Skip to main content

115 replies

MLB umpiring incompetency strikes again

Tx-HuskerTx-Husker1,000+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by Tx-Husker:
You must be a zomby if you think NBA refs are better than MLB umps. NBA is a joke.


Better..No way..NBA refs use the star system. But they do get up and down the court tho


Who cares if they get up and down the court when they make awful calls when they get there. MLB umps do a far better job than NBA refs. No question. Only thing worst than NBA refs are s0ccer refs/umps/whatever they are call.
zombywoofzombywoof1,000+ posts
quote:
We are all expecting the umps to see in a split second what we see in HD solo motion. Impossible.
If we went back through time and looked at all games with the same technology as we have today, perhaps we might consider some of the very best umpires incompetent as well.
It's not really fair to judge the human eye with today's technology is it?. Using this technology on every suspect call would definetly stop the continuity.



Agree. You can't compare the technology to the human eye. The purpose of the technology should be to reverse the most obvious mistakes. The Jim Joyce incident was a clear examole of that. So was the Golston catch the other night.

Now when it comes to the split second bang-bang play that gets looked over 50 times over to try and make the right call, that alone justifies the call and that play should never see a replay booth and let the umpire call stand.

However, what must change is the three-monkeys approach where an umpire blew an obvious call and with six umpires and not one of them see the play and a terrible call goes unchanged.

These are the types of plays that need to be reviewed and checks and balances need to be in place so the umpires don't have an escape route when they blow a call.
Last edited by zombywoof
Jimmy03Jimmy031,000+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by zombywoof:
However, what must change is the three-monkeys approach where an umpire blew an obvious call and with six umpires and not one of them see the play and a terrible call goes unchanged.


Please accept this as it is intended...a serious, non sarcastic question.

Do you believe the average fan believes that all umpires are watching the same play?

Working three man, I occasionally get coaches asking me what I saw at one base while I had the responsiblity of a runner going into another, but I really never thought fans would expect 6 umpires to be watching the same play. Could be, though.

And, if that is the case, is there any way they could be educated into understanding that that just doesn't happen?
piaa_umppiaa_ump5,000+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by zombywoof:
[QUOTE]These are the types of plays that need to be reviewed and checks and balances need to be in place so the umpires don't have an escape route when they blow a call.


I guess this is where you lose me......are you saying that you want technology to assist the umpires in getting the call right or as a tool to punish umpires for not being up to the techno-mechanical standards?.......

because this statement is what we have now...umpires make a call and the technology can show otherwise....the umpires can't change the call by rule and take the heat for it...
Last edited by piaa_ump
P PGStaff10,000+ posts
piaa ump,

I appreciate your answer to that question and understand completely. Though people might disagree with things, sometimes it becomes crystal clear to everyone. No one should ever condemn a person who does things based on passion or love of the game and those who play the game. FWIW... You have my complete respect.

On another topic, I can't even fathom how difficult officiating NBA games must be. Seems like you would have to be a great athlete just to keep up with everything. Are those guys really that bad?
Tx-HuskerTx-Husker1,000+ posts
quote:
Are those guys really that bad?


They go by different rules depending on the quarter they are in and "who" you are. It would be the same as the plate ump having a knee cap to belt strike zone for the first 6, then shoe strings to chin for the last 3...unless you're Albert then it's belly button to belt for all 9. It's silly. And the error rate per call would have to be at least 3X MLB.
Jimmy03Jimmy031,000+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by bsballfan:

And agree that you are 100% the authority on all things umpire related?


I don't think Coach May, Coach 2709, PGStaff, Trojan-Skipper and others I have had the pleasure to debate civily, agree with and sometimes disagree with, would think any such thing.

I'm sure, however that TR, Noreplay and some others do. Here's what influences my posts.

I am older than many here, in late 50's. I've umpired since I was 22. I've worked several levels including high school, D-1, D-111, Legion, Select, Adult and have had the great fortune to have also worked relief in two minor leagues when an umpire gets ill or injured or promoted and his replacement can't get to town in time for a game.

I've been to proschool and work hard to keep my skills current. This requires harder work each year and I have gone to pro clinics to help keep up and stay current on rules interpretations.

Over the years I have met many minor league umpire and a few major league umpires and have been lucky enough to maintain a relationship with some of them I am not unique in that. Many amateur umpires have MLB friends. We just don't talk a lot about them. It's fairly universal that if we do, we lose their trust and eventually their friendship. From what I've seen here, I'm sure Matt13, Dash, PIAA and MST also have contacts at higher levels.

Most of all, I am a student of baseball and of umpiring. I've studied how the game was called in the 30's, 40's, 50's, and 60's. (I was there for the late 70's, unfortunately.) I've studied the evolution of the rules and work to understand not just the rules and interps, but also the reasons for the rules.

I've studied mechanics from the time they weren't referred to as mechanics, to the birth of the written two man system, the three man system and the four man system. I've dabbled with the six man system, but very little...I've only worked it four times.

I am not the best umpire. I am not the worst umpire. As I'm fond of telling coaches who say nice things at the end of a game..."I'm sure you've had better, I'm sure you've had worse." I work hard to get into position, I hustle and I call only what I see.

I respect coaches, managers and players who respect The Game, play it hard and honestly, and love it for what it is.

I do not respect those who disrespect the history and "grandness" of The Game or don't appreciate their "inheritance". I don't suffer well those who generalize or don't take the time to understand any role but their own, and who chose to accept emotion and opinion over facts.

I know that I can appear arrogant. I have on occasion apologized for that, especially when I have misunderstood a post or question. But I don't apologize for it when it comes in response to those who who chose to engage in baseball "class warfare" and choose not to consider the why's and wherefors of the actions of The Game or just want to attack and then beat the drum, again and again.

I truly enjoy this site and the many posters who chose to share their knowledge and genuine passion for The Game without hyperboleor shading the truth and who are willing to examine information that may be new to them...regardless of the conclusion they may come to.

Agreement is not necessary for respect. Honesty is. And I can happily say that this site is blessed with some good honest people.

One last thing, I really appreciate MST and PIAA as moderators and the all the other moderators as well. Their job is thankless and they do it well.
Last edited by Jimmy03
Jimmy03Jimmy031,000+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by NoReplay:
QuesTec, the original MLB contracted system to assess/improve umpire zones claimed an accuracy of one half inch in 2001.
Presumably the systems would be at least as accurate now.
Does MLB still use this as an umpire training tool?


Questec was blowing somke. It proved to be very inaccurate and MLB stopped using it.
NoReplayNoReplay100+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by Jimmy03:
quote:
Originally posted by bsballfan:

And agree that you are 100% the authority on all things umpire related?


I don't think Coach May, Coach 2709, PGStaff, Trojan-Skipper and others I have had the pleasure to debate civily, agree with and sometimes disagree with, would think any such thing.

I'm sure, however that TR, Noreplay and some others do. Here's what influences my posts.

I am older than many here, late in 50's. I've umpired since I was 22. I've worked several levels including high school, D-1, D-111, Legion, Select, Adult and have had the great fortune to have also worked relief in two minor leagues when an umpire gets ill or injured or promoted and his replacement can't get to town in time for a game.

I've been to proschool and work hard to keep my skills current. This requires harder work each year and I have gone to pro clinics to help keep up and stay current on rules interpretations.

Over the years I have met many minor league umpire and a few major league umpires and have been luck enough to maintain a relationship with some of them I am not unique in that. Many amateur umpires have MLB friends. We just don't talk a lot about them. It's fairly universal that if we do, we lose their trust and eventually their friendship. From what I've seen here, I'm sure Matt13, Dash, PIAA and MST also have contacts at higher levels.

Most of all, I am a student of baseball and of umpiring. I've studied how the game was called in the 30's, 40's, 50's, and 60's. (I was there for the late 70's, unfortunately.) I've studied the evolution of the rules and work to understand not just the rules and interps, but also the reasons for the rules.

I've studied mechanics from the time they weren't referred to as mechanics, to the birth of the written two man system, the three man system and the four man system. I've dabbled with the six man system, but very little...I've only worked it four times.

I am not the best umpire. I am not the worst umpire. As I'm fond of telling coaches who say nice things at the end of a game..."I'm sure you've had better, I'm sure you've had worse." I work hard to get into position, I hustle and I call only what I see.

I respect coaches, managers and players who respect The Game, play it hard and honestly, and love it for what it is.

I do not respect those who disrespect the history and "grandness" of The Game or don't appreciate their "inheritance". I don't suffer well those who generalize or don't take the time to understand any role but their own, and who chose to accept emotion and opinion over facts.

I know that I can appear arrogant. I have on occasion apologized for that, especially when I have misunderstood a post or question. But I don't apologize for it when it comes in response to those who who chose to engage in baseball "class warfare" and choose not to consider the why's and wherefors of the actions of The Game or just want to attack and then beat the drum, again and again.

I truly enjoy this site and the many posters who chose to share their knowledge and genuine passion for The Game without hyperboleor shading the truth and who are willing to examine information that may be new to them...regardless of the conclusion they may come to.

Agreement is not necessary for respect. Honesty is. And I can happily say that this site is blessed with some good honest people.

One last thing, I really appreciate MST and PIAA as moderators and the all the other moderators as well. Their job is thankless and they do it well.


Got no problem with any of that. Peace and love Smile
(c'mon I'm in oregon)

Plate Ump Frisco Game still looks allstar!
Jimmy03Jimmy031,000+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by zombywoof:
The Umpire Strikes Again!!!

Giants vs Braves

SS makes nice play for SF, throws to 1B. Foot clearly off the bag and runner called out.

WOW..these guys in blue all over the league are bad. What's going on here.

How much incompetance could be stood in MLB playoff baseball rounds?


Here is how that play is being reported:

"On Friday, Uribe dove to his right to grab the Gonzalez grounder, bounced up and threw to first. Replays were inconclusive whether Huff's foot came off the base as he stretched to grab the throw. Gonzalez, though, argued with Emmel after he crossed the bag, and Cox immediately picked the sword, slamming his Braves cap to the turf in anger."

In the limited replays I've seen, I couldn't tell exactly where the foot was when the ball was caught. He certainly came off at some point.
B bsballfan100+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by Jimmy03:
quote:
Originally posted by zombywoof:
The Umpire Strikes Again!!!

Giants vs Braves

SS makes nice play for SF, throws to 1B. Foot clearly off the bag and runner called out.

WOW..these guys in blue all over the league are bad. What's going on here.

Seems like the home plate umpire would have had a "straight line" view of the play....why not ask for help?
How much incompetance could be stood in MLB playoff baseball rounds?


Here is how that play is being reported:

"On Friday, Uribe dove to his right to grab the Gonzalez grounder, bounced up and threw to first. Replays were inconclusive whether Huff's foot came off the base as he stretched to grab the throw. Gonzalez, though, argued with Emmel after he crossed the bag, and Cox immediately picked the sword, slamming his Braves cap to the turf in anger."

In the limited replays I've seen, I couldn't tell exactly where the foot was when the ball was caught. He certainly came off at some point.


Seems like the home plate umpire had a "straight line" view of the play.....why not ask for help?
Last edited by bsballfan
Jimmy03Jimmy031,000+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by bsballfan:
quote:
Originally posted by Jimmy03:
quote:
Originally posted by zombywoof:
The Umpire Strikes Again!!!

Giants vs Braves

SS makes nice play for SF, throws to 1B. Foot clearly off the bag and runner called out.

WOW..these guys in blue all over the league are bad. What's going on here.

Seems like the home plate umpire would have had a "straight line" view of the play....why not ask for help?
How much incompetance could be stood in MLB playoff baseball rounds?


Here is how that play is being reported:

"On Friday, Uribe dove to his right to grab the Gonzalez grounder, bounced up and threw to first. Replays were inconclusive whether Huff's foot came off the base as he stretched to grab the throw. Gonzalez, though, argued with Emmel after he crossed the bag, and Cox immediately picked the sword, slamming his Braves cap to the turf in anger."

In the limited replays I've seen, I couldn't tell exactly where the foot was when the ball was caught. He certainly came off at some point.


Seems like the home plate umpire had a "straight line" view of the play.....why not ask for help?


It appears Cox did speak with the PU and wasn't happy with the answer.

I know it would be hard to believe, but U1 may have gotten the call right.

Something to consider about PU's view:

PU needs to be watching the entire action on the play..this means he has to try to open his view so he can see the catch up highs and the foot touch the bag down low at the same time...harder than it sounds, and counter intuitive because when he's working first, he focuses his eyes on the foot touching the bag and listens for the ball hitting the glove.
Last edited by Jimmy03
NoReplayNoReplay100+ posts
OK. Giants/Braves game over
watched some but not all.
Was very impressed how the plate ump's (Nauert) calls were virtually perfect, both in terms of what naked eye saw and with what pitch track showed; it seemed he called virtually every ball/strike correctly.

Look at the Brooks site data on this:

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/...=|10/08/2010|Atlanta Braves @ San Francisco Giants

These scatter plots show the same thing, almost no missed calls and those missed were really pretty close.

To me the visual impression (liveview) matches the pitchtrax (tbs) which matches the Brooks site data.

Now compare those scatter diagrams to those posted for Wendelstedt's job in the yankees/twins game. Pay particular attention to the Left handed Hitters.

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/...lb_1%2F&prevDate=107

Once again,the visual impression real time matched the pitchtrax (tbs broadcast) which matches the Brooks site pitch location scatter diagrams. Before I knew of the existence of the Brooks site i stated in Jimmy03's thread that wend was consistently calling strikes 3 baseball widths off the plate. 9 inches. ( after being challenged on my admittedly exagerated 5-6 baseball widths..my bad, Rookie mistake) These scatter diagrams confirm that...he was calling balls 18 inches from the center of the plate strikes. Thats almost 10 inches off the plate, so LH hiters were facing 2 top of the line starters with a strike zone 27 inches wide.

Now look at wendelstedt's data for RHH. Totally different zone. Almost picture perfect for righties. So really, managers should be looking at this data when they set their lineups, not which pitcher they are facing. LHH is probably not going to get a good pitch to hit or ever be ahead of the count when wendelstedt works.

So back to my original question. I can see this. Others can see this, so surely mlb can see this. Why do they accept it?

The staggering thing about this is the consistency of wendelstedts erroneous zone. Also, he gets the RHH zone correct, so couldnt remediation from mlb get him to improve on the LHH zone?
Last edited by NoReplay
20dad20dad1,000+ posts
other than reading his post, i haven't really given much thought to the umpiring this post season. but i can't read any sports news without the bad umpiring headlines.

we all know that with so much media today, they replay things so much all mistakes are exposed. so i thought mlb will just tell the media to cool it with all the replay's,( kind of like not showing the guy running around the playing field.)

but with all the money these networks pay for broadcast rights,are they going to laugh at them? or is mlb going to be forced by public perception to use some sort of replay system?

to me it's part of baseball, some day's chicken, some day's feathers. i really don't see the need to highlight these things, as being that umps are not that bad.

but if it sells it prints. just a thought.



A baseball fan is a spectator sitting 500 feet from home plate or watching tv on the couch. Who can see better than an umpire standing five feet away.
Last edited by 20dad
fenwaysouthfenwaysouth10,000+ posts
Umpires - I know you are doing the best you can do with what you have. I know many people have tried umpiring and told me it is far from easy. I believe them. The "mechanics of umpiring" is difficult is usually what I hear most from those that try it.

My gripe is not with umpires (you are the messengers) it is with Major League Baseball; its Excutives and owners. Umpires need better tools to do their jobs better because the game has changed and will continue to change. Expectations from coaches, players and fans for correct calls will continue to increase. MLB is once again putting their head in the sand just like racial integration and PEDs or steriods. Reaction is part of their organizational legacy - to do as little as possible or resist change. Rather than be proactive they choose the path of "business as usual" or being reactive. This is all on the commissioner in my mind. He has the power to try to move this forward to protect the "brand" and grow it. Some will say the "brand" is already growing in attendance and revenue. I contend the "brand" would have been even bigger with these needed changes. The bigger problem is MLB needs to get on the front-end of future issues if it wants to compete with other major sports.
Last edited by fenwaysouth
Jimmy03Jimmy031,000+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by NoReplay:
OK. Giants/Braves game over
So back to my original question. I can see this. Others can see this, so surely mlb can see this. Why do they accept it?



Because MLB understands how flawed Brookes methodology is and how the reults do not reflect reality. A simple reading of the description of the process will begin to show most people the inherent errors of the system.

This was examined by experts and discarded. It remains available for entertainment purposes.
igballigball500+ posts
I think overall they do an excellent job under difficult circumstances and I'm not a fan of expanding replay. However what I would like is to ensure is that the very best are out there this time of year. I can live with human error knowing the highest rated guys are the ones making the calls. This is another way of saying cb Buckner should never be out there during October.
NoReplayNoReplay100+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by Jimmy03:




Because MLB understands how flawed Brookes methodology is and how the reults do not reflect reality. A simple reading of the description of the process will begin to show most people the inherent errors of the system.

This was examined by experts and discarded. It remains available for entertainment purposes.[/QUOTE]

Im Sorry but with all due respect that argument wont work anymore.
The thing is, it does reflect reality. Wendelstedts strike zone just simply sux for LHH. I can see it. Pitchtrax can see it. The scatter diagrams confirm it. The players see it. F2 sets up on the chalk line for the opposite batters box. F1 hits that spot, W calls it. Rinse and repeat. Berkman knows it and knows he is safe laying off the inside pitch.
MLB has abandoned it?
Every Major League park is wired (camera'd??) for pitchtrax or a system like it.

Look. You cant pretend there is no issue. The cry for replay comes because of repeated observable mistakes...the issue creates the furor.

Its better from almost everyone's perspective to minimize use of replay and continue with the umps, who in fact do a great job most of the time. But, just like hitters and pitchers use video and modern training techniques to improve their game, mlb and the umps need to do the same. Aside from physiogic testing and weeding out the old, fat and infirm probably not much you can ever do to affect the call of the bang bang play at first or the high tag.

But the strike zone? Called 200 times every game, right there in front of everyone, big as buck jones for all to see, all to record, all to play back. Wendlestedt and his ilk call strike after strike way off the plate. Clearly affects the game, and contrary to the recurring pap apologists for this offer over and over again, it cant be adjusted to by the hitter except in the way Berkman did, which as we have seen leads to its own set of problems.

The cumulative effect of all those miscalls (which is essentially cheating on the umps part) readily observed, throughout the course of a game/series/season seves to magnify the ire and anger expressed over the other "one-off" missed calls nd fuels more of the demand for replays...people dont want to remove the charm of the human element, they want to remove the cheating and incompetence.


Its interesting. Spent a few hours browsing several of the umpires bulletin boards. They talk about this. Some are bothered by the process, some laugh at the dismay of "the rats".
the problem becomes more understandble tho, like the players, many desire and most dont achieve MLB. Tose who do apparently have say in who else goes up and down. Wendelstedt sells courses and camps to these aspiring umps. He must become somewhat "untouchable"

So I guess we are depnding on Bud to fix it.
biggerpapibiggerpapi5,000+ posts
A little off topic here (but this IS getting a little old)....

Did anyone else think it was unnecessary for Cox to get himself run so early in a VERY important ballgame?

I know many people seem to think it's cute that he so old and has so many ejections. I just wonder if it had more potential to hurt his team to get tossed in the second inning.
T Tooldforthis100+ posts
biggerpapi,
After the interview from the game the night before, the reporters were all over him for not questioning the call, so IMO I think that this one was so close that he decided to run out to the field and argue the call because it was the same umpire and he may have felt that it would fire up his team.

Just a note on the call at first base, It has been shown from every point that the cameras had here in the Bay Area and everyone shows that it was a bang, bang play and to close to call or over turn. Besides it wouldn't have changed anything more than the fastball down the middle of the plate that ended up in McCovey Cove, that is the one that should have been over turned. I think the pitcher balked before he threw the ball, should have been a non pitch. Just kidding, nice hit, dang it.
Jimmy03Jimmy031,000+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by NoReplay:
quote:
Originally posted by Jimmy03:




Because MLB understands how flawed Brookes methodology is and how the reults do not reflect reality. A simple reading of the description of the process will begin to show most people the inherent errors of the system.

This was examined by experts and discarded. It remains available for entertainment purposes.


Im Sorry but with all due respect that argument wont work anymore.
The thing is, it does reflect reality. Wendelstedts strike zone just simply sux for LHH. I can see it. Pitchtrax can see it. The scatter diagrams confirm it. [/QUOTE]

This is normally where I get frustrated and say something obnoxious. I will do my best to not do that.

The facts are that the mythodology of the brookes site is severely flawed. It has been examined and tested and failed. You can relate what you think you see all you want. No probelm. No one can argue with you over what you think you see. However there are facts regarding the brooke site, and they do not support its results.

Now then, if you want to discuss Meals calling two pitches in the opposite side batter's boxes strikes in the top of the 7th a few minutes ago...yep, he sure did.

See, I don't deny it can happen. I just deny it happened when I have the evidence to demonstrate that it didn't. Two different things.

Generalizations are not valid.
Jimmy03Jimmy031,000+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by zombywoof:
The Umpire Strikes Again!

SB attempt by Texas in the 6th..Runner slides in, momentum pulls him off the bag, infielder applied the tag and held the tag at second as the baserunner comes off the base and the umpire missed it.

Looks like these playoffs are about the sub-par officiating.



Tough call. The umpire was screened by the fielder and didn't see the separation. But he surely missed it.
F fathertime7110+ posts
Incompetency again today...

Paul N. is the best umpire in the business, he is not incompetent. Others I will choose not to name in MLB are incompetent. I sat through many spring training games with well respected umpires for almost two decades and can vouch for some of them but Paul is the best. Dutch was awesome too. Too bad he retired, but I don't blame him. Golf on a daily basis opposed to sweaty ballparks with everyone yelling at you is a no-brainer. The games I observed with Paul N. when he was an umpiring supervisor here in FL during spring training taught me a great deal. The human aspect of making snap calls cannot be denied in the game of baseball; however, technology is being used for everything else! Why not MLB post season play?

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, replays are desperately needed in post season play! I might give Paul a ring to see if replays are going become a reality. My guess would be yes after what I have witnessed during this post season, thusfar. I'm just a retired person with no real inside knowledge but it is obvious for even the novice fan that too much is on the line to allow the DINOSAUR APPROACH TO CONTROL MILLIONS.
Jimmy03Jimmy031,000+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by biggerpapi:
A little off topic here (but this IS getting a little old)....

Did anyone else think it was unnecessary for Cox to get himself run so early in a VERY important ballgame?

I know many people seem to think it's cute that he so old and has so many ejections. I just wonder if it had more potential to hurt his team to get tossed in the second inning.


When see this one and then count up how many times he got ejected without leaving the dugout, I think there is some truth to the allegation he's just padding his stats.
TPMTPMHSBaseballweb Member since 2003
quote:
Originally posted by biggerpapi:
A little off topic here (but this IS getting a little old)....

Did anyone else think it was unnecessary for Cox to get himself run so early in a VERY important ballgame?

I know many people seem to think it's cute that he so old and has so many ejections. I just wonder if it had more potential to hurt his team to get tossed in the second inning.


According to one Atlanta Brave who has played with him for quite sometime, he doesn't really coach much anymore, he let's his players play their game.
Jimmy03Jimmy031,000+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by bsballfan:

Great, awesome, doesn't give you the right to be arrogant and condescending.


You are correct. Nothing gives anyone that right. Unfortunately, as I've admitted before, I fail to avoid writing some things than can easily be interpreted as arrogant.

What it is in reality, is a response to frustration, which, still, doesn't excuse it.

On the field, I can walk away from situations that cause that frustration. At home, on the computer, it's just so much easier to type something. I will try to remember to go back to my original philosophy about responding when I am frustrated...not to.

That said, and just for fun, here's what, for whatever reason, gets me that frustrated.

1. Folks who refuse to understand the difference between and explanation and an excuse. MST, PIAA, MATT 13, Dash and I have all had our turns at training umpires and we appear to have similar backrounds. When we see umpire err, our first reaction is to discover "why" the error was made.

The simplistic name calling (incompetent) is not a reason and is not usually true. When we discover the reason, improper mechanics, screened-out, result of the compromises inherent in mechanics, bad positioning...whatever, we do not excuse the error, we simmply explain. When we do this some folks accuse us of just blindly backing up the umpire and, believe me, because I've tried, no amount of conversation can convince them that there is a difference bewteeen knowing the cause of an event and excusing the event.

2. People who confuse opinon with fact.

3. People who refuse to accept facts, even presented with documented and, at times, visual evidence. That one astounds me.

4. People with no intellectual curiosity for anything other than what they have already accepted as important, true, or convenient.

5. People who think the rule book differentiates between right handed and left handed pitchers.

6. People who blame umpires for MLB policy.

7. People who think the rule book is the only source of interpretations.

8. Umpires who do not understand the game.

9. Umpires who do not know the rules.

10. Players who think yelling F bombs at umpires from dugout (think Shields)is normal, accepted, and protected practice.

11. Paid coaches who think that because they make a living in baseball, they should get a call that their team honestly did not earn.

12. People who generalize and claim "all umpires...this or that" or "all coaches...this or that." This is simply an excuse for hot having to think.

13. The Yankees, since CBS purchased them and thereafter.

14. Anyone who will post that this lists proves anything.

15. The designated hitter.

16. People who think that a force play slide rule, requires a runner to slide.

16. Weak baseball commissioners.

And last....me, when I forget to walk away from these other sources of frustration.
B bsballfan100+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by TPM:
quote:
Originally posted by biggerpapi:
A little off topic here (but this IS getting a little old)....

Did anyone else think it was unnecessary for Cox to get himself run so early in a VERY important ballgame?

I know many people seem to think it's cute that he so old and has so many ejections. I just wonder if it had more potential to hurt his team to get tossed in the second inning.


According to one Atlanta Brave who has played with him for quite sometime, he doesn't really coach much anymore, he let's his players play their game.


That is laughable....Bobby Cox is one of the finest managers in MLB history....His players LOVE HIM.

Also, that umpire did not have to throw him out of the game....he could have said "Bobby pick up your **** hat and let's play" or he could have brought the home plate umpire over talked it over and said "hey Bobby, I asked neither or us had him off the bag" but he didn't....he just threw him out.

Look, he was wrong to do it but they didn't have to throw him out.
TPMTPMHSBaseballweb Member since 2003
Of course his players love him! Where was it mentioned he wasn't a great manager, he just doesn't coach up like he used to. If they really needed him, he wouldn't get himself thrown out every other game and especially during playoffs.

A big part of him being a great manager is to let his players play the game, not micro manage every move. He's taught a lot of players to make their own decisions and be responsible for their mistakes, that is why they love him so much and why so many great players have come from Atlanta.

BTW, I hate that pitch trax, the intended use is to show the pitchers set up, some think it's to show whether calls are good or bad.
NoReplayNoReplay100+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by Jimmy03:
quote:
Originally posted by NoReplay:
quote:
Originally posted by Jimmy03:




Because MLB understands how flawed Brookes methodology is and how the reults do not reflect reality. A simple reading of the description of the process will begin to show most people the inherent errors of the system.

This was examined by experts and discarded. It remains available for entertainment purposes.


Im Sorry but with all due respect that argument wont work anymore.
The thing is, it does reflect reality. Wendelstedts strike zone just simply sux for LHH. I can see it. Pitchtrax can see it. The scatter diagrams confirm it.


This is normally where I get frustrated and say something obnoxious. I will do my best to not do that.

The facts are that the mythodology of the brookes site is severely flawed. It has been examined and tested and failed. You can relate what you think you see all you want. No probelm. No one can argue with you over what you think you see. However there are facts regarding the brooke site, and they do not support its results.

Now then, if you want to discuss Meals calling two pitches in the opposite side batter's boxes strikes in the top of the 7th a few minutes ago...yep, he sure did.

See, I don't deny it can happen. I just deny it happened when I have the evidence to demonstrate that it didn't. Two different things.

Generalizations are not valid.[/QUOTE]

You have stated this before. Your statement remains unsupported despite multiple requests re same. Show me how the data is flawed, show me the "tests" that you reference; show me "the facts regarding the brooke site" because frankly, I dont believe you. And Im not talking, btw, about the more esoteric aspects of the site where they predict pitch effectiveness etc. Im talking about the simple pitch location scatter diagrams. These are not 3rd order differentials or theoretical equations; these are simply plotted coordinates.

Im not talking about "what I think I saw". Im talking about what I KNOW I saw, and what, for that matter , I can go back and review over and over because it is recorded...as can you.
In your later post tonight you say this:

"3. People who refuse to accept facts, even presented with documented and, at times, visual evidence. That one astounds me."

Me too. Can you actually look at the calls made by Wendlestedt in the Twins/Yankees game and NOT see that he was calling an entirely different zone for RH and LH hitters? Can you not compare what you see in the game with the scatter diagram on the Brooks site that matches this? There are 14-15 called strikes on LHH that were clearly 6 inches plus off the plate, several of these are well beyond 6 , one is at 10 inches.

This is really the crux of the issue we face now. Back in the day you got one look at the pitch. Umps could and did rely on the fact that any discussion was a whole lot of "he said" "she said" stuff that could never be settled one way or the other. Today I can go back and review every single off the plate call made by Wendlestedt on a LHH in that game. You said that you TIVO'D the game so you can as well. What do you "think" you saw when you do this?

You are simply telling me over and over that what I can SEE didnt happen. Revealed Knowledge. Revealed knowledge that does not stand up to any sort of objective assessment. Wont work anymore

BTW, What evidence, as in "I just deny it happened when I have the evidence to demonstrate that it didn't." do you have to demonstrate that the strike zone called by Wendlestedt in that game is not as I have said it was? And not as the Brookes scatter diagrams objectively documents?
NoReplayNoReplay100+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by Jimmy03:
While I am waiting for permission to release an email to you, why don't you just review Dan Brooks's comment regarding his graphs?

"These parameters are variable and should not be taken as gospel"


Sure . But how does it apply?
He was referencing adjustments to the height required for batters of varying height...the y axis. Setting the upper and lower limits of the strike zone for short fella vs tall guy.
We have been discussing variations along the x axis..inside/outside.
For the purposes of this discussion you can simply look at the non-normalized maps and then those parameters are not involved.
Clear?

Last edited by NoReplay
Previous

Add Reply

Post
.

Membership Required

We're sorry. You must be signed in to continue. Sign In or Register
×
Are you sure you want to remove from your Block List?
×
Loading...
×
When you block a person, they can no longer invite you to a private message or post to your profile wall. Replies and comments they make will be collapsed/hidden by default. Finally, you'll never receive email notifications about content they create or likes they designate for your content.
Note: if you proceed, you will no longer be following .
×
Advanced Search
Advanced Search
Link copied to your clipboard.
×