Game thread, Mariners at Athletics, 9/30

DMZ · September 30, 2004 at 11:03 am · Filed Under Mariners 

12:35, on FSN

Franklin v Redman

Ichiro! v Sisler

Possible position players to plunk in retaliation for Ichiro’s beaning, if Melvin protected his players, which he doesn’t:
Erubiel Durazo, DH
Eric Chavez, 3B
Mark Kotsay, CF

If you want value for value, though, you really have to plunk Durazo and someone else like Byrnes. To make a serious point, you’d plunk Durazo and Chavez.

Not that I’m advocating a beanball war. Though the A’s might be slow to retaliate, given that they’re in a pennant race and don’t want to get injured or suspended.

I’m only going to say that if I was Melvin, I’ve got 20 relievers I can bring in to plunk somebody in the butt to make my point, if I get tossed it’s no big deal, if they get tossed it’s no big deal, but protecting Ichiro! is worth doing (if you think beaning, say, Durazo and Byrnes does that) (I mean, as long as you’re not going to protect Madrtisch’s arm).


75 Responses to “Game thread, Mariners at Athletics, 9/30”

  1. Paul Weaver on September 30th, 2004 2:50 pm

    #43, tede.
    The reason it is illogical from a strategic winning perspecitve, is you just gave a free base, gave up a potential out. That’s all. Nothing to do with Liberal or Conservative. I was even advocating for it….so I’m not sure what you were getting at.
    I can’t really answer your question because I don’t know the answer. Maybe the plunkers win, maybe the non plunkers win…*shrug* Can’t say. Who’s keeping track? I went with the plunkers, but it’s a guess.

    On another note,#36 Troy – good call on Olivo, too bad it was after the fact you decided to say something. I wanted to hear a bet – it’s too late now.

    It’s the 8th. If the M’s go 3 and out each inning, no more at bats for Ichiro….come oooonnnn somebody!

  2. Evan on September 30th, 2004 2:52 pm

    “…in the baseball spectrum AS A WHOLE, new school statistical analysis like most of us here ascribe to are parallel in certain ways to much of what are liberal politics…”

    Honestly, that would surprise me. Given the sabermetric tendency to measure stuff, it seems to run more in parallel with far-right capitalist economics principles (“if it matters, measure it”). The old-school baseball guys (“you can see his obvious potential if you just watch him play”) seems more parallel to leftist economic policies (“obviously, the best way to help the poor is to give them money”). Neither one tends to use detailed analysis of outcomes when determining a course of action.

  3. John Wiebe on September 30th, 2004 2:55 pm

    #44: I would rank the Mariner broadcast team, as a whole, somewhere in the middle of the pack. Off the top of my head:

    Dodgers: Scully, best in baseball.

    Giants: Krukow and Kuiper, solid (and I hate the Giants).

    Padres: Jerry Coleman just isn’t getting it done anymore, and his partner is worse.

    Angels: Steve Physioc and Rex Hudler say things that make Valle sound like Billy Beane.

    Yankees: Does anybody like Michael Kay? Easily worse than the Mariners’ team.

    And of course there are many more, some better, some worse than the M’s. Just a few examples.

  4. Evan on September 30th, 2004 2:57 pm

    The Braves and White Sox have dreadful commentators, too. Far worse than ours.

    I kinda like the YES guys.

  5. DMZ on September 30th, 2004 2:59 pm

    I’ve listened to a ton of broadcast crews and I hate, hate, hate the M’s. Not because they’re the worst, but more because the more you’re exposed to a particular set of bad broadcasters, the more their schtick wears thing. I thought Valle and Henderson were interesting and cool changes initially, and then soured on them pretty quickly.

    So I freely admit that familiarity has led to discontent on my part. And also that it takes a great talent to rise above that effect, that expecting that kind of greatness might be too much, and that I should be lucky I don’t have to listen to the Wonderdog or the YES Network crew.

    But that doesn’t change my gut reaction every time I hear “Hi again everybody, it’s Rick Rizzs and…”

  6. tede on September 30th, 2004 3:02 pm

    #43Paul Weaver. The point is that you protect the outside and inside parts of the plate. And you don’t as a pitcher let your teammates get abused because the other team will make a habit of it. Best point is Frank Thomas who whines like a baby if you pitch him inside. If you don’t he’s gonna hog the entire strike zone and extend his arms. And strategically that ain’t good. And for not protecting your teammates, supposedly (insert Mariner urban legend here) Eric Hanson didn’t and Griffey and Buhner definitely didn’t like that.

    Mets, Phillies and Padres at the Safe next year. Oh boy!

  7. Paul Weaver on September 30th, 2004 3:12 pm

    Hello Tede. I’ve never argued against your point, so I don’t know why you lumped me in with Hans. Besides, I think you are pushing it off topic. You always throw inside if that’s where the hitter can’t hit it – if the “liberal democrat manager” advises his pitchers to avoid conflict by pitching outside, then he’s not staying employed, because he’s not winning. The contention is not about sticking to your game and staying mentally tough. The contention is: are retalitory HBPs going to lead to wins? I suggested yes, but without conclusive evidence I also presented the other side of the argument as I often do in my posts. So, we’re in agreeance, but you’re arguing with me, man.

    Looks like the M’s aren’t going to do it though….*sigh*
    I don’t think Ichiro will seethe about it the way Griffey or Buhner would. It seems almost like a non-issue now.

    Ichiro coming up…

  8. John Wiebe on September 30th, 2004 3:13 pm


    The expectation of greatness is what Dodger fans are going through right now. Vin Scully is so good, well, to say that we’re spoiled doesn’t tell the half of it. As a result, Ross Porter isn’t as popular, and he’s quietly served as Scully’s sidekick for 28 years. Frank McCourt has floated the rumor of replacing Ross next year, and I think he was surprised when the fan reaction was averse to the idea. We like Ross, but we spend so much time praising Vin that a new owner can almost be forgiven for thinking that Porter was expendable.

    At any rate, I agree with Derek that the more you hear bad announcers the worse they get. Physioc and Hudler are particularly cringe-worthy because they never, ever fail to espouse the virtues of the Angels’ style of baseball, which is supposedly the reason they won it all on ’02 (and not the homers and extra-base hits from Glaus, Salmon, et al.). “Look how the Angels move those runners over! That’s Mike Scioscia right there folks, they work on that in spring training, making productive outs, bunting, putting on the hit-and-run, stealing bases!”

    Then, when a hit-and-run turns into an inning-ending strikeout-throw-em-out double play to jettison a rally, or a sac bunt keeps the Angels away from the big inning, they somehow fail to mention the downside of Scioscia’s style, or the risks that come with always blindly taking the extra base, no matter the situation.

  9. Jeremy on September 30th, 2004 3:14 pm

    John Wiebe,

    Here’s a few more broadcasting crews for you. I’ve had the chance to listen to a few of these crews since moving from Bremerton to Arkansas last year:

    Rangers — Josh Lewin and Tom Grieve: I hate Lewin, but Grieve is solid.

    Cardinals — Joe Buck (part-time), Dan McLaughlin, Al Hrabosky: McLaughlin is bland, but Hrabosky is insane. He’s the Mad Hungarian for a reason. And Joe Buck has grown on me.

    Astros — Bill Brown and Jim Deshaies: I’ve always been a fan of Deshaies, since his playing days.

    However, the White Sox have the worst broadcasting crew. Hawk Harrelson and Darrin Jackson, good god. PUT THIS ON THE BOARD, HAWK…YOUR TEAM IS STILL MEDIOCRE. Too bad, so sad.

  10. John Wiebe on September 30th, 2004 3:29 pm

    “And Joe Buck has grown on me.”

    Since getting MLB.TV, I’ve come to realize there are two Joe Bucks. One is the national TV, working-with-McCarver Buck that dumbs down everything and tries to appeal to the common fan. The other is the regular-season Cardinals game Buck that makes witty, subtle jokes and good observations. So yes, I have to say Buck has grown on me as well.

    The Lewin-Grieve team in Texas couldn’t be more opposite. Lewin is excitable and young and loud. Grieve is older, wiser, and wouldn’t raise his voice if the Rangers were winning the World Series.

  11. Paul Weaver on September 30th, 2004 3:32 pm

    game over. Ichiro strikes out, Atchison gives up the long ball to Crosby.

  12. DMZ as Trollotron 2000 on September 30th, 2004 3:33 pm


    “The reason most hard core baseball analysts are on the left is because they’re smart.”


    Seriously, as much as there’s a perception that BP, etc are left-wingers, it’s just not true. Knowing a lot of the BP guys personally, the team runs the political spectrum. If there’s one thing in common, it’s an anti-authority streak which the last couple years in particular makes us come off as far more left-y than we are.

    We’re not exaggerating when we say that in the last presidential election as a group BP probably cast a ballot for every candiate, and for the same candidates for wildly divergent reasons.

    Not sure what that’s worth.

  13. Sean on September 30th, 2004 3:42 pm

    I was at the game last night, and I thought Ichiro got hit because Madritsch threw two pitches up and in to Chavez a few innings earlier.

  14. Jeff Sullivan on September 30th, 2004 3:45 pm

    Today’s comments have covered a range of topics, from baseball to left-wing analysts to genital herpes.

    I just thought that should be pointed out.

  15. sidereal on September 30th, 2004 3:47 pm

    The best comment anyone has made on this thread about politics is that we shouldn’t talk about it. It’s an absolute third rail. I just had this political argument with someone and by the end I wanted to tear into him for being so asinine. Later it turned out we shared a ton of hobbies (really obscure ones involving painted miniature aliens) and probably would have gotten along swell if we hadn’t talked politics first. So do yourself a favor and save it for the political blogs.

    On announcers:
    Where the hell is Jon Miller these days? Absolutely the best. I’d taken him over anyone, even Scully.

  16. Troy on September 30th, 2004 3:48 pm

    I’m sure you’re correct about the political diversity DMZ, it just seems to me like the leftys are much more vocal about their leanings and opinions. But you’re probably right,it has more to do with who’s in power than anything. If the blogosphere was up and running back then it’s likely the conservatives would have been the more vocal group under Clinton. Good point.

  17. Matt on September 30th, 2004 3:51 pm

    MVP Baseball 2k4 made me realize that we actually have a decent broadcast team. Krukow and Kiper are terrible “Grab some pine meat!” Ugh, fratboy broadcasting at it’s worst.

    Also, politics on a baseball board should be a no go.

  18. tede on September 30th, 2004 4:03 pm

    Ron Santo anybody? Guy has had his health problems but does like game like he his sitting on a barstool and finishing his lunch.

    How about some of the old M’s TV guys: Wes Stock (boring), Maz (ditto but really don’t remember), Bill Freehan (IIRC, he was sorta OK, but left for college baseball), Joe Simpson (it’s was like having Willie Bloomquist doing the games. Couldn’t get over how bad he sucked as the M’s CF). Any others?

    And of course, Niehaus’ original sidekick Ken Wilson (’77-’82). He left for hockey and this year got canned by the St. Louis Blues. Now (tieing the political and broadcasting themes together) he wants to be governor of Hawaii. He has as much chance as Pat O’Brian does in becoming Gov. of South Dakota (or Joe Piscopo in Jersey).

    IIRC, one winter Niehaus did Husky hoops and Ken Wilson did Cougar hoops.

  19. Paul Weaver on September 30th, 2004 4:08 pm

    Broadcasting 162 3+ hour games a year (and more, plus postgame, pregame….) – I’m sure it’s hard to stay interesting or avoid inane chatter. Kudos to those who can do it well.

    I don’t mind politics in baseball analysis – it makes it fiery and more fun (and sometimes parallels can be drawn) – as long is it doesn’t have the same polarizing effect on the baseball analysts as it does on the masses…..and also be wary of analogies, because no analogy is perfect. Any time I hear a political speaker who is on my side go into an analogy, I cringe.

    So, my two(gillion) cents: When someone makes a political comment for baseball, it’s meant to be flavor and related to baseball analysis. So, if I say something enfuriating to you, such as Melvin’s bullpen consistency is like Kerry’s stance on war, or Beltre’s future is as certain as Iraq’s WMD supply….it’s not meant to be a deep political analysis, but a baseball analysis with those dumb analogies that beat writers try to be good at. I appreciate the flavor, and won’t get into specifics on the politics unless it furthers the other side of the baseball argument.

  20. tede on September 30th, 2004 4:19 pm

    Just saw the replay of the A’s first run.

    Melhuse safe on error by 1B Bloomquist
    Kotsay doubles him home on ball to LC that should have been caught.

    My oh my!

  21. Evan on September 30th, 2004 4:53 pm

    “Franklin ended the season with a 4-16 record and a 4.90 ERA. He held opponents to two or fewer runs in 11 of his 32 starts.”

    That’s the ringing endorsement Franklin gets from He was good about a third of the time.

  22. Dave in Palo Alto on September 30th, 2004 8:25 pm

    #65 — Jon Miller does Giants play-by-play when he’s not doing ESPN. And he is fabulous. Always a pleasure, but the whole crew for the Giants are great, including Kuiper, Krukow, and Dave Fleming (no, not THAT Dave Flemin).

    Incidentally, I remember to Jon Miller doing the O’s with Tom Marr. Great pairing, made ever more amusing when Brooksie stopped by for color. (You had to hear him to appreciate it.)

    On Physioc and Hudler, I kind of like Hud, but Physioc is so full of it you have to laugh.

  23. Greg on October 1st, 2004 8:51 am

    um, are you forgetting that the M’s pitchers had plunked both Crosby AND Durazo the night before in a game that was already over? If the A’s had wanted to retaliate, they would have had Harden’s 100mph fastball hit Ichiro, not Duke’s 85 mph heater.

    I didn’t read all the comments on here, so forgive me if this has already been said (you can understand just glossing over the thoughts of Mariners fans, right?)

    For a website that constantly promulgates itself as intelligent baseball analysis, you sure screwed up with this one.

  24. DMZ on October 1st, 2004 10:43 am

    “promulgates itself as intelligent baseball analysis”

    When do we do that? I think we we’re sometimes serious and sometimes funny. In this case, I was trying to make a joke about how teams supposedly try to plunk equivalent guys, and it’s stupid to attempt that kind of mathmatics and protecting your batters is itself sort of pointless.

    Also, this:

    you can understand just glossing over the thoughts of Mariners fans, right?

    I don’t know if you’re trying to imply we don’t listen to people, but it seems like something you wouldn’t want to say if you wanted to be taken seriously.

  25. hans on October 5th, 2004 1:34 pm

    Sorry this is really late. I kind of doubt whether anyone will even read it. I had to get back to work and couldn’t continue along with the thread.

    The point I was trying to make is that beaning opposing players does not protect your own players. Sure, it fires up your team, it gives everyone a sense of revenge, it helps the pitcher by preventing the batter from crowding the plate and taking away the inside corner. It does a lot of good things. I am not advocating baseball without pitching inside or the occasional plunking.

    But strictly speaking… it does not “protect” your batters. It makes them no safer. If anything, it increases the chance that someone else will be gunning for them.

    And by the way… I’m glad that there was no revenge for Ichiro being hit. The Mariners made the right call on that one. As those of you who read this will note, the lack of an avenging plunk did not lead to any large-scale targeting of Marnier batters for the rest of the season.