And That Happened: Monday’s scores and highlights

39 Comments

Braves 10, Diamondbacks 1: Justin Upton went 4 for 5 with a homer and 2 RBI. Chris Johnson went 3 for 4 with a homer and 3 RBI. Martin Prado had a couple of hits and I suppose he was gritty. Gonna say that the first visit to Arizona for the Braves post-trade falls to their advantage.

Twins 10, White Sox 3: Aaron Hicks hit two home runs and robbed one from Adam Dunn in center. If I remember by college accounting course, that’s a +3 in the home run column.

Indians 1, Yankees 0; Yankees 7, Indians 0: An old-timey doubleheader with no multi-hour break in the middle and one ticket buying access to both games. Don’t see that happen much anymore. Takes a couple of rainouts to make it happen I guess. Justin Masterson was outstanding in the first, shutting out the Yankees and striking out nine. Vidal Nuno, I’m guessing a hair stylist/cosmetics mogul, pitched five innings of shutout ball himself in the second game, backed by a couple of RBI each from Vernon Wells and Lyle Overbay. Those three names, if I had told you were important parts of a Yankees game before the season started, would have likely had you thinking the team was in last place. They’re, instead, a game up in the AL East, tied for the best record in the American League.

Cardinals 6, Mets 3: Rick Ankiel’s Mets debut: 0 or 3 with two strikeouts. And he made a diving stab at a catch in the seventh inning, but just missed it, which led to the Cardinals scoring three runs. He said after the game if he had his own glove — which was still back in Houston — that he would have caught it. Instead he had to use a pitcher’s glove. I’m actually inclined to believe him here. Outfielder gloves are gigantic.

Brewers 5, Pirates 1: Milwaukee stole six bases off Pirates backup catcher Michael McKenry. I haven’t seen a defender so abused since Jerry Rice embarrassed Charles Dimry back in 1990. Maybe Jerry Glanville thought McKenry could handle throwing out Brewers base runners like he thought Dimry could cover Rice in man-to-man.

Cubs 9, Rockies 1: Travis Wood joins the increasingly long list of pitchers making the Rockies look lost at the plate lately, tossing seven shutout innings. The AP gamer said “He’s the first Cubs pitcher since Hippo Vaughn in 1919 to start with eight quality starts.” I’m guessing that Hippo Vaughn had no idea what a quality start was. And even if he did, it wouldn’t fit the same definition of “quality start” we know today. In 1919 it probably included cigarettes, Spanish Flu masks and trips to a brothel.

Tigers 7, Astros 2: A grand slam for Andy Dirks and, ouch, a dislocated jaw for Jose Altuve. These losses are getting increasingly painful for the Astros.

Nationals 6, Dodgers 2: Bryce Harper needed 11 stitches on his chin and he jammed his shoulder hitting the outfield wall. This is the quintessential “guy who plays really freakin’ hard” kind of injury, I suppose. He actually hit a chain link fence which sits in front of a scoreboard. Don Mattingly said after the game “That fencing we have is a little dangerous,” he said. “If you hit that, you’re going to feel it, especially face first.” You know THAT’s gonna be thrown back in Mattingly’s face during his deposition. Man.

Royals 11, Angels 4: Five hits and five RBI for Billy Butler, breaking a horrendous slump for Country Breakfast. Speaking of nicknames, Ned Yost called pitcher Luis Mendoza “Mendy” after the game, extending his streak of awful, unimaginative nicknames for his players to, like, 15. He and Eric Wedge probably have a little cheat sheet with every player’s name on his team with a little “y” next to it in case they need to use a nickname in a postgame interview.

Athletics 5, Rangers 1: Eight Ks for A.J. Griffin. Back to back homers for Yoenis Cespedes and Brandon Moss. The A’s needed this one after dropping six of their last seven.

The Braves are leaning toward keeping Brian Snitker as manager

Getty Images
3 Comments

Mark Bradley of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported over the weekend that the Braves are leaning toward keeping Brian Snitker as manager. Part of that comes after team meetings between Snitker and top brass. Some of it, however, is likely attributable to player sentiment, with Bob Nightengale of USA Today reporting this morning that Freddie Freeman and several Braves players have told the Braves front office that they want Snitker back.

Is it a good idea to bring Snitker back? Eh, I’m leaning no, with the caveat that it probably doesn’t make a huge difference in the short term.

The “no” is based mostly on the fact that Snitker has had a disturbing trend of preferring veterans over young players, as Bradley explains in detail here. For a brief moment this summer the Braves seemed surprisingly competitive. Not truly competitive if anyone was being honest, but they were hovering around .500 and were arguably in the wild card race. Around that time he made a number of questionable decisions that favored marginal and/or injured veterans over some young players who will be a part of the next truly competitive Braves team, likely messing with their confidence and possibly messing with their development.

These moves were not damaging, ultimately, to the 2017 Braves on the field — they were going to be under .500 regardless — but it was the sort of short-term thinking that a manager for a rebuilding team should not be employing. Part of the blame for this, by the way, can be put on the front office, who only gave Snitker a one-year contract when they made him the permanent manager last year, creating an incentive for him to win in 2017 rather than manage the club the way a guy who knows when the team will truly be competitive should manage it. Then again, if Snitker was so great a candidate in the front office’s mind, why did they only give him a one-year contract?

I suspect a lot of it has to do with loyalty. Snitker has been an admirable Braves company man for decades, and that was certainly worthy of respect by the club. That he got the gig was likewise due in part to the players liking him — the veteran players — and they now are weighing in with their support once again. At some point, however, loyalty and respect of veterans has to take a back seat to a determination of who is the best person to bring the team from rebuilding to competitiveness, and Snitker has not made the case why he is that man.

Earlier, of course, I said it probably doesn’t matter all that much if they do, in fact, bring Snitker back. I say this because he will, in all likelihood, be given a short leash again, probably in the form of a one-year extension. It would not surprise me at all if, in the extraordinarily likely event the Braves look to be outclassed in the division by the Nationals again in 2018, they made a managerial switch midseason, as they did in 2016. If that is, indeed, the plan, it seems like the front office is almost planning on losing again in 2018 and using the future firing of Snitker as a time-buying exercise. Not that I’m cynical or anything.

Either way, I don’t think Snitker is the right guy for the job. Seems, though, that he’ll get at least an offseason and a couple of months to prove me wrong.

Bruce Maxwell on anthem protest: “If it ends up driving me out of baseball, then so be it”

Associated Press
49 Comments

For the second straight day, Oakland Athletics catcher Bruce Maxwell took a knee during the national anthem before the A’s game against the Texas Rangers. Afterward, he said he did not care what the repercussions might be:

“If it ends up driving me out of baseball, then so be it. This is bigger than a monetary standpoint, this is bigger than the uniform I put on every day. This is about the people in this country and we all deserve to be treated equally. That’s the whole purpose of us taking a knee during the national anthem.”

And make no mistake, there will be repercussions of one kind or another. The immediate ones are pretty predictable: Maxwell says he has received threats since his first protest on Saturday night, including racial epithets and warnings “to watch [his] back.” These came via the Internet and Maxwell has brushed it off as the act of “keyboard warriors.”

The more interesting question will be whether there will be career repercussions. He has received support from the A’s, but even the supportive comments come with at least a hint of foreboding. Here’s his manager, Bob Melvin:

“It does take a lot of courage because you know that now the potential of the crosshairs are on you and for a guy who’s not as established, I’m sure, and I’m not speaking for him, but I’m sure there were some feelings for him that there was some risk. I do know that he felt better about it afterwards because there’s a lot of uncertainty when you take that type of step.”

I don’t feel like Melvin is referring to the threats exclusively, there, given the reference to Maxwell not being “as established.” That’s a phrase used exclusively to refer to a player’s standing within the game. As long as Melvin is the A’s manager and Maxwell plays for him, sure, it may very well be the case that only Maxwell’s ability as a player will impact his future. But Melvin seems to be acknowledging here — correctly — that this act of non-conformity on Maxwell’s part could be career limiting. Heck, his teammate, Mark Canha, voices concern over the fact that he merely put his hand on Maxwell’s shoulder in support. He’s worried that that might be seen as bad for him.

And if you don’t read that into Melvin or Canha’s words, fine. Because it’s very clear based on the words of others around the league that Maxwell’s sort of protest might be considered . . . problematic. From the story that Ashley linked yesterday, let’s focus again on the words of Pirates GM Neal Huntington:

“We appreciate our players’ desire and ability to express their opinions respectfully and when done properly,” GM Huntington told Elizabeth Bloom of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. “When done appropriately and properly, we certainly have respect for our players’ ability to voice their opinion.”

Does that sound like a man who is going to judge a player based solely on his baseball contributions? Heck no it doesn’t. How about if Maxwell lands on the Dodgers?

Make no mistake: Matthews is taking a risk with his protest. There are a number of teams — likely more than will admit it publicly — who will hold this against him as they evaluate him as a player.

You can react to this in a couple of ways, I figure. You could nod your head like a sage, adopt the tone of some inside-baseball guy and say “Well, of course! There are consequences for one’s behavior and only those who are naive don’t believe that.” If you do, of course, you’re ignoring the fact that Maxwell has already acknowledged that himself in the quote that appears in the very headline of this story.

Another option: acknowledge his bravery. Acknowledge that he knows damn well that, especially in baseball, that this kind of thing is far more likely to harm his career than help it. If you acknowledge that, you have no choice but to then ask why Maxwell nonetheless continues to protest. Why this is so important to him despite the risks.

That’s when your reacting and your second-guessing should stop and your listening should begin.