Top 1: A bobble by Hinske put Soriano aboard -- not an auspicious beginning -- but then Torre asked a guy with a .384 OBP to sacrifice. Thanks, Joe. Doc fanned Giambi and got Williams on an easy 6-3 groundout, so no harm done.

Bottom 1: Long fly ball to straightaway CF by Stewart. Mussina threw mostly curves to Cat, who chased a low one for the K. Vernon Wells impatiently swung at the first pitch, then blasted the second one into the seats -- 1-0, Jays.

Top 2: Gorgeous deuce from Doc to get ahead of Matsui, who then grounded harmlessly to first. Posada singled through the 5.5 hole. TSN's Vic Rauter (who is a lot better than Rod Black) asked Pat Tabler, "are we coming to the end of the Ventura Highway?" Doc got Robin to hit a perfect 4-6-3 DP ball, but Clark booted it. Fortunately, Howie recovered to get the out at first, then Garcia bounced out 4-3, so again, no harm done. I'd feel better if the infielders were making the routine plays.

Bottom 2: When Rauter commented on the humidity inside the closed Dome, Tabby said that's exactly how the hitters like it. Moose threw breaking stuff to Myers down-and-in, and fastballs away. Crash kept spoiling great pitches until he worked the count full, then drew a rare walk from the master control artist. Hinske, guessing knuckle-curve, looked at two perfect fastballs before advancing the runner with a high bouncer to first. A frustrated Reed Johnson fell behind 0-2 (the second one was way inside) before being punched out by the 1B ump on a questionable checked swing. Howie Clark took a 3-2 fastball (that one really was on the black) for a called third strike.

Top 3: I guess I'm all alone here. An overmatched Curtis Pride went down swinging, Soriano grounded to second, and Jeter was frozen by back-to-back world-class curves for Doc's third K. That's a tidy 38 pitches through three, despite his teammates giving up two extra outs.

Bottom 3: Woody rolled out 6-3, Stewart went to 3-0 but grounded to short. Cat, by now sitting on the curve, watched a fastball down Broadway, fouled a couple off, spoiled a low breaking ball then hit a hard short-hop off Jeter's glove (E-6). Wells watched a rainbow curve for strike one, fouled another one straight back, then chased one a foot outside. Make it 5 Ks (and 52 pitches) for Mussina.

Top 4: It's going to be 5-3 on the scoresheet, but that was Eric Hinske retiring Giambi on a first-pitch ground ball just to the left of the second-base bag. Williams bounced the second pitch to Clark for an easy out. Doc threw nothing but strikes to Matsui, who fouled off a couple at 0-2 before grounding out to Clark, who looks extremely shaky out there, bobbling another easy one before making a good throw just in time. The 3-4-5 guys, in order, on eight pitches. No Yankee has hit a fly ball, not even foul.

Bottom 4: A slow roller by Delgado got by the pitcher into the shift for an infield hit. The ever-relaxed old pro Myers, who used to pull outside fastballs into double-play grounders, steered a single into shallow left. Unfortunately, Hinske wasn't watching Crash, and hit into a 4-6-3 to derail what could have been a huge rally. Reed Johnson came through in the clutch, delivering a 2-out RBI single to make it 2-0, Jays.

Top 5: Ahead 0-2 on Posada, Doc induced yet another weak roller to Clark. An easy comebacker to the mound retired Ventura. Finally, a fly ball -- a can of corn -- to shallow RF by Garcia. Doc's faced two over the minimum (a single and an error) on a mere 55 pitches through five. It's not possible to pitch much better.

Bottom 5: My man Woody led off with a single just out of Jeter's reach, but Stewart hit a sharp one-hopper to third for an easy around-the-horn DP. Catalanotto, who isn't picking up the knuckle-curve well today -- Moose must have changed his plan -- grounded to short. Still 2-zip in a terrific, fast paced ballgame.

If Coach posts to a blog and there's no one there to hear him, does he make a noise?

What's with Vic Rauter today? During his previous telecasts, I enjoyed the frequent quiet periods during which he was no doubt pondering his next great pearls of wisdom, or addressing the lint build-up situation in his navel. Today's he's a Chatty Cathy doll.

Top 6: Pride bounced to short on the first pitch. This time, on a sharp Soriano grounder, Hinske made the play. Jeter put his patented inside-out swing on a fastball for a 2-out single to right-center. Giambi crushed a hanging curve (Doc's first mistake) and just like that, it's tied.

I like last years Halladay better. The one that walked more, and had fewer Ks

I had a nice monologue going before Chuck's rude interruption.

Bottom 6: Wells just missed a curve and skied it to left. Delgado is really confused against Mussina. Does anyone know what I mean when I say you can see a hitter thinking? It's an almost imperceptible delay in reaction time when you're defensive up there. Aggressive, confident hitters impose their will on the pitcher, and Carlos is usually a good example. Not today.

I like last years Halladay better. The one that walked more, and had fewer Ks

You mean the one that gave up a ridiculously low 10 HR in 239 IP rather than 19 in 151?

Aggressive, confident hitters impose their will on the pitcher, and Carlos is usually a good example. Not today.

This serves a nice segue into this Globe Mail article.

From the article: "I would say they are 30 or 40 at-bats this year where I've gone back to the dugout thinking, 'What did I just do?'"

Top 7: Tabler was making generalizations about "all Japanese hitters" based on Ichiro and Godzilla. "They" are very technical, we're told. All TV analysts on Canadian cable are morons.

Doc's getting tired. He's not finished, just weary. Sometimes fatigue comes from the pressure of carrying a team on your shoulders, more than the physical effort of pitching.

Yeah, the no-homers Halladay. (he's allowed to have one! (or two))

Stupid Mussina, don't break our trade bait!

Thanks for the link, Chuck. And thanks to Jeff Blair; that is a good piece. I love the quote from Pedro:

"There are, maybe, four players I do not want to face with a man in scoring position: Jason Giambi, Manny Ramirez, Edgar Martinez and Delgado. Put them in any order you want."

Bottom 7: The bottom of the order tried to rally with two outs -- consecutive singles by Clark and Woodward -- then Shannon Stewart got hit on the left hand by a high-and-tight heater. I hope he's OK, or it will be hard to trade him. With the bases loaded, Cat looked very confident until the 2-0 pitch, which was six inches inside, was called a strike. Then it was a war, won by the good guy with a huge 2-run single. 4-2 Jays. Great game.

Oh, I've got to record sportscentre tonight, that Schilling highlight is hilarious.

Top 8: The 2-run cushion eased the tension, and a rejuvenated Halladay mowed down the Yankees in order, making Jeter look sick (again) with curveballs. Will we see Miller? God, I hope not. Please, Carlos, ignore what hand they write with and let your best man finish this.

When Rauter commented on the humidity inside the closed Dome, Tabby said that's exactly how the hitters like it.

Don't the experiences in Arizona and Colorado contradict this? Or was that the point of Coach postin gthe comment?

If the Jays have a 3 or 4 run lead, I hope they pull Halladay. No point risking an injury.

O.k.- How does Roy pronounce his last name? I thought it was "Holiday", given the "Doc" moniker, but Sportscenter's little special constantly refers to him as "Hal-iday". It's amazing how a slight adjustment has changed his career. How many pitches is he at right now, and how long do you leave him in?

Nice catch by Karim Garcia -- NOT!

Reed Johnson makes them pay with another big hit, cashing two. Howie the hitting machine follows suit. OK, maybe Miller can come in for the ninth.

Andrew, Tabler talks to the hitters a lot more than I do. For sure, they like the roof closed, but I thought balls carried better in crisp air conditioning than when it's muggy.

Ah. Just got it Coach. the lack of humidity in the dome. Right-oh.

No way they should let Halladay finish this now.

Howie Clark is my new favourite Jay.

Snellville, when Roy first came up, I read a story about how his family pronounces the name -- it was definitely "hall," not "hal". I tried to mount a campaign to "correct" people, but gave up against overwhelming odds. Recently, I got a phone call from Doc -- not personally; it was one of those recorded sales pitches to get me to buy tickets -- and he said "Hi, this is Roy Halladay" the same way all the broadcasters do. So I guess it's Hal-i-day now. I don't care what you call him, he's awesome.

So Doc's 13-0 in the last three months, leads the majors in wins, and has allowed 3 runs in 17 IP this week against the Yanks and Red Sox. Yet if Scioscia forces him to go out there Tuesday night, he'll serve up a couple of BP fastballs (like he did to Bonds last year) and people will still write to me asking if he's a fluke. ESPN's "Moonlight" Graham watched last year's All-Star game and concluded "Halladay's still the same guy he was in 2000," one of the silliest things I've ever read from a so-called expert.

Can someone with more time than me, better math skills and an idea where to find such information do a study on the Jays' production this year with two outs? Compared to previous years, or to other teams, whatever. Using my typical unscientific approach of just watching the games, I've never seen anything like it.

Tabler talks to the hitters a lot more than I do. For sure, they like the roof closed, but I thought balls carried better in crisp air conditioning than when it's muggy.

Check out #2 here.

Can someone with more time than me, better math skills and an idea where to find such information do a study on the Jays' production this year with two outs? Compared to previous years, or to other teams, whatever. Using my typical unscientific approach of just watching the games, I've never seen anything like it.

And all the more reason to temper expectations in the second "half" of the season. A regression to the mean will be misinterpreted as failure in the clutch.

Hey Coach, just wanted to say thanks for the great recaps you provide. Living in Chicago I almost never get to see the Jays, either in person or on the tube, so it's a real pleasure to be able to read about their games in such detail here. Thanks.

Can someone with more time than me, better math skills and an idea where to find such information do a study on the Jays' production this year with two outs?

I could do all of that but it's Saturday night . So, I'll take the easy way out and show you this.

The Jays are much better with RISP and 2 outs than their opponents have been. Overall, the Jays outhit their opponents by 32 "points" of OPS. With RISP and 2 outs, they outhit their opponents by 134 points.

A regression to the mean will be misinterpreted as failure in the clutch.

If they regress, that is. I think their two-out success (which may be a mirage, but I've come to expect the data to support my instinctive observations) is a result of having fewer black holes in the lineup, and a shared belief in Mike Barnett's "pass the baton" approach. Selfish free-swingers (like the departed Lopez, Mondesi and Cruz) kill innings by flailing away at pitches in the dirt. Patient team-first guys (newcomers Catalanotto, Myers and Clark, for example) looking for walks and opposite-field singles keep rallies going longer. Both styles are contagious.

The Jays are much better with RISP and 2 outs than their opponents have been.

Thanks, Spicol. And they don't even have the advantage of hitting against the Toronto pitching staff!

A great pitching match up, the Jays performed well in front of a large crowd (37,100) for a change, and Halladay has shown now on 2 occasions that he can pitch really well on just 3 days rest, hopefully Escobar can follow up with a good performance on Sunday, and a great job on the running commentary coach.

Coach, I'm going to disagree with you.

If you subscribe to the notion that the Jays can choose to elevate their play in certain situations (2 outs, RISP for instance), then you're basically saying you believe that clutch hitting is a skill and not due to random chance. If you're saying that, well, there's volumes in print to refute the position better than I ever could.

I do concur that the Jays' overall hitting success is, to quote you, "a result of of having fewer black holes in the lineup, and a shared belief in Mike Barnett's "pass the baton" approach". I can't, however, make the ipso facto leap to the conclusion that their enhanced play in "clutch" situations is a byproduct.

Selfish free-swingers (like the departed Lopez, Mondesi and Cruz) kill innings by flailing away at pitches in the dirt. Patient team-first guys (newcomers Catalanotto, Myers and Clark, for example) looking for walks and opposite-field singles keep rallies going longer.

I'm going to say something that won't be very popular around here. I think Catalanotto is an overrated player. He is the worth the money, don't get me wrong, just overrated if we focus solely on the metrics.

I like Catalanotto. He seems a decent person and one who seems to leverage his skills to their max. But I wonder, Coach, if you're overstating the team-firstedness of his hitting approach. Because of his limitations (minimal power, minimal ability to draw a walk), Catalanotto must, by definition, be a Barnett-type hitter to succeed. He must work the count, he must go the other way. And because he hits for an average, and hustles, and is likable, and doesn't often flail away, I think it's easy to be deceived into thinking he's a better, and more unselfish, player than he is.

Cruz and Mondesi, anti-Catalanotto's both, are having similar OBP/SLG seasons to Catalanotto -- Catalanotto (345/482), Mondesi (334/468), Cruz (376, 461) -- but getting there in very different ways.

Cruz and Mondesi are hitting for more power, drawing more walks (both are at better than league average in this regard) but hitting for lower batting averages and striking out more. And, I would imagine, flailing away at the low and away pitch quite a bit more as well.

(Quick aside: I know Mondesi is making a ridiculous amount of money and that Cruz would have been making more via arbitration than is Catalanotto, but I just want to focus on their on-field performance.)

Now, and I ask this sincerely, not rhetorically, has Catalanotto truly been less selfish than Cruz and Mondesi?

He certainly looks less selfish. It would be disengenuous of me to suggest otherwise. But has he been?

Can Cruz and Mondesi be taught to flail less? If so, could they also maintain their other numbers? As a hitter, are you basically Popeye ("I am what I am") or can you be taught to be something else? If so, just how much can you reasonably expect to improve your game by sheer will alone? Many players certainly have improved, but how much has been due to experience and how much due to actual training? (Once again, I don't pretend to know.)

If you're Billy Beane hiding in the clubhouse, and you know your RF has a 350/470 season going, perhaps you don't get overly concerned how the underlying numbers are configured. Perhaps you're better off not watching so that you don't make emotional judgements.

As much as I like Catalanotto, part of me wishes that he'd take even just one more walk per week. But perhaps he's Popeye, perhaps his other numbers would suffer with the change in approach that extra walk would cost. I'm tempted to brandish him selfish for a 340:18 AB:BB ratio just as I'm tempted to pat him on the back for his unselfish 2-out, tie score, opposite field single today. But neither would be fair, in my opinion.

Chuck,

I agree with your points about the quality of Catalanotto's season and the possible difficulties in teaching a hitter to walk more (or otherwise change his batting approach).

However, I want to add to your comments about Catalanotto, Cruz and Mondesi. As you point out, Catalanotto isn't walking very much this year. In fact, he's walking strikingly less this year than he has in any year since 2000.

Year   BA    OBP   SLG  OBP-BA  P/PA  (BB+HBP-IBB)/PA
1998  .282  .325  .446  .043    3.52  .064
1999  .276  .327  .458  .051    3.69  .073
2000  .291  .375  .457  .084    3.86  .120
2001  .330  .391  .490  .061    3.74  .086
2002  .269  .364  .443  .095    3.64  .132
2003  .305  .344  .480  .039    3.66  .060

Total .298  .359  .467  .061    3.71  .088

Given that he (as you point out) walks less than Cruz or Mondesi and also sees fewer pitches per at-bat (this year -- Cat: 3.66; Cruz: 3.94; Mondesi: 3.84), I don't think he's "working the count" more than the men he replaced. So he's walking less, seeing fewer pitches ... but he does hit the ball the other way; that's true. However, I can't imagine that Mike Barnett is responsible for Cat's style of hitting. I would imagine that he's been hitting this way for years.

My point is that Cat isn't really any more representative of a Toronto "style" than his departed brethren were.

Incidentally, I don't think "minimal power" is quite fair. His career rates per 500 AB are 33 2B, 5 3B, 13 HR. Cat has low home run power but hits an awful lot of doubles and triples, making his overall power slightly above league average (and only modestly below average for a corner OF). But I'm just quibbling now, so I'll shut up, except for one last comment: it sure is more fun to watch Cat hit than to watch Jose Cruz. To me, that's worth something.

Cheers,

John

Robert Adair's "The Physics of Baseball", as well as simple dynamics and a hundred years of ballistics studies, tell us that projectiles (from cannonballs to cruise missiles to baseballs) travel further in hot, muggy air than in crisp, dry air. But as Adair points out, the effect is small, and the ball is actually going to take on water weight from the air in humid weather, especially where the weather is humid all the time.

i was reading chuck's post and think to myself that something looked out of whack there. specifically, the OBP for cruz and mondesi looked high. so i took a look at the walk rate for each player (mondesi, cruz, and catalanotto)

i looked at AB/BB for career and for this year.

career // this year

mondesi- 12.4 // 9.1
cruz- 7.8 // 5.2
catalanotto- 12.6 // 18.9

kinda of interesting considering that the jays pride themselves on being a team that will take a walk. i would expect the walk rate for these players will approach their career numbers as the season progresses.

hehehehe- while i was looking up the numbers, john was posting pretty much the same thing.

If I were a "conspiracy theorist" or "Toronto Star writer", I might suggest there's a reason that Catalanotto seems less selfish than Cruz and Mondesi...

Seriously, though, it's an old point, but how often are "non-white" players described with adjectives like "scrappy", and "hard-working"?

On that same point, George, did you notice this from Coach?

I think their two-out success ... is a result of having fewer black holes in the lineup

Coach, I'm disappointed that you're buying in to the Toronto Star White Jays campaign. Really. You should know better.

[P.S. to anyone ... anyone ... anyone who replies to this. Before you do ...]

I don't think he's [Catalanotto] "working the count" more than the men he replaced [Cruz and Mondesi]

As I wrote the words "work the count", I figured that someone like Catalanotto, who doesn't walk or strike out much, is probably looking at fewer pitches than hitters like Cruz and Mondesi, who do both.

But that is not what I meant by "working the count". I could be way off (and I welcome being corrected), but it strikes me, watching Catalanotto, that he is good at getting into 1-0, 2-0, 2-1 (etc.) counts to better position himself to succeed in an AB.

Were he less skilled at making contact, I suppose he'd be going deeper into counts and matching Cruz and Mondesi's pitch/AB. I would argue that Cruz and Mondesi are not always going deep into counts by design. I am presuming (perhaps incorrectly) that they swing and miss more than Catalanotto, thereby extending their AB's longer than they had planned. A high pitch/AB ratio may not be indicative of a patient hitter, but of one who has trouble making contact. Hell, the credit for patience these two are getting for their walks may have something to do with them not being able to make contact and end their AB's sooner.

http://www.baseballblog.blogspot.com/2003_07_06_baseballblog_archive.html#105772782113025020
Seriously, though, it's an old point, but how often are "non-white" players described with adjectives like "scrappy", and "hard-working"?

Here's an SI player survey

Who gets the most from the least talent?
David Eckstein 62.2%
Craig Counsell 6.7
Jamie Moyer 4.8
Joe McEwing 2.7
Kevin Millar 1.7
Juan Pierre 1.2
Albert Pujols 1.0
Brad Ausmus 1.0
Eric Byrnes 0.7
Greg Maddux 0.7
Mike Sweeney 0.7

Of the top 11 players, 9 of them are "white guys."

Who gets the least from the most talent?
Ruben Rivera 29.3%
Raul Mondesi 6.9
Frank Thomas 3.1
Mo Vaughn 3.1
Adrian Beltre 2.8
Kyle Farnsworth 2.8
Ken Griffey 2.4
Aramis Ramirez 2.1
Esteban Loaiza 2.1
Juan Gonzalez 2.1
Jose Guillen 2.1

Whereas there were 9 white guys in the top 11 in the previous category, there is a grand-total of 1 white guy in this category.