Getty Images

World Series Preview: We have come to the proverbial ‘pivotal Game 2’

10 Comments

Some fun facts in the wake of the Nationals stealing one on the road from Gerrit Cole and the Astros last night:

  • Before last night the Astros hadn’t lost a Cole start since July 12 and hadn’t lost a Cole start at home since May 22;
  • Juan Soto became only the fourth player to homer in the World Series before turning 21. The others who have done it: Miguel Cabrera, Andruw Jones and Mickey Mantle. Cabrera’s 2003 Marlins and Mantle’s 1952 Yankees won. Jones’ 1996 Braves lost;
  • 18 of the last 22 teams to win Game 1 of the World Series have gone on to win it all.

Those first two are just neat trivia. The last one is a bit more foreboding for the Astros. The last two, I guess, can go together in that the World Series in which Andruw Jones homered at age 20 was also a World Series in which the team which won Game 1 — and Game 2 for that matter — lost, with the 1996 Braves falling to the Yankees. Encouraging on some level? I dunno. What do you do when your invincible hero gets beat up by a kid? You reach a bit, I suppose.

You also turn to the next hero and hope for better things:

The GameWorld Series Game 2: Washington Nationals vs. Houston Astros
The Time: 8:08 PM Eastern
The Ballpark: Minute Maid Park, Houston Texas
The Network: Fox
The Starters: Stephen Strasburg vs. Justin Verlander

The Upshot:

Another night, another fantastic starting pitching matchup, with two Cy Young Award candidates — really, if either of them finish lower than second in the voting in their respective leagues it’ll be an upset — facing off.

There is obviously pressure on Justin Verlander here, as it’ll be a Very Bad Thing if the Astros fall down 0-2, at home no less, in this series.

But there is also pressure on Stephen Strasburg. Not just in a “every game in the World Series is laden with pressure” way, but in a “the Nationals really, really need him to go deep into this game” way.

Washington won last night, but they did so in a way that reveals one of their weaknesses. Max Scherzer got the win but he labored, only going five innings on over 100 pitches. Because Dave Martinez really only has two relievers he can trust in Daniel Hudson and Sean Doolittle, he made the bold move to use presumptive Game 3 starter Patrick Corbin for an inning of relief. It worked and, since he only threw 21 pitches the Nats can probably call it a defacto bullpen side session between starts and can count on him in Game 3. But Martinez, not wanting to stretch Corbin, also had to use Tanner Rainey — who gave up a run — as a bridge to Hudson — who gave up a run — and Doolittle. The two big guns each had to go longer than an inning.

Which is to say that the Nats would really prefer not to have to rely too much on their bullpen this evening. Or, if they do have to do that, they’d really prefer it not to be a close game, so they can maybe get some of their lower leverage arms some work to save the higher leverage arms for later. There are only so many starting pitchers you can press into service when you’re playing a best-of-seven series over nine days.

The one they have going tonight, though, is a good one who is 3-0 with a 1.64 ERA in the 2019 postseason. He has also given the Nats nineteen innings in his three starts, so there’s reason to believe he can do exactly what is needed to be done here. It’s just a matter of executing.

As for Houston: if Stephen Strasburg shuts them down and Justin Verlander can’t get the job done, hoo boy, they’re in some serious trouble. They will have fired their two best bullets to no effect and will have to go on the road with their third starter, albeit a better-than-usual third starter, and Brad Peacock/bullpen arms in the first two games in hostile territory. Not what you want.

But, as is the case with Washington and Strasburg, the Astros should have confidence in their co-ace. Tonight’s start will be Verlander’s 30th career postseason appearance. He’s 14-9 with a 3.26 ERA in the playoffs and. While his 1-2, 3.70 ERA this postseason is not a Verlander-esque line, he has still held opposing batters to a .205 average and a 1.07 WHIP. Not bad given the level of competition and the pressure. He’s going to be tough for Nats hitters to deal with. And, if he’s smart, he’s not gonna give Juan Soto a good pitch to hit all night.

It’s an overused phrase in sports, but we’re facing the proverbial “pivotal Game 2.” An Astros win — especially one that has Strasburg leaving earlier than he planned — essentially re-sets the series. A Nats win — especially one in which the Nats bullpen can be re-set — puts Houston in a big hole.

Rob Manfred explains reasoning behind proposal to cut 42 minor league teams

Cody Glenn/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images
6 Comments

As we learned earlier this week, Major League Baseball wants to contract 42 minor league teams, mostly in short-season and rookie ball. The proposal earned a lot of backlash, including from some of the teams on the chopping block and from Congress. MLB responded with its own letter to Congress, written by deputy commissioner Dan Halem, explaining the league’s reasoning.

In the letter, Halem complains about the lack of competition between minor league teams and independent teams. Halem wrote, “The lack of competition among operators of teams for an affiliation with a Major League Club has reduced the incentive for some affiliated Minor League teams to improve their facilities and player amenities.” It is an interesting thing to write as someone representing a $10 billion business that has benefited for a century from an antitrust exemption.

Halem also noted that MLB has several goals that are supposedly attained by cutting 26 percent of the minors: ensuring the quality of the facilities for the players, reducing the travel burden, improving the “compensation, accommodations, and amenities” for players, improving the affiliation process between minor league and major league teams.

Commissioner Rob Manfred essentially echoed that sentiment on Thursday, per Newsday’s Laura Albanese. He gave four reasons behind the proposal: inadequate facilities, travel, poor pay, drafting and signing players who don’t have a realistic shot to make it to the majors. The last reason is a new one, but let’s go over those four reasons in context.

It is true that some, perhaps even most, of the facilities of the 42 named teams are inadequate. It’s not all of them. As NECN’s Jack Thurston reports, the owner of the short-season Lowell Spinners, Dave Heller, said that his team’s stadium is “arguably the best facility in the New York-Penn League,” speaking highly of its lighting and field conditions. The Quad Cities River Bandits, the Astros’ Single-A affiliate and also on the chopping block, renovated their stadium a handful of times over the last 12 years. In fact, it earned an award from BallparkDigest.com for “Best Ballpark Improvement” in both 2008 and ’09, and finished third in the 2018 running for “Best View in the Minors.” At any rate, if facility quality is such a big issue, why did the Athletics continue to play in a stadium that repeatedly had its sewage system overflow in 2013?

Travel is certainly a big issue for minor leaguers because they mostly travel by bus, not plane. Having teams located closer to each other would be more beneficial in this regard. Or — and hear me out, here — major league teams could take on the extra expenditure of paying for their minor leaguers’ airfare. Several years ago, the Phillies took on the extra expenditure of making sure their minor leaguers ate healthy food and that has worked out well. The Blue Jays took on the extra expenditure of giving their minor leaguers a pay raise and that has worked out well. The Red Sox took on the extra expenditure of installing a sleep room at Fenway Park to ensure their players were well-rested and that has worked out well. No one is suggesting that Single-A players have to fly first class on every flight, but the travel issue is an easy fix that doesn’t require contracting 42 teams. Teams have individually chosen to improve their players’ quality of life and it has yielded positive results. Imagine it on a league-wide scale for thousands of players in their formative years.

Manfred citing minor league pay as a basis for the proposal is laughable. His own league successfully lobbied Congress to amend language in the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, classifying minor league players as seasonal workers. That means they are not entitled to a minimum wage or overtime pay, among other worker protections. If the pay of minor league players was so important to Major League Baseball, it wouldn’t have pressured the government to legally ensure they didn’t have to pay them a living wage. Every baseball team is worth at least a billion dollars. The league has set year-over-year revenue records for 16 consecutive years, crossing $10 billion in 2018. Minor leaguers could be compensated well without robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Lastly, it is true that a majority of minor league players will never reach the major leagues. That doesn’t mean that their presence in the minor leagues or their effort to realize their dreams have zero value. Lopping off the bottom 26 percent of minor leaguers might nominally increase the level of skill on each roster, but it eliminates so many jobs — well over 1,000. Furthermore, there are few incentives for athletes to want to slog through several years of the minors as it is, as Kyler Murray recently showed, but there would be even fewer incentives by shrinking the minors (and, consequently, the draft). Shrinking the minors and the draft could lead to more minor league free agents, but if baseball is actually interested in a free market (it’s not) then it should abolish the draft entirely as well as the arbitration system.

These reasons, each uniquely fallacious, hide the real reason behind the proposal: shifting money around so Major League Baseball can say it will award pay raises to minor leaguers, ending a years-long stretch of bad P.R., without actually cutting into profits. MLB could have afforded to pay minor leaguers a living wage years ago and it chose not to. MLB could have chosen not to lobby Congress for the ability to continue underpaying minor leaguers years ago, but it chose to do so. Everything since has been the league trying to avoid lying in the bed it made for itself.