotten one since 2005. So there are more starts that are going to make-or-break his season because he isn't going to get those 3-to-5 shutouts. For a Hall of Fame pitcher, he can count on those shutouts, but Vazquez isn't going to get those shutouts, so he needs to keep the ball in the ballpark and strikeout hitters...neither of which he has done well this year.
I would keep my team in the game during those other starts. It just so happens that Vazquez has had his bad starts already.
I don't believe Vazquez has his 3-to-5 bad starts out of the way already. What are the odds out of 30 starts Vazquez gets all of his bad starts out of the way at the beginning of the season? More importantly, what if those five starts to begin this season were the 20-30 starts that make-or-break his season? That's a more likely probability isn't it?
It’s all about what you’re made out of when things are tough.
That's why Bert's advice isn't great. I think we have seen what Vazquez is made of and that is what is concerning Yankees fans right now. Having him serve up fastballs that have gotten killed all year, telling him to think positive, and encouraging him to aim his fastball better is great advice for a guy who has great control, which Vazquez doesn't have right now.
-I am getting kind of tired of these "unwritten rules" in baseball that keep popping up when Dallas Braden is on the mound. I can handle the rule of not walking over a pitcher's mound as a runner, but now it is getting ridiculous in my mind.
Now there is a minor controversy over Evan Longoria trying to bunt his way on base during a perfect game. I don't know if Braden considers this one of the unwritten rules of baseball or not, but my stance is that it was the 5th inning and the Rays needed to score runs to win the game, Longoria should do what it takes to win or get on-base. If the A's can't field a bunt then that is there fault. Why should a team quit trying to score runs or challenge the other team to preserve a perfect game being thrown AGAINST them?
Braden kept his cool about it, but I can't help but think that he was seething inside about someone trying to break up his no-no with a bunt. Not doing that sort of thing is one of the unwritten rules, you know.
Craig Calcaterra is being tongue-in-cheek with this statement, but it wouldn't shock me if Braden was upset. I am mystified at the idea it is wrong to try and bunt your way on base during a perfect game or a no-hitter. Why should a team stop competing simply because the other pitcher is pitching well? Isn't the purpose to win the baseball game? If so, bunt or do whatever you have to do to win the game. I don't see the problem.
Of course Bob Brenly saw the problem a few years ago with a bunt during a perfect game.
Just ask Bob Brenly. He was the Diamondbacks manager back in 2001 when Curt Schilling had a perfect game going against the Padres in the eighth inning. Padres catcher Ben Davis laid down -- or rather, popped up -- one of the uglier bunts you'll ever see, but the ball managed to elude second baseman Jay Bell just long enough for Davis to reach.
The Diamondbacks freaked out, with Brenly calling the move "chicken" after the game and saying "Ben Davis is young and has a lot to learn. That was just uncalled for."
I remember this game and I can not have disagreed with Brenly any more than I did at the time, and I still feel that way. Ben Davis has a responsibility to his team to try and get on-base to win the game, he can't just stop trying, and whatever it takes to get on-base is what I think should be done. It sucks Schilling lost the perfect game, but get over it, I don't know why Ben Davis would stay up there swinging at pitches and doing something that hasn't worked all game. He tried something different and it worked.
That set off a nice little controversy about whether it's kosher to break up a no-hitter with a bunt.
In regard to the A's-Rays game on Sunday, Longoria tried to bunt in the 5th inning, so that was plenty fine for him to try and break up the perfect game. Isn't that the hitter's job? Get on base? Every bunt doesn't lead to a base hit or a no-hitter being broken up. Fielding a bunt is part of the game, so I think a team that is being no-hit or having a perfect game thrown against them should do whatever they can to break it up. It's not like they have a responsibility to make sure the perfect game or no-hitter happens. Let the other team worry about making sure a pitcher stays perfect.
I haven't seen anyone complaining about Longoria's attempt yesterday, but it was 4-0 at the time, which I suppose makes it a tad less defensible.
I don't care what the score is. I can see how bunting would be annoying, especially if it broke up a perfect game or a no-hitter, but the Rays hitters get paid to get on-base and win games. 4-0 isn't a lopsided score and one base hit could lead to a rally.
I understand the idea of unwritten baseball rules, but the bottom line is that I don't find it disrespectful for a batter to try and get on-base in any fashion during a no-hitter or perfect game...outside of throwing yourself in front of a pitch to get a baserunner on and break up a perfect game. A bunt is a way of the batter putting the ball in play and it is up to the defense to try and get the bunter/runner out. It's pretty easy for me, I have no problem with a bunt at any point to break up a no-hitter or perfect game.
Unwritten rules about the pitcher's mound are fine, but for me, unwritten rules that require a team being no-hit to basically cut down on their options of getting on-base are not fine with me. Why should the team getting no-hit by a pitcher feel the need to make sure it is easier for the pitcher to throw a no-hitter or perfect game? It's not like they are jumping in front of pitches to get hit-by-a-pitch or anything. They are bunting and if the opposing team's defense is good enough they can preserve the no-hitter or perfect game.
I don't get why there has to be reverence given to a pitcher who is pitching well. The offensive players get paid to get on-base and they should do so to the best of their ability.
That's probably because he is nearly the same pitcher as he was the second half of the season in 2004.
2nd half 2004: 4-5, 6.92 ERA, 1.487 WHIP, 6.2 SO/9, 1.96 SO/BB
April 2010: 1-3, 9.78 ERA, 2.043 WHIP, 7.8 SO/9, 1.33 SO/BB
It looks like in the second half of 2004 he lost his control, quit striking out batters, and started giving up hits. The amount of home runs he gave up didn't change significantly, but he started getting wild and giving up hits. He's doing that same thing this year for the Yankees.
So how do we explain Vazquez’s problems? Are they physical, where he just has to iron out his mechanics? Or are they mental woes enhanced by the pressure of playing in New York? Could it be a little bit of both?
I vote it is a little bit of both. It seems like Vazquez has a problem pitching in New York, but there is also something wrong with the way he is pitching. One thing we need to make clear is that Vazquez is not a really great pitcher. Last year with the Braves was a surprise, because he hadn't been quite that good in a while. He is a guy who will give his team 200 innings, 10-15 wins, and a chance to stay in every game (usually). There is nothing wrong with that, but he gives up home runs, and has tended lately to have a fairly high ERA.
He's had good years in the American League (2007) and he has had bad years in the American League (2004). He's had good years in the National League (2009) and he has had bad years in the National League (2005). It is not like he is a stud pitcher who can't handle New York, because he has handled New York before. He is a pretty inconsistent guy from season to season.
As part of my lifelong crusade against wins, I want to point out you can see that Vazquez actually has a better winning percentage in the American League over his career than in the National League. This is despite the fact he is considered a better pitcher in the National League, though if you look closely at his splits I just linked, his peripheral numbers like H/9, strikeouts, and SO/9 aren't that different in each league. It just so happens Vazquez pitched for two good teams in the American League and pitched for the Expos for a while in the National League...hence his winning percentage is better in the AL.
Somehow he has "pitched well enough to win the game" in the American League despite the fact they have (generally) stronger hitters and he doesn't actually pitch quite as well when compared to him being in the National League. I thought that was kind of interesting that a guy who is considered to be a National League pitcher has a better winning percentage in the American League. There is another variable in there that gives him those wins...I think it may be the offense for the team he is plays on, but I would have to double check that with Joe Morgan to see if it is true.
Now Bert talks about himself for a bit:
Not only can it be tougher to play for certain teams in certain cities, but sometimes you struggle against certain teams as well.
Vazquez seems to struggle against the entire American League, so it isn't about "certain cities" or teams that cause him problems.
I always did well against Kansas City (34-22, 2.59 ERA) and Anaheim (28-14, 2.45 ERA), so I always went into those games with a positive frame of mind.
So he just needs to pretend he is pitching to National League hitters. Be positive, therefore the increased control and the decrease in home runs given up will follow? I am all for some positivity, but I don't know how much this can really help. He needs to take a different approach on the mound.
Cleveland (16-17, 4.40 ERA), however, had some hitters who saw me well, and they knew it. They probably wanted to send a limo for me just to make sure I arrived at the ballpark safe and sound. When you’re dealing with that kind of situation, you can’t do a whole lot about it, but you can’t dwell on it either.
So right now considering the entire league is hitting Vazquez well, how does he not dwell on this? This is great advice when playing certain teams, but the entire American League is destroying Vazquez right now. He would be booed in nearly every single MLB city for his performance.
The little devil in your mind is saying, “you’ve stunk against them before, and you’re going to stink today.” You have to fight that devil and tell him you’re going to shut these guys out today.
Again, great advice if Vazquez only knew how to do this. What happens when the devil keeps hanging curveballs and putting fastballs over the middle of the plate? Maybe Vazquez is mentally defeated, but I don't believe it is just a matter of pitching in New York. He's had success in the city before...unless it is wearing the Yankees jersey that causes him to pitch poorly.
His career numbers at Shea Stadium and old Yankee Stadium are pretty good. He had a 3.53 ERA, 1.248 WHIP and tOPS+ 95 at Shea Stadium. At old Yankee Stadium he had a 4.68 ERA, 1.153 WHIP, and a tOPS+ 96. He wasn't terrible, so I don't know if pitching in New York is the problem or not.
Sometimes players put pressure on themselves when playing in a big market, and the pressure can be even greater when that team is expected to win 100 games like the Yankees are.
This very well may be it, but recognizing the problem and fixing the problem are two different things. How does he fix this?
Yankee fans and Boston fans are intense. They’re not like Midwest fans who are a little easier. A Midwest fan is more likely to tell you “hey, we know you’re struggling, but you’ll get better.” But a Yankee fan might simply say “you suck.”
I am pretty sure a Chicago White Sox fan would tell Vazquez he sucks also, so I wouldn't sell them short on this. That's the only Midwest-type team he has pitched for. He has also pitched in Arizona, Montreal, and Atlanta, none of those cities are known for rabid fans. Maybe Vazquez's problem is the fans and the pressure he feels in the certain American League cities he plays in. I don't think it is a matter of the AL being a more difficult league.
The team spends big bucks on its players and the fans don’t have much patience when a guy is struggling. Carl Pavano went through that during four miserable seasons in New York.
Carl Pavano is a terrible example to use. He had miserable years in New York because he faked injuries, lied about injuries and generally just wanted to collect a paycheck and not be a part of the team. What killed Pavano was signing a long-term contract where he didn't have to earn his next one.
He was highly paid, and because of injuries he was unable to perform. Now he’s better off in the calmer environment in Minnesota.
A calmer environment that also doesn't involve a $40 million dollar contract. A calmer environment where he is no longer belatedly telling the team about an injury he has and a calmer environment where everyone in the locker room doesn't hate him because they think he is lazy.
Vazquez is going to make his 30-35 starts and pitch 200-plus innings.
Not if he keeps pitching this way. If he keeps pitching like he is then he will be lucky to make 10 starts and pitch 50 innings.
Even though the fans are going to ride him, he has to just take the ride and turn the fans onto his side rather than against him.
Gosh, that's all he has to do? It's so easy to do that in a heartbeat in New York! Why didn't he think of that earlier? Perhaps he should hand out cotton candy before and after games to the fans, come over to the season ticket holder's houses and walk their dogs or maybe just let the fans know he cares by taking out a billboard with a big heart on it that says, "I love Yankees fans." It's that easy and Yankees fans will just love him after that.
All he has to do is throw out three or four good starts in a row and they’ll be cheering for him again.
So here is Bert's advice for Javier Vazquez: You know that problem you are having with pitching one good start in a row? Just go out there and throw three or four good starts in a row and everything will be fine. Just pitch well and everything should be fine, so go ahead and start to pitch well now.
This is like telling a heroin addict the best way to recover is to just stop taking heroin. Yes, that solution would fix it, but it feels impossible to do. It is all well and good that he can get on the fan's good side by pitching three or four good starts in a row, but that's his entire problem...he hasn't been able to pitch one good start, much less three or four.
I would especially focus on control of the fastball. I would look at his balance point and his release. I wouldn’t even want to see the breaking ball or changeup, just the fastball,
I am not a pitching coach, but I am not sure if using his fastball (which is currently getting killed) more often is the answer. I remember him having success in Atlanta by mixing in his offspeed pitches and breaking pitches in fastball counts and keeping hitters off-balance. He is not keeping hitters off-balance at all, so turning him into a one-pitch pitcher doesn't seem like it fixes anything to me.
especially down and away to right-handers and down and away to left-handers.
This is great advice but Vazquez can't hit these spots right now. If he could do this, then he would, but the problem with this solution is that Vazquez currently can't do what it takes to create the solution.
The walks (5.9 per nine innings) are hurting him, so it’s most likely a matter of control.
Which is why telling him to hit certain spots isn't going to work right now nor is using his fastball more. If Vazquez aims down and away to a right-handed hitter with a fastball, misses his spot like he has been, and the ball is over the middle of the plate...and crushed by the hitter.
Once he gets that ironed out, he should be fine.
So just stay positive, throw more fastballs to spots you can't currently hit and stop walking people. He's not going to get the time to get this ironed out at this rate.
I might print out his stats and stick them in his locker. Highlight some of these good things. The wins, the innings pitched, etc. Tell him “you’ve done it before, you can do it again.”
"Javy, look at your career record of 143-142, ERA of 4.24, your ERA+ of 106, and 1.252 career WHIP. Your career is similar to that of Tim Belcher, Brad Radke, and Kevin Tapani. You are a slightly above average pitcher, so be that guy again. Oh yeah, everyone out there hates you so don't give up any runs early."
He has a great track record, particularly last season in Atlanta.
He really doesn't have a great track record, last season in Atlanta was his best year as a pitcher. He hasn't been great, excluding last year, since 2003. He's an above average pitcher, that's all. Sometimes I think there are unreal expectations for Vazquez. He is not a bad pitcher, but it is not like star pitcher or another guy who has been on a 2-3 year hot streak and is not pitching wel right now. There is some history for Vazquez to pitch badly or at least at an average level.
He’s won at least 10 ballgames in each of the last 10 seasons. He will give up the long ball, but he can also strike a lot guys out. He’s also very durable and pitches 200 innings almost every season. How many guys out there are like that?
Nobody is saying Vazquez is a bad pitcher or anything like that. It's just a matter of realizing he isn't an elite pitcher, but more a guy suited to play on a smaller market team or out of the spotlight. He can get batted around and his career ERA is over 4.00, which even given what else Bert said above isn't great.
When I pitched, I always figured there were 3-to-5 times a year I would pitch a shutout
This is a great philosophy for a guy like Bert Blyleven who is a Hall of Fame pitcher, but Javier Vazquez has 7 career shutouts and hasn't gotten one since 2005. So there are more starts that are going to make-or-break his season because he isn't going to get those 3-to-5 shutouts. For a Hall of Fame pitcher, he can count on those shutouts, but Vazquez isn't going to get those shutouts, so he needs to keep the ball in the ballpark and strikeout hitters...neither of which he has done well this year.
I would keep my team in the game during those other starts. It just so happens that Vazquez has had his bad starts already.
I don't believe Vazquez has his 3-to-5 bad starts out of the way already. What are the odds out of 30 starts Vazquez gets all of his bad starts out of the way at the beginning of the season? More importantly, what if those five starts to begin this season were the 20-30 starts that make-or-break his season? That's a more likely probability isn't it?
It’s all about what you’re made out of when things are tough.
That's why Bert's advice isn't great. I think we have seen what Vazquez is made of and that is what is concerning Yankees fans right now. Having him serve up fastballs that have gotten killed all year, telling him to think positive, and encouraging him to aim his fastball better is great advice for a guy who has great control, which Vazquez doesn't have right now.
-I am getting kind of tired of these "unwritten rules" in baseball that keep popping up when Dallas Braden is on the mound. I can handle the rule of not walking over a pitcher's mound as a runner, but now it is getting ridiculous in my mind.
Now there is a minor controversy over Evan Longoria trying to bunt his way on base during a perfect game. I don't know if Braden considers this one of the unwritten rules of baseball or not, but my stance is that it was the 5th inning and the Rays needed to score runs to win the game, Longoria should do what it takes to win or get on-base. If the A's can't field a bunt then that is there fault. Why should a team quit trying to score runs or challenge the other team to preserve a perfect game being thrown AGAINST them?
Braden kept his cool about it, but I can't help but think that he was seething inside about someone trying to break up his no-no with a bunt. Not doing that sort of thing is one of the unwritten rules, you know.
Craig Calcaterra is being tongue-in-cheek with this statement, but it wouldn't shock me if Braden was upset. I am mystified at the idea it is wrong to try and bunt your way on base during a perfect game or a no-hitter. Why should a team stop competing simply because the other pitcher is pitching well? Isn't the purpose to win the baseball game? If so, bunt or do whatever you have to do to win the game. I don't see the problem.
Of course Bob Brenly saw the problem a few years ago with a bunt during a perfect game.
Just ask Bob Brenly. He was the Diamondbacks manager back in 2001 when Curt Schilling had a perfect game going against the Padres in the eighth inning. Padres catcher Ben Davis laid down -- or rather, popped up -- one of the uglier bunts you'll ever see, but the ball managed to elude second baseman Jay Bell just long enough for Davis to reach.
The Diamondbacks freaked out, with Brenly calling the move "chicken" after the game and saying "Ben Davis is young and has a lot to learn. That was just uncalled for."
I remember this game and I can not have disagreed with Brenly any more than I did at the time, and I still feel that way. Ben Davis has a responsibility to his team to try and get on-base to win the game, he can't just stop trying, and whatever it takes to get on-base is what I think should be done. It sucks Schilling lost the perfect game, but get over it, I don't know why Ben Davis would stay up there swinging at pitches and doing something that hasn't worked all game. He tried something different and it worked.
That set off a nice little controversy about whether it's kosher to break up a no-hitter with a bunt.
In regard to the A's-Rays game on Sunday, Longoria tried to bunt in the 5th inning, so that was plenty fine for him to try and break up the perfect game. Isn't that the hitter's job? Get on base? Every bunt doesn't lead to a base hit or a no-hitter being broken up. Fielding a bunt is part of the game, so I think a team that is being no-hit or having a perfect game thrown against them should do whatever they can to break it up. It's not like they have a responsibility to make sure the perfect game or no-hitter happens. Let the other team worry about making sure a pitcher stays perfect.
I haven't seen anyone complaining about Longoria's attempt yesterday, but it was 4-0 at the time, which I suppose makes it a tad less defensible.
I don't care what the score is. I can see how bunting would be annoying, especially if it broke up a perfect game or a no-hitter, but the Rays hitters get paid to get on-base and win games. 4-0 isn't a lopsided score and one base hit could lead to a rally.
I understand the idea of unwritten baseball rules, but the bottom line is that I don't find it disrespectful for a batter to try and get on-base in any fashion during a no-hitter or perfect game...outside of throwing yourself in front of a pitch to get a baserunner on and break up a perfect game. A bunt is a way of the batter putting the ball in play and it is up to the defense to try and get the bunter/runner out. It's pretty easy for me, I have no problem with a bunt at any point to break up a no-hitter or perfect game.
Unwritten rules about the pitcher's mound are fine, but for me, unwritten rules that require a team being no-hit to basically cut down on their options of getting on-base are not fine with me. Why should the team getting no-hit by a pitcher feel the need to make sure it is easier for the pitcher to throw a no-hitter or perfect game? It's not like they are jumping in front of pitches to get hit-by-a-pitch or anything. They are bunting and if the opposing team's defense is good enough they can preserve the no-hitter or perfect game.
I don't get why there has to be reverence given to a pitcher who is pitching well. The offensive players get paid to get on-base and they should do so to the best of their ability.
6 comments:
I really hate when analysts attempt to equate their own situations with the situation of another player. Just because you played the sport at the professional level does not mean you are a mind reader. Everyone knows that if you pitch badly against one team, you're automatically nervous to pitch against them again.
Bert Blyleven fixes world hunger: "Just make everyone tasty sandwiches. Gosh!"
And I don't have an issue with Longoria's bunt for a couple of reasons. First, it's only a four-run game, and one baserunner could spark a rally. Making a pitcher throw from the stretch for the first time in a game could easily affect his rhythm.
Also, it's the fifth inning, and that's too early to be whining about breaking up the no-hitter. Braden hadn't made it through the lineup twice yet. He'd set down all of twelve batters in a row, so it wasn't like he was on the brink of history just yet.
All he has to do is throw out three or four good starts in a row and they’ll be cheering for him again.
But we already established the rabid nature of Yankees fans. Even if he throws 3 good games in a row, the next bad start will have fans going "oh shit, not again."
The Diamondbacks freaked out, with Brenly calling the move "chicken" after the game and saying "Ben Davis is young and has a lot to learn. That was just uncalled for."
Wasn't it a 1-0 or 2-0 game at the time? It's not like it was 10-0 and the guy bunted. What if the next guy hit a HR? The game is now tied (if it was 2-0). Remember the perfect that was broken up this year by a HBP... next guy hit a HR...
but it was 4-0 at the time, which I suppose makes it a tad less defensible.
It was the fifth inning... What if Pena gets up and hits a HR? Then it's 4-2 in the fifth inning. Considering Oakland's bullpen is all sorts of suck right now, it's not the craziest idea that to think the team with the best record in baseball might score a couple runs in the remaining 4 innings.
Then again, the only reason anyone can bitch about it is because no one actually got a hit. If Longoria got on and then someone else got a basehit (again, it was only the fifth inning), no one would give a crap.
Dylan, I don't like that either. It seems like pitching with the Yankees uniform on is Vazquez's problem, but Bert's situation isn't exactly comparable.
Casey, Bert would fix world hunger that way. It's as simple as doing the one thing you have struggled to do.
I don't have an issue at with Longoria's bunt because it was so early and he needs to help his team win. That's his job and no one would expect him to bunt. The goal isn't to preserve a perfect game, but to get runners on base and score. It's still a competition. You are right, it was too early to complain a/b that too.
Rich exactly, anytime he gives runs in the 1st inning Yankees fans will say that. I live with one, I know this all too well.
There is a reason Brenly is calling Cubs games now and not managing...ok, it has nothing to do with his comments, but that was a game in the division between two teams tightly contesting for the lead in the divison. It was a close game and the Padres wanted a runner on. I don't see why the other team has to be in awe of a perfect game. I thought a bunt by the catcher was brilliant.
Not to mention, we have seen how Braden is kind of emotional out there, if he gives up a hit, how long does he think about it? He could dwell on it or start to lose it with runners on base and then Pena gets a hit and the Rays have a rally. You are right, if someone else got a hit, it would all be null and void.
The game was 2-0 at the time. As soon as Davis got on with the bunt, the tying run was at the plate. In fact, there was only one out, so the tying run came to the plate twice. To quote Herm Edwards, you play to win the game. I also agree, if the score had been 10-0, chickenshit would have been the correct call. 2-0? Not even close, bunt away.
Martin, agreed. I remember when that happened. I am a sort of baseball traditionalist in several ways, but I have never understood the whole "you don't bunt during a no-hitter/perfect game" idea. In my mind that is when you SHOULD do things to get on base.
Shit, in a 2-0 game, do whatever it takes to win the game. That's not breaking unwritten rules, that's playing to win the game.
Post a Comment