I can't fathom any possible situation where I'd want McDonald hitting with the game on the line. If Johnny Mac were the starting SS and was due up in that situation, I would have pinch hit for him. Zaun and Wells were both on the bench and Zaun had to come into the game regardless.

Still scratching my head!

Zaun and Hillenbrand?!

Wouldn't mind having Pujols and Rolen either.

Because it costs a lot to produce a baseball game and most people are at work and can't watch it. On top of that, it's an 8 am start time on the west coast. Makes perfect sense why they'd take a pass on this one.

Presumably that'll be all for Schilling. Just as well. As Craig pointed out, his strike zone has been getting wider.

My theory on the first Ramirez error: as Remy pointed out, on a ball lost in the sun and not even touched with the glove, the scorer usually calls it a hit. Thing is, no one cares about Ramirez's error total. They do care about Schilling's ERA, however. Just another piece of pro-Schilling bias.

Looks like the same pitch Adams walked on earlier in the game. A gutsy ump would have called it a ball, but justice ain't always blind in rookie-vs.-Schilling matchups.

It wasn't an inside the park homerun. It was a homerun that cleared the homerun line near the top of the wall but did not clear the wall. It was first ruled a double and, after an umprire conference, changed to a homerun.

Gotta disagree. I'd rather see the officials get it right.

Just ask any Buffalo Sabres fan. A bad call probably cost their team the Stanley Cup.

Try channel 1.

I believe that reversing a call will only add more controversy to the game even though it may be the right call. Regardless of ego, a call is a call. Human error is part of the game. Unfortunately, technology is able to point out just about all human errors. But the argument is opinion based, I don't want to open a can of worms.

In the case of the home run, and the Buffalo game, it was the original rules which caused the argument. If players could score a goal in the crease, there would be no argument. If Fenway didn't have a stupid ledge, the home run wouldn't be in question. I'm not saying go out and make every thing about sports foolproof, but controversy can be cut down significantly.

Not to fear! Francona won't let something like that happen!

2002: .250/.288/.326, 264 AB
2003: .215/.258/.280, 214 AB
2004: .204/.237/.344, 93 AB

Again, I don't want to make too much of this, and I think Gibbons is a fine field general in other respects. But I really don't like seeing this happen two consecutive days, because it suggests a bad underlying philosophy regarding offensive substitutions. And if Adams is going to be regularly pinch-hit for against lefties, then it certainly points out the need for another bat on the bench.

I say, quit when you're ahead.

This would apply to a team in the heat of a pennant race. The Jays aren't making the playoffs this year. Playing J.M. might be a good short term decision, but in the long term, the future is getting the short end of the stick.

NYJaysFan36 wrote:

Amazingly, the Jays outhit the Red Sox 17-15. I wonder when the last time a team that lost by 5 or more runs outhit the opposition...

This phenomenon, while not exactly common, is hardly rare. The last time it happened was all the way back to last Friday, when Philadephia lost to Atlanta, 11-4, but the Phillies outhit the Braves 10-9.

It's funny how "ride the hot hand" works. Adams has had 67 plate appearances against right-handed pitchers since he came up in September. In these PAs, his OBP is almost .390, and his slugging percentage is almost .600. I don't see anyone suggesting that he should be batting cleanup against righties. We all have the good sense to recognize that it is a small sample size, and that Adams is not likely to keep this up. Why is the logic any different when it comes to McDonald?

Lefties who are so psychotic as to virtually guarantee clubhouse problems and negative publicity don't grow on trees, no matter how fast they may be.

Andrew, believe it or not, there is only one "bad word" that major league umpires will toss a manager for.

That word is "you".

A manager can use as much below-decks language as he wants, and scream it as loud as he likes, but until he says "you" to the umpire, he's fine. Fay Vincent (via Bruce Froemming) explained it in his book The Last Commissioner:

We've all seen it... [f]or a while the umpire takes it... but at some point he reaches a breaking point and tosses the guy... Every umpire I've asked, I get the same answer.

"Guy says the magic words..." Bruce Froemming once told me, "...anything with a "you" before it... 'you blind fuck', 'you're full of shit'. If a player says 'That was a horseshit call,' he's fine. If a guy says 'you're a horseshit ump,' you ring him up. He's gone."

Later in the book, Vincent has a great story about Roger Clemens and ump Terry Cooney in the 1990 ALCS, where Roger was thrown out because Cooney said Roger said "you mother****er" to him. Magic words, right? It turned out, when they had the hearing, that Roger said a bunch of other things, but not the magic words.

The book is really good, by the way. Recommended.

Fascinating. Thanks, Craig. Perhaps I'll get that book.