Drew Neighborhood play

What happens to “the neighborhood play” if managers are given replay challenges?

90 Comments

There was a classic neighborhood play in last night’s Sox-Tigers game. And it has me wondering about the future and instant replay.

The scene: Austin Jackson on first base, Jose Iglesias at the plate. He grounds it to Pedroia who bobbles it, then flips it to Stephen Drew at short who tries to start a double play. You can watch the play in real time at the :18 second mark here:

Note that Drew takes that throw pretty far off the second base bag. Here’s a still:

source:

We are all familiar with calls in this situation. In order to keep shortstops and second basemen from being destroyed on close plays, umpires have routinely called base runners out as long as the middle infielder was “in the neighborhood” of the bag when he accepted the throw. Most often it’s a situation in which the fielder skids a foot across second base and takes the throw a second later.  It’s a pretty smart instance of latitude, obviously, because you do not want guys having their knees blown out as they try to ensure that the foot is on the bag in every instance.

This one, of course, was more extreme than you usually see, Indeed, it wouldn’t have surprised me a bit if the ump had called Jackson safe here because of how far off the bag was when Drew took the throw. But rather than dwell on it for purposes of this game (it happened, it’s over), I’m more interested in thinking about what could happen with this play, and all neighborhood plays, if it were to occur in a future with a replay challenge system like the one we’ve been told to expect.

If managers can challenge this play, Jim Leyland certainly comes out to challenge it, right? Why wouldn’t he?  Unlike last night where any argument he might have made about it would have been pointless, in a replay system he has a chance to get an out back.  And if there is replay on it and he did argue, the umpire clearly must rule that Jackson was safe, yes? We could probably live with that — this play was on the extreme end — so probably not too big a deal.

But now picture a more typical neighborhood play when the fielder skids his foot across the bag but takes the throw a second later. Wouldn’t a manager be wise to challenge those too? Like, every one of them? I mean, an out is valuable! Don’t umps have to call it how the replay actually shows it then? The entire point of replay to take out those fuzzy areas of umpire judgment, after all. And if neighborhood plays get challenged and outs get overturned, doesn’t that mean the end of the neighborhood play? And doesn’t that put middle infielders at greater risk of injury?

Of course it’s possible MLB could make a rule that the neighborhood play is not subject to challenge. That would be hard, though, because as it is now, there are still instances where umps do call runners safe if the neighborhood is too big. And there are plays at first base sometimes where the first basemen is given the benefit of taking his foot off the bag early in the interests of not getting stomped on.  Where do you draw the line on a matter that, historically, has been part of an umpire’s judgment and discretion?

And if MLB doesn’t say the neighborhood play is exempt from replay, how do managers approach it in real life? It’s hard for me to imagine that managers would actually challenge normal neighborhood plays as a matter of course because, man, that’d be kind of a jerk move. But sometimes one out would be critical and maybe they do? Do they challenge it in tight games but not blowouts? Late innings but not early? How does that work? And does it become a strategic tool for managers? It’ll be interesting to see.

For my part, though, “interesting” does not mean “good.” I want the umpire to maintain discretion in that situation, not have the neighborhood play become something managers can tinker with in order to gain strategic advantage. More broadly, I want umpires and umpires alone to be the ones who decide how rules are interpreted. And if we had a replay system that was instituted and run by umpires (with my preferred “fifth ump in the booth” system), they’d be able to.

With a challenge system, who knows how it’ll go?

Minor League Baseball established a political action committee to fight paying players more

DURHAM, NC - JULY 28:  The Chicago White Sox play the Most Valuable Prospects during the championship game of the 2011 Breakthrough Series at the Durham Bulls Athletic Park on July 28, 2011 in Durham, North Carolina.  Most Valuable Prospects won 17-2 over the Chicago White Sox. (Photo by Sara D. Davis/Getty Images)
Sara D. Davis/Getty Images
5 Comments

Josh Norris of Baseball America reports that Minor League Baseball has established a political action committee to continue fighting against a lawsuit brought by a group of former minor league players seeking increased wages and back pay.

You may recall that, earlier this year, two members of Congress — Republican Brett Guthrie of Kentucky and Democrat Cheri Bustos of Illinois — introduced H.R. 5580 in the House of Representatives. Also known as the “Save America’s Pastime Act,” H.R. 5580 sought to change language in Section 13 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. In doing so, minor leaguers wouldn’t have been covered under a law that protects workers who are paid hourly. Minor League Baseball publicly endorsed the bill. Bustos withdrew her support after receiving widespread criticism.

The whole thing started when Sergio Miranda filed a lawsuit in 2014, accusing Major League Baseball teams of colluding to eliminate competition. The lawsuit challenged the reserve clause, which binds minor leaguers into contracts with their teams for seven years. That suit was dismissed in September 2015. However, another lawsuit was filed in October last year — known as Senne vs. the Office of the Commissioner of Baseball — alleging that minor leaguers were victims of violations of state and federal minimum wage laws. Senne et. al. suffered a setback this summer when U.S. Magistrate Judge Joseph Spero of the U.S. District Court in San Francisco dismissed class certification. That essentially meant that the players could not file a class-action lawsuit. As a result, the players’ legal team led by Garrett Broshuis amended their case to only include players who play in one league for an entire season. As Norris notes, that means that the included players’ experiences are uniform enough for inclusion in a class-action lawsuit.

So that’s why Minor League Baseball established a political action committee (PAC). A PAC, for the unfamiliar, is an organization created with the intent of raising money to defeat a particular candidate, legislation, or ballot initiative. In other words, they’re getting serious and want Capitol Hill’s help.

Minor League Baseball president Stan Brand said, “Because of procedurally what has happened in the Congress and the difficulties in getting legislation, we’ve got to adjust to that. We were lucky. We had the ability because of the depth of the relationships and involvement in the communities to not have to worry about that. And now we do, I think. The PAC . . . gives us another tool to re-enforce who we are and why we’re important.”

Norris mentions in his column that Phillies minor league outfielder Dylan Cozens received the Joe Baumann Award for leading the minors with 40 home runs. That came with an $8,000 prize. Cozens said that the prize was more than he made all season. The minor league regular season spanned from April 7 to September 5, about six months. Athletes aren’t paid in the other six months which includes offseason training and spring training. They are also not paid for participating in instructional leagues and the Arizona Fall League. Minor leaguers lack union representation, which is why their fight for fair pay has been such an uphill battle.

Report: White Sox, Nationals making “strong progress” on a Chris Sale deal

CHICAGO, IL - SEPTEMBER 27:  Starting pitcher Chris Sale #49 of the Chicago White Sox deliivers the ball against the Tampa Bay Rays at U.S. Cellular Field on September 27, 2016 in Chicago, Illinois.  (Photo by Jonathan Daniel/Getty Images)
Jonathan Daniel/Getty Images
8 Comments

Jon Heyman of FanRag Sports reports that the White Sox and Nationals are making “strong progress” on a trade involving ace Chris Sale. Most reports coming out on Monday night suggest that a deal isn’t likely to be consummated until Tuesday at the earliest.

Sale, 27, has pitched in the majors over parts of seven seasons. He owns a career 74-50 record with a 3.00 ERA and a 1,244/260 K/BB ratio in 1,110 innings. The lefty will earn $12 million in 2017, then has a club option for 2018 worth $12.5 million with a $1 million buyout as well as a 2019 club option worth $13.5 million with a $1 million buyout. Relative to what he would earn if he were a free agent today, Sale’s remaining salary is a bargain.

The Nationals would likely have to part with several of their top prospects. MLB Pipeline lists pitcher Lucas Giolito, outfielder Victor Robles, and pitcher Reynoldo Lopez in the club’s top-three.

Adding Sale would arguably give the Nationals claim to the best starting rotation in baseball as he would join 2016 NL Cy Young Award winner Max Scherzer and Stephen Strasburg.

There are other teams in the mix for Sale. The Red Sox and Astros have also talked with the White Sox about the lefty’s services.