nolan ryan george bush alcs game 1

Disastrous eighth inning dooms Rangers as Yankees steal Game 1 in Texas

17 Comments

Pictures may say a thousand words, but the shot of Nolan Ryan and George Bush after the Rangers’ implosion in the eighth inning of the ALCS opener can probably be boiled down to just one: Yuck.

Texas chased CC Sabathia from the game after four innings, got an excellent start from C.J. Wilson, and then watched a 5-1 lead turn into a heartbreaking 6-5 defeat as the wheels came flying off in the top of the eighth frame.

Wilson was at 98 pitches through seven strong innings, but manager Ron Washington left him in the game to face Brett Gardner leading off the eighth. Gardner is left-handed and Wilson has always been death on lefties, so that move was at least somewhat understandable. Washington leaving Wilson in to face the right-handed-hitting Derek Jeter after Gardner dove into an infield single was simply a mistake. And things only got worse from there.

Jeter doubled down the left field line to score Gardner and knock out Wilson and then Washington began a game of musical relievers. He used a total of five pitchers in the inning, including four relievers in the span of five batters, all while seven straight Yankees reached base. Bringing in lefty Darren Oliver to face switch-hitters Nick Swisher and Mark Teixeira was iffy and bringing in lefty Derek Holland to face right-handed bat and career-long southpaw masher Marcus Thames was flat-out crazy, but here’s the kicker:

Washington brought in four arms out of the bullpen, yet never turned to his best reliever, Neftali Feliz.

I’m sure Washington was saving his closer for a supposed “save” situation, but there’s no situation that could possibly need saving more than the Rangers’ eighth-inning implosion and after coughing up the lead there was no “save” chance for Feliz in the ninth inning anyway. Blaming the manager for five different pitchers allowing seven straight batters to reach is obviously silly, but Washington pulled some extremely questionable strings and never even saw fit to let Feliz try to put out the fire.

And as if that wasn’t enough, Ian Kinsler led off the bottom of the eighth inning with a hard-fought walk only to be picked off first base by Kerry Wood, against whom runners are 19-for-19 stealing bags over the past two seasons. Wood’s move to first base wasn’t even a particularly good one, which is why he’d picked off just one previous runner during the past five seasons, and there’s no real need to take added risks getting a big jump when Jorge Posada has thrown out just 14 percent of steal attempts this season.

Ryan got the evening off to a great start with the best ceremonial first pitch you’ll ever see from a 63-year-old team executive and jumping all over an uncharacteristically wild Sabathia in the first inning had the crowd in a frenzy, but a Yankee-friendly bounce and close-but-correct umpire’s call on a wild pitch allowed him to wriggle out of the jam, the Rangers failed to truly put the game away after having the Yankees on the ropes, and the eighth inning was a mess on nearly every possible level.

Texas will try to regroup with Colby Lewis on the mound Saturday and a series-evening victory with Cliff Lee set for Game 3 would be huge, but New York will counter with Phil Hughes and Joe Girardi may be leaning toward skipping A.J. Burnett and bringing Sabathia back on short rest for Game 4 following his four-inning, 93-pitch outing in Game 1. Given how much Sabathia struggled that probably shouldn’t scare the Rangers, but the Yankees would love to avoid using Burnett.

One nightmarish inning may have changed the whole series.

* * * * * * * * * *

To follow Aaron Gleeman on Twitter for in-game commentary throughout the playoffs, click here.

Great Moments in Not Understanding The Rules

screen-shot-2017-01-17-at-10-02-33-am
Leave a comment

Bill Livingston of the Cleveland Plain Dealer is a Hall of Fame voter. In the past he has voted for players who used PEDs, but he’s never been totally happy with it, seeing the whole PED mess as a dilemma for voters.

On the one hand he doesn’t like voting for users and doesn’t like harming those who were clean by shifting votes away from them, but on the other hand, he doesn’t want to pretend history didn’t happen and that baseball hasn’t been filled with cheaters forever. What to do?

This year he decided to abstain altogether. A fair and noble act if one is as conflicted as Livingston happens to be. Except . . . he didn’t actually abstain:

Major league baseball will confer bronzed immortality on a few players Wednesday when the results of the national baseball writers’ balloting for the Hall of Fame will be announced.

I had a 2017 ballot. I returned it signed, but blank, with an explanatory note.

A blank ballot, signed and submitted, is not an abstention. It’s counted as a vote for no one. Each “no” vote increases the denominator in the calculation of whether or not a candidate has received 75% of the vote and has gained induction. An abstention, however, would not. So, in effect, Livingston has voted against all of the players on the ballot, both PED-tainted and clean, even though it appears that that was not his intention.

This is the second time in three years a Cleveland writer has had . . . issues with his Hall of Fame ballot. In the 2014-15 voting period, Paul Hoynes simply lost his ballot. Now Livingston misunderstood how to abstain.

I worry quite often that Ohio is gonna mess up a major election. I guess I’m just worrying about the wrong election.

Hall of Fame voters are making news, not exercising democratic rights

Cooperstown
Associated Press
3 Comments

Last month the Baseball Writers Association of America voted to make all Hall of Fame ballots public beginning with next year’s vote for the 2018 induction class. In the past 24 hours or so, as this year’s Hall of Fame voting period comes to a close, a lot of folks have been talking about that. Most notably in Jayson Stark’s piece over at ESPN regarding next year’s brave new public world.

Stark is pro-transparency on the ballots, as are the vast majority of BBWAA members who voted on the public ballot measure (it passed 80-9). Not everyone Stark quotes in his article is on board with it, though:

“I’ve already seen a lot of people change their votes from one year to the next,” said one of the strongest dissenters to this decision, USA Today’s Bob Nightengale. “People have changed their votes based on public opinion.”

Two other sources in the story, Scott Miller of Bleacher Report and a voter who asked to remain anonymous equated their Hall of Fame vote with democracy and invoked the sanctity of the secret ballot. “The No. 1 reason I was against this rule is that in this country, it’s a democracy, and everyone has a vote on different things. And I hate to see a blanket rule that forces everyone to go in one direction,” Miller said. Here’s what the anonymous guy said:

“To me, a secret ballot is a fundamental of democracy. You should be able to vote your conscience without having to explain your vote. But once it’s public, you’re open to public pressure. And that’s not what we want in a democracy. We’re not elected representatives. We’re chosen to be part of a voting group.”

This is ridiculous of course. Voting for the Hall of Fame is not exercising democratic rights. It is making news and making history. Hall of Fame voters are making decisions which will fundamentally alter baseball history and which matter greatly to a large number of baseball fans. They are not advancing their own or society’s interests at the ballot box the way citizens do on election day. Despite the fact that the form of their action here is, technically speaking, a ballot, they are making news in the same way a GM makes a news with a trade, the commissioner makes news with a rule change or a team makes news by winning a World Series.

Would any of these voters — who are credentialed members of the media, by the way, and like to style themselves as truth-seeking members of the Fourth Estate — accept silence from the people who make the news on the beat they cover? Would they be content if the newsmakers whose acts they chronicle demanded anonymity the way they themselves do now? Of course they wouldn’t. And if they got the same silent treatment they’d prefer to give, they’d write one of those petulant little columns they love about players who “duck the press” after a game.

Suck it up, journalists. Act the way you expect the newsmakers you cover to act and own your decisions. Don’t pretend for a moment that you’re not the subject of, and not the reporter of, the story when Hall of Fame season comes around.