Getty Images

A.J. Hinch angry about plunking everyone knew was coming


I have long been on record as not much caring for intentional plunkings. I understand the dynamics of the game and the codes and rules among players that lead to them, but I simply don’t like them because no matter how one might justify doing it, it’s just insanely dangerous business to throw a baseball at a person.

People have died by being hit with thrown baseballs. Many more have been seriously injured. Defenders of the practice say it’s different if you’re just trying to hit someone on the rear end or whatever, but it’s also the case that no one has 100% control over where they throw a baseball at all times and even a slight mistake can lead to disaster. I wish it wasn’t part of the game.

But it is a part of the game and, whatever my personal wishes, everyone in the game knows it. Everyone knows that, in certain instances, there is a 100% probability of someone getting thrown at. One of those instances popped up last night in Anaheim as the Angels took on the Astros. Yet, despite the 100% knowledge that it was going to happen, Astros manager A.J. Hinch had a cow about it.

You know the back story by now. Last week Jake Marisnick of the Astros barreled over Jonathan Lucroy of the Angels, injuring him pretty badly. Almost everyone who is not an Astros employee or partisan believed Marisnick barreled over Lucroy on purpose and outside of the rules. Major League Baseball concurred, suspending Marisnick. Marisnick appealed his suspension and is still playing. When the Astros faced off against the Angels last night “Angels pitcher hits Marisnick” was as certain a proposition as “sun rises in the east.” And, indeed, that’s what happened:

Marisnick, to his credit, did not act aggrieved. He knew that, under baseball’s operative ethics, he had it coming and he quickly took his base. Everyone else got a lot more chippy about it. How much of that was genuine and how much of that was “we have to appear to have our guy’s back” stuff meant more for show will never be known, but it was a moderate-at-best ruckus as these things go.

There was also the usual disingenuousness about it all. Brad Ausmus and the pitcher, Noé Ramirez, each claimed it was accidental which, sure dudes, whatever. Indeed, I suspect it was even less accidental than most of these things are. It’ll never be proven, but I suspect it was decided that Marisnick would be hit later in the game, by a reliever, rather than early so as not to burn a starter in what could’ve been (but wasn’t, actually) a close game. Ramirez was expendable in that situation in ways that Andrew Heaney would not have been and the task fell to him. We’ll let Ausmus and Ramirez pretend they put one over on all of us, though, bless their hearts.

But what has me scratching my head the most is A.J. Hinch’s response after the game:

“Wasn’t everybody expecting something to happen to Jake tonight?’ I mean, the entire industry was probably expecting it. Our guy got suspended for an unintentional act, and they got a free shot. I feel bad for players nowadays. There’s a lot of gray area in what to do . . . Sometimes you can retaliate, like tonight. They’re going to get away with it, unless he gets suspended. Sometimes you can’t, and you get thrown out of the game for backup sliders that hit guys. It’s a confusing time. Either the players govern the players on the field like it’s always been or we legislate it to where none of this crap happens. They got a free shot at him with no warning, with no ejection . . . We’ll see if there’s discipline; and without discipline, there’s not going to be any issue doing it the next time. So if retaliations are in, cool. We’re well aware.”

I can’t tell if Hinch is anti-retaliation here or pro-retaliation. I can’t tell if he wants players to be able to police the game the way they did here or not do it. I’m also not sure, if like he said, everyone knew this was coming, he just didn’t let it lie rather than act all surprised. Also, if an Astros pitcher now retaliates for this by hitting an Angels batter, Hinch’s comments are gonna be the smoking gun for whoever argues that it was premeditated and greater discipline will likely come down.

Which is to say that’s this is all rather dumb and silly. It’s further evidence that the unwritten rules of baseball — the codes and rituals which govern all of this kind of business — is rather inconsistent and, at times, incoherent. Everyone acts like they are time-honored conventions, but they’re really no more reliable or informative in most cases than “other team bad, our team good.” If the positions were reversed Hinch and Ausmus would be arguing the opposite way.

Which is probably another good reason for players not to throw at other players on purpose. Dangerous is bad enough as it is. Dangerous and dumb is never a good idea.

Red Sox want to trade Jackie Bradley Jr.

Julio Aguilar/Getty Images
Leave a comment

Pete Abraham of the Boston Globe reports that the Red Sox are actively trying to trade outfielder Jackie Bradley Jr. In fact, the Mets were discussing such a trade with the Mets before they ultimately acquired Jake Marisnick from the Astros last week.

The Red Sox have made it no secret that they plan to reduce payroll. They’re currently above $218 million, about $10 million above the competitive balance tax threshold. Bradley is projected to earn $11.5 million in his third and final year of arbitration eligibility.

While Bradley continued to play above-average defense, his offense has left a bit to be desired. He has an aggregate adjusted OPS of 90 over the past three seasons (100 is average), matching his mark of 90 in 2019 specifically. Bradley hit .225/.317/.421 with 21 home runs, 62 RBI, and 69 runs scored in 567 plate appearances.

Since an acquiring team would likely be on the hook for most or all of Bradley’s salary, the Red Sox wouldn’t get much in return in a trade. With the Mets out of the picture, the Cubs and Diamondbacks are a couple of teams that could match up with the Red Sox on a trade involving Bradley.