When was the last time you saw something like this? Mets 1, Diamondbacks 0, in 13 innings. A classic Pedro performance, of course. No run support for Petey, of course. And another no-decision, bien sur. (We’re sticking with a sort of pseudo-French fencing lingo today.) Be sure to check out the loopy box score. Zut alors!
By submitting your comment, you acknowledge that you've read and agree to our comment policy.
 |
Hot Tickets! |
January 7, 2010 - 8:06 am
I can’t say I’m surprised, considering it’s the BWAA, but still, when it came down to it, I was actually pretty sure that Roberto Alomar was going to get into the Hall on his first ballot, if only because he obviously deserves to be in and because the ballot was so thin this year, at [...]
January 5, 2010 - 10:35 am
Recently, as I was writing my post on why Barry Larkin deserves to be a first-ballot hall-of-famer, I got to wondering who the top 10 shortstops of all time are. In order to get an answer, I decided to crowdsource my question to the internet!
What I did was I went to Google and looked up [...]
January 4, 2010 - 1:25 pm
This year UmpBump continues its annual tradition of honoring the greats by casting our vote for who we think deserves to be enshrined in the National Baseball Hall of Fame. As always, we vote not just on players currently eligible for Hall of Fame voting under baseball’s arcane eligibility rules, but for any and all [...]
- 2:35 am
To my mind Barry Larkin is a stone cold lock for the Hall of Fame, even though there are probably enough people with short memories or who are just not paying attention among the BWAA to insure that he doesn’t get in this year.
Larkin had the complete package. An outstanding hitter with an .815 career [...]
June 1st, 2006 at 2:42 pm
Don’t forget to mention Webb’s masterful performance. Both pitchers went deep in this game. Both were dominant. Both are on my fantasy team. Justice.
Report this comment
June 1st, 2006 at 5:15 pm
What seems incomprehensible to me, aside from the obvious pitching performances of Pedro and Webb, is how incongruous some of these numbers are. I didn’t get a chance to watch the game so when I first saw the box score this number, the number that immediately struck me was two – as in how many walks were issued by both teams. Combined. In a thirteen inning game. Ninety-two batters came to the plate. Two walked. Very odd. It seems to indicate a great deal of impatience from all of the batters – but it wasn’t the case, at least for the Mets hitters. Arizona’s pitchers threw 184 pitches during the game to the forty-five Mets batters who came to the plate. That’s a little over 4 pitches per plate appearance, which is pretty good. As a comparison, only 26 hitters in all of baseball average more pitches per plate appearance than that. And yet, the Mets only managed to post an OBP of .200 for the game (By the way, Arizona batters saw 3.28 pitches per plate appearance, which is pretty poor). The only way I can rationalize this is to go back to one of the many old baseball adages: “pound the strike zone”. Out of the 184 pitches that the D-Backs threw, only 57 were balls. Even more amazingly, the Mets threw 154 pitches, with only 47 balls – that’s one ball per every Diamondback that came to the plate. If you knew beforehand that you were going to get four at-bats in a game, and that you’d see only four balls the entire night with the rest of them being strikes, wouldn’t you be more aggressive than usual? And yet, both pitching staffs combined to strikeout a quarter of the hitters they faced. It’s strange. I always thought that there’s a point of diminishing return when it comes to “pounding the strike zone”. If you throw too many strikes, you’re going to get hit. It didn’t happen in this game.
Report this comment
June 1st, 2006 at 5:41 pm
Coley – this is exactly why I don’t want Pedro. It’s 2004 all over again. He is always matching up against the other team’s ace….always in a tight one…..gets his work done, some k’s, scatters a few hits, walks none….but at the end of the day no W.
That’s ZERO wins in May. 0. Goose EGG. Doughnut. Bagel. Zilch.
Curt, on the other hand went 5-1 in May. Oh…and i don’t need K’s, WHIP, or ERA….I just need to stop playing Brett Tomko. So basically this is a wash….
The fact is that wins are perhaps the hardest category to get. And I’m raking them in right now with Schilling.
Prediction? By the time Curt rolls over his 10th win, Pedro is still stuck on 5. Heard it here first.
Report this comment
June 1st, 2006 at 6:30 pm
Paul,
Don’t you have a job or some other way to waste your time than calculate average pitches per at bat? Gracious.
Report this comment
June 7th, 2006 at 10:06 am
The IRS? What? Do you have to pay taxes on steroids?
Report this comment
June 8th, 2006 at 12:37 pm
I wonder how the majority of players have handled this news. Obviously, there will be at least some who will be angry at Grimsley for being a rat. However, if this article quoting Ozzie Guillen and Jeff Nelson is the normal reaction of players/coaches (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-060607soxbrite,1,7147201.story?coll=cs-home-headlines), then I’d be disappointed. It’s normal to be angry when you feel like you’re being attacked, but it sounds to me like neither of these guys even want PEDs to disappear from the game. If Grimsley actually did name names (I assume he did, but feds can easily lie about these things) I understand that they’re upset. But from the sound of things, Jeff Nelson sees no problem with HGH. And that is problematic. He claims that Grimsley’s squealing is “a black eye for baseball”, but to me, that phrase ought to be reserved for the whole situation and those responsibile for letting it get so far. Nelson blames Grimsley, but doesn’t seem to see any problems with using PEDs. That’s a bit warped.
Report this comment
June 8th, 2006 at 1:31 pm
Okay, I clearly need to add Jeff Nelson to my unofficial list of people who juiced. Jeff Nelson played with Grimsley during the height of the steroid era. Why else would he be so worried about naming names?
Report this comment
June 8th, 2006 at 3:27 pm
I think we’re all going to be surprised to find out just how many players were using HGH and other steroids. In the end, I think we’re going to decide Bonds and Co. didn’t have an unfair advantage, b/c EVERONE was juiced!
Report this comment