Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
A few scattered observations from my perch in the Cheap Seats (it's not like we pay to get in, right?)


It was fun to see GGZ back behind the plate, and he was in the thick of it last night. First and foremost (as any catcher will tell you), he got an outstanding game out of his starting pitcher. At the plate, he crushed a ball to the wall in centre, with enough on it to score Frank Thomas from first base (OK, there were two outs, but still!)  Zaun almost had another extra base hit in his last at bat, but Langerhans made a stupendous play to take the hit away from him, forcing him to settle for a sac fly and another RBI. And while the Blue Jay defenders had pretty well nothing but routine plays to make on this night, Zaun managed to be the exception, diving after Lopez' little squibber, bare-handing it just before it went foul, and throwing to first for the out. (Millson said the only way Zaun has the energy to make that play is because he's been sitting for a month!)

Langerhans was in the the thick of the action for the Nats -it was truly a remarkable catch he made on Zaun's liner in the bottom of the eighth, running into the gap, diving, and making a back-handed grab. In the top of the inning, his two run homer finally persuaded John Gibbons that Doc's night was done. Which reminds me - I'm not really sure why Halladay was still out there at that point. The only reason I can think of is that Gibbons wanted to give him a chance to go for the shutout, and Halladay is quite capable of getting six out in a hurry. But the game was already 2 and a half hours old (as many readers will remember, the amount of time the pitcher's been working is a much bigger deal to me than the number of pitches he's thrown), and once Schneider singled to lead off the inning... well, I probably still would have let him face Logan who was absolutely helpless against him all night long. But not Langerhans. As I told my neighbours at the time. Not that anybody listens to me...

Langerhans was also in the middle of that bizarre moment in the third inning when the home-plate umpire lost track of the count. He fell behind 1-2, hung in there, fouled off a couple of pitches, and trotted down to first when Halladay missed him a 3-2 fastball. And then C.B. Bucknor began calling Langerhans back to the plate, and Pandemonium broke out briefly. All eyes in the press box turned to yours truly, and the GameDay person beside me - as one we said "that was Ball Four." They eventually got it sorted out, but it was the first sign that Mr Bucknor (who was in fact feeling ill, and was forced to call it a night a few innings later) was not on top of his game. That, and the fact that he never corrected the scoreboard. Normally, when the scoreboard has the count wrong, the home plate umpire always makes a point of making sure everyone knows what the count really is. Bucknor didn't do that, although the scoreboard (which in this case, was correct) did not agree with what he believed the count to be.

I was charting Doc's pitches tonight, just for the hell of it, and I hope to say something about it in a day or so, when I've had a little more time to go over my notes. But I did have one thought about pitchers and hitters. You will notice sometimes, when the broadcasters are really into the game, they'll get into speculating on how to work the hitter and what pitch to throw next. This normally happens only when a former catcher is in the booth. And how often, after a hitter has been fooled by a breaking ball, does someone say "I'd come right back at him with the same pitch."

Well, I seem to hear it a lot.

It's not an idea I think very highly of myself. Major league hitters sit on the fastball. They look for the fastball, they expect the fastball - they adjust when they see a breaking ball. A curve ball or a slider can be spotted as such very quickly after it leaves the pitcher's hand. But not a change-up, which is the beauty of the pitch - it looks like a fastball, until you're too far gone and committed to salvage the situation. A true master, like Tom Glavine, just changes speeds on a seamless continuum between his change and his fastball and has hitters off balance all night long.

The Nationals young starter, Mike Bacsik, is no Glavine but he's the same type of pitcher. He spots his 85 mph fastball, and mixes in his 75 mph change-up at very opportunity. Unlike Glavine, he doesn't change speeds on his change of speed, nor does he have Glavine's command and control. So he's not going to win 300 games - he's still got something he can succeed with.

But. The second batter of the game was Vernon Wells. Bacsik threw him a 1-1 changeup, and Wells was fooled badly and barely made contact, fouling it off. Bacsik came right back with another change, and Wells was still off-balance and fouled it off again, although this time he made better contact.. You'd never expect him to throw that thing three times in a row would you? But he did - element of surprise! - and while Wells may have been surprised, he was also very well prepared to recognize the pitch for what it was drive it into the gap for a double. When you keep going to the well with an off-speed pitch, the element of surprise is more than cancelled out by the hitter's enhanced ability to recognize the pitch. (All this reminds me of Dave Bush throwing curve after curve after curve after curve to Angel Berroa - until first Berroa laced one into the stands, just foul; and then crushed the next one into the stands for a home run.)

Halladay, by the way, in his 7.1 innings, through consecutive breaking balls exactly once in the entire ball game. In the fifth, with two out and nobody on, he threw a 2-2 curve that Schneider fouled off. Doc came right back with another curve and Schneider lined a base hit.

Ahem.

One other odd note from last night's affair, although this may only be of interest to people who score games or are really, really obsessive about minutiae. Flores came up to bat in Schneider's spot in the ninth - he was announced as a pinch-hitter. I thought for a moment - that's weird. There's a RH (Frasor) on the mound. Why is there RH backup pinch-hitting for the LH catcher? But I thought, well, they do lots of strange things in Washington. Maybe this is just another.

After the game, the official scorer went crawling through the videotape, and was able to determine that Flores had actually come into the game as a defensive replacement for Schneider in the bottom of the eighth. Nobody noticed. If Frasor had retired the Nats in order, it's possible that no one would have ever known.

This stuff still happens, even today - despite all the videotape, and scorers, and media people, and reps from both teams. I remember a game during the World Series years. In the top of the ninth, Cito Gaston sent Alfredo Griffin out to play second, giving Alomar the rest of the night off. I made the lineup change on my game account. When the game was over, the STATS office asked me if I was sure - no one else had Griffin coming in. I checked with the official scorer. He hadn't noticed. Howie Starkman of the Jays hadn't noticed. No one in the press box had noticed. We went back, and looked at the tape - and there was nothing there to help us. The inning lasted about seven pitches, and there were no balls hit to an infielder.

There's simply no way, no way on earth that I, or any long-time Blue Jay watcher, could possibly look at Alfredo Griffin and think I was looking at Roberto Alomar. But it doesn't matter - officially, Roberto Alomar played all nine innings. I know better, of course - me and Alfredo and Robbie and Cito. We know what really happened...

Now you might want to consider the thousands and thousands and thousands of games before there was STATS and GameDay and VCRs and computers and 45 people in the press box writing every last little thing down - most of the game's history, in fact.
16 June 2007: Doc in the House | 26 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
jbrains - Saturday, June 16 2007 @ 12:32 AM EDT (#169952) #
Sorry, dude. From our seats in section 122, Halladay flashed two fingers, checking that the count was 2-2, Bucknor then clearly signalled 2-2, even though the scoreboard and everyone else had 3-2. :)
Magpie - Saturday, June 16 2007 @ 01:18 AM EDT (#169957) #
Halladay flashed two fingers, checking that the count was 2-2, Bucknor then clearly signalled 2-2

None of us noticed. And that explains why the Jays were arguing, with some conviction rather than just going through the motions, when Langerhans was sent to first.
jbrains - Saturday, June 16 2007 @ 01:36 AM EDT (#169959) #
None of us noticed.

I wouldn't have noticed, either, if I hadn't been right behind home plate.

And that explains why the Jays were arguing, with some conviction rather than just going through the motions, when Langerhans was sent to first.

Halladay especially, since he went to the trouble of checking the count. What I don't get is why Joe West was able to confirm the walk, but wasn't watching Bucknor to correct him when he signaled 2-2. Was nobody watching?

jbrains - Saturday, June 16 2007 @ 01:43 AM EDT (#169960) #
I looked away when Abreu balked. What did he do?
ayjackson - Saturday, June 16 2007 @ 09:55 AM EDT (#169965) #

I looked away when Abreu balked. What did he do?

Looked in for the sign, came halfway to set, then aborted prior to taking his foot off the rubber.  Though, I'm not an expert.

Rob - Saturday, June 16 2007 @ 10:28 AM EDT (#169966) #
Now you might want to consider the thousands and thousands and thousands of games before there was STATS and GameDay and VCRs and computers and 45 people in the press box writing every last little thing down - most of the game's history, in fact.

One of my favourite anecdotes from The Numbers Game (p.104): "One box score from 1901 had a Woodruff playing right field for the Cleveland Blues ... No one could find any record of a Woodruff in any other game, on any other team in any other year ... the telegraph operator, clearly, had mistaken the Morse code for 'Wood rf' as 'Woodruff.'"
Magpie - Saturday, June 16 2007 @ 11:08 AM EDT (#169969) #
Who knows? Maybe Moonlight Graham got into more than one game....
VBF - Saturday, June 16 2007 @ 08:14 PM EDT (#169983) #
With the constant visiting of the Nats trainer talking to Bucknor between innings and the event of the Nats pulling themselves off the field, I was certain that Manny Acta had somehow thought the playing surface to be unfit and had put the game under protest--which (I thought anyways) was exciting!

Nevertheless, CB Bucknor disappointed me once again.

I thought it was cool that Tom Henke's kids were wearing Halladay shirts.



HollywoodHartman - Sunday, June 17 2007 @ 01:38 AM EDT (#169989) #

Has there been any update on when AJ's next start is going to be?

Gerry - Sunday, June 17 2007 @ 09:09 AM EDT (#169991) #
According to the Syracuse Post-Standard Victor Zambrano was recalled to the Jays on Saturday.  See the notes at the bottom.
Mike Green - Sunday, June 17 2007 @ 10:32 AM EDT (#169993) #
Zambrano being recalled is a real head-scratcher. Usually when a pitcher is having that much trouble against triple A hitters, things don't go much better in the Show.
China fan - Sunday, June 17 2007 @ 11:42 AM EDT (#169996) #

    Can we assume, from Zambrano's recall, that Burnett is going on the injury list?    As usual, the Jays are extremely slow to disclose the status of his injury.

     Among other things, Zambrano's promotion is a bit of a slap in the face to poor John Thomson, who keeps plugging away in Syracuse without anyone at the Jays seeming to notice.   His numbers at Syracuse are not great, but they're certainly better than Zambrano's.   Moreover, Thomson is supposed to be on an injury rehab, but he's already had 39 innings at Syracuse -- far more than the standard injury rehab.  If he hasn't been recalled so far, with all the turnover in the rotation and with Ohka's departure and with all the second chances for Towers, it's hard to imagine when Thomson will ever be recalled.

ayjackson - Sunday, June 17 2007 @ 12:03 PM EDT (#169999) #

Well I for one would be happy to see AJ on the DL.  I'd prefer the Jays were careful with him.  Missing just one start did not seem like being careful to me, it felt like rushing him back.  Missing two starts would allow the use of the DL.  I believe the 28th or 29th would be his next available appearance if he went to the DL.

As for Zambrano, I'm dumbfounded.  AAA batters are getting on-base over 40% of the time versus him.  John Thomson is still on the Jays' 60-day DL.  That may be playing a role in the decision.  He's likely eligible to come off, but maybe they don't want to bump another player from the 40-man roster.  Or maybe he's a free agent when he comes off.  I'm at a loss.

Magpie - Sunday, June 17 2007 @ 12:15 PM EDT (#170000) #
Zambrano's not coming up.  Breathe regular, everyone!

I was just talking to the Jays staff - Mal and Ryan and Jay - (because this news just scared the crap out of me, too!) - what's happened is his rehab stint is up. So he's on the Toronto DL (which is where he's been all along) for the moment while they figure out what to do next. They can apply for another rehab stint, or they can attempt to outright him to Syracuse (he's have to clear waivers)., they can activate him on the ML roster, or they can just leave him on the DL.
ayjackson - Sunday, June 17 2007 @ 12:18 PM EDT (#170001) #

Though there's no problem with AJ's legs - he showed off his wheels between innings yesterday.  Perhaps Gibby should consider using him as a pinch runner.

I have a question for Bauxites:  right now (AJ's injury aside), which starter do you feel most comfortable taking the hill for the Jays?  With Roy's recent struggles, I'm actually feeling most confident in Marcum these days.  I'm pretty confident in AJ too, but he doesn't seem to get as many wins as he should.

Mike Green - Sunday, June 17 2007 @ 02:17 PM EDT (#170003) #
Thanks, Magpie, for the update.  That's much better. 

The Jays have scored precisely 7 runs in each of the last three games.  It is exceptionally good luck to score precisely 7 runs in 7 straight games...a club might even run the table.
Mike Green - Sunday, June 17 2007 @ 08:53 PM EDT (#170010) #
Never mind.

Burnett is apparently  headed for the DL, according to John Gibbons.

AWeb - Sunday, June 17 2007 @ 09:24 PM EDT (#170012) #
From that article: A.J. Burnett played catch on Sunday, and the pitcher still experienced pain in his right shoulder.....Burnett initially believed the discomfort stemmed from fatigue, considering he had thrown 372 pitches over his previous three starts.

The snarky reaction : I wonder if he threw 125 pitches of catch before the trainer stopped him. But less snarky, it's still a travesty he threw that many pitches, even after he got extra rest because he had thrown too many pitches! A Burnett injury may or may not be preventable, given his history, but I'm still annoyed by it lo these many days later.

So Zambrano might get the start in his place according to another comment upthread? I asume this would be purely so they don't have to manipulate the 40-man roster or possibly start teh clock on another prospect prematurely.
Dez - Sunday, June 17 2007 @ 10:38 PM EDT (#170015) #
The damage control that Gibbons is spewing is starting to bother me. He reminds me of that Iraqi information minister with his "there's nothing to worry about" nonsense. He has no idea when AJ will not feel pain in his shoulder, just like he didn't know about Chacin. These two injuries seem so similar, I just hope the end result isn't the same.
Magpie - Sunday, June 17 2007 @ 10:45 PM EDT (#170016) #
Zambrano might get the start in his place

I can't see it. His rehab stint is finished, so he's back on the Toronto DL. But he went 1-1, 8.41 in 4 starts at Syracuse and his ERA keeps jumping by a couple of runs every time he moves a step higher on the ladder (A- 4.50; AA - 5.68; AAA - 8.41; Majors - 10.97) I would expect they'll either try to get him another rehab stint or DFA him and see if he clears waivers so they can outright him to the minors.

I assume that Thomson is on his second rehab stint already (he was shut down in early May with a blister issue as I recall), but his time must be just about up as well. I think his next scheduled start would fall on Thursday.

It may depend on a couple of things - if they think Burnett will just miss one more start, and will be back to make his start on June 28, they could call up a starter for a day. Or, if the bullpen has a light week, they could go starter by committee, which they did once last season (Brian Tallet got the start!)

But if Burnett's going to miss even just two more weeks, I'd expect we're all going to see John Thomson.
VBF - Sunday, June 17 2007 @ 11:28 PM EDT (#170018) #
Surely the 370 pitches in 3 starts Burnett threw played some role in his latest trip to the DL. I want to win the games as much as anybody, but asking that much of him, a player with that kind of track record, is asking a lot from the body. I agree with the morning ESPN guys who called it "borderline negligence".

Hopefully they've realized how far you can stretch Burnett out and will use him a little more conservatively. Obviously there's a middle ground somewhere, because as Dez said, they didn't pay the guy 55 million to pitch 5-6 innings, but a little less extreme would be nice.

Two questions, as I was at the game and not a beneficiary of colour commentary:

-Did Marcum retire the side on 9 straight pitches in the first inning yesterday?
-If so, isn't that the first time a Blue Jay has ever done it? (I recall Howarth saying something like that when Towers nearly did it earlier this season).

Original Ryan - Sunday, June 17 2007 @ 11:40 PM EDT (#170020) #
-Did Marcum retire the side on 9 straight pitches in the first inning yesterday?

Close, but not quite.  Marcum did it on 10 pitches.  I believe one pitch was fouled off.
16 June 2007: Doc in the House | 26 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.