This link from ESPN.com's Jayson Stark was posted in last night's game thread, but if you missed it, it bears mention on the front page:
There have been 1,251 postseason games in baseball history. Only two others -- two -- ever ended this way, with a walk-off extra-base hit by a team that was one out away from losing.
One was The Kirk Gibson Game -- Game 1 of the 1988 World Series, Gibson homering off Dennis Eckersley, Jack Buck warbling: "I don't believe what I just saw."
The other was The Bill Bevens Game -- Game 4 of the 1947 World Series, when Yankees pitcher Bill Bevens got within one out of the first no-hitter in World Series history, and then lost it all. Lost his win. Lost his place in immortality. Lost it on a two-run double by Cookie Lavagetto with two outs in the ninth.
Here's something you might not know about Bill Bevens -- that was the last major league game he ever started. He threw 2.2 innings of relief in Game Seven of the 1947 World Series, and then spent the next six years in the minors, never returning to the majors.
And just to clarify Jayson Stark's comment about Jack Buck: Buck's call of Gibson's HR was on CBS radio -- you can hear it at this link. Vin Scully, the Dodgers' regular play-by-play man who was calling the game for the national TV audience on NBC, called it this way:
"In a year that has been so improbable, the impossible has happened."
And none of this is even mentioning last night's stunning walkoff Angels win over the Yankees, which doesn't qualify for Stark's list only because the Angels weren't trailing at the time. This is some postseason we're having -- all we need now is a series to go down to the wire, or to have the Dodgers come back from a 3-1 deficit, or some more tense and thrilling extra-inning games.
Yankees at Angels, 6:57 pm CDT. Yankees lead series 2-1. TV: Fox. Announcers: Joe Buck and Tim McCarver.
Baseball-reference.com game preview
Please visit our SB Nation Angels site Halos Heaven and Yankees site Pinstripe Alley.
Discuss amongst yourselves.
0 recs | 103 comments
I find it surprising
how much I’m enjoying watching these games.
That said, I can’t help feeling how vividly it seems the gap is between these teams and our guys. We measure our team by how we compare against the Cards, or the wild cards, and look how meager their efforts seemed — not any different from our effort the last two years.
What I get from this is how high the bar is, and how far away we seem.
BatCubFan - October 20, 2009
I dunno.
Look at how some of these teams failed — the Angels failed to protect a lead in extra innings in game 2, the Dodgers had a topnotch closer last night who failed, the Angels couldn’t get a winning run home from 3B with nobody out…
Al Yellon - October 20, 2009
Sure, they are all far from playing perfect baseball,
in fact, that is what is making it so entertaining. Nevertheless, despite the gaffes, they are competing at levels we didn’t see a lot of this year.
BatCubFan - October 20, 2009
Well, yeah, because that was the regular season.
daver - October 20, 2009
No, its because
they are better teams.
BatCubFan - October 20, 2009
Who can easily look just as bad as the Cubs on any given day or night.
I give you the Dodgers getting blown out 11-0 the other evening.
daver - October 20, 2009
HA!
The Cubs’ worst loss to the Phillies this year was 10-1! So that must mean the Cubs are better than the Dodgers, right?
Right? Right?
Al Yellon - October 20, 2009
I approve of that logic.
daver - October 20, 2009
as do the 1960 Yankees...
ballhawk - October 20, 2009
I know just what you’re talking about – the real top teams have that machine-like quality. All their hitters seem dangerous, all their pitchers avoid mistakes, etc. The Red Sox were like this in their championship years, and so were (sigh) the Cards the year they won; it’s apparent to one extent or another in all four of the remaining contenders this year.
As far as the distance we need to travel, well….yes. But, I honestly think there’s a luck factor in all this. If a few players have career years at the same time, it can really transform a lineup. If you have a good core of talent, and supporting players with the potential for a breakout year, then there’s the possibility of everything coming together.
This is what was so frustrating about the Cubs’ 2008 season – we seemed very close then.
The Yankees, of course, are exceptional – they probably have about 150% of a good core of talent, which is why they’re prerennially in contention.
CaughtInTheVines - October 20, 2009
Just to clairfy...
….the Cardinals had this quality IN THE WORLD SERIES the year they won…..
CaughtInTheVines - October 20, 2009
Yeah, the Angels defense looked looked great the other night.
daver - October 20, 2009
Hey
I said “to one extent or another”! :-)
CaughtInTheVines - October 20, 2009
I just think it's important not to get too googly eyed over these playoff teams.
daver - October 20, 2009
I approve this comment!
ballhawk - October 20, 2009
Rec'd
chilango2 - October 20, 2009
LOL!
sue369 - October 20, 2009
I hear ya...
…but I think the thing that’s interesting about this stage of the season is that combination of talent and fortune. It’s just so darn rare for the pieces to come together that it’s fun to watch.
It gets at the point that Al has made a bunch of times about the eventual champion usually being the team that gets hot at the right time. That’s very apt – but unless you have that core of talent, getting hot in late September just moves you from 4th th 3rd.
And I’ll make sure I stay stern, steely-eyed and realistic!
CaughtInTheVines - October 20, 2009
Oh, it's definitely fun to watch.
And I give the Dodgers, Phillies, Angels and Yankees full credit for all they’ve accomplished up to this point. I’m not trying to take anything away from them. But this whole notion that the Cubs are sooooo far away from competing at that level strikes me as dubious to say the least.
daver - October 20, 2009
Right!
That’s what I was trying to say – that we have a passable core, especially with the pitching staff, and if we get breakout years from a couple of surprising places we could be One of Those Teams. Looking back I guess I didn’t say it very clearly!
CaughtInTheVines - October 20, 2009
Don't think this is worthy of a Fanshot, but
Mariano Rivera spitting on the ball.
Nice paranoid, rousing post on Deadspin. What do you think?
chilango2 - October 20, 2009
Look closely - see where the expectorant is going to land?
I think he was just channeling what most of the rest of us think of Bud…
ballhawk - October 20, 2009
Of course it's not intended to go on the ball.
I just found it humorous that Angels fans are this paranoid. I don’t even want to imagine if this happened against the Cubs. Many would die from an outrage fit.
chilango2 - October 20, 2009
actually I was referring to how the ball is positioned - with a certain signature up top
ballhawk - October 20, 2009
Ah. Gotcha.
chilango2 - October 20, 2009
not to feed into the paranoia, but did you watch the video?
Agreed that the spit could have landed any number of places besides on the ball – you really can’t tell from just one angle. But the way Rivera looked up towards 2nd base and then 3rd base is pretty damning. He definitely had a “I’m about to raid the cookie jar” look about him.
ballhawk - October 20, 2009
His hand is at his side.
The spit is going straight down. Not sure how that’s going to hit the ball.
It’s an optical illusion created by the camera zoom.
Goodie1969 - October 20, 2009
http://www.sportingnews.com/blog/the_sporting_blog/entry/view/39607/mariano_rivera_and_the_case_of_the_spitball
maybe they should watch the video
jesus christos - October 20, 2009
It's an illusion caused by the angle of the lens.
Note that Rivera spits straight down. His arm is at his side. This is a non-issue.
Al Yellon - October 20, 2009
1) Rivera doesn't need it. 2) He has 1,000 cameras focused on him - think he's an idiot?
stuartscottslefteye - October 20, 2009 via mobile
Exactly.
Al Yellon - October 20, 2009
paging Gary Hart...
ballhawk - October 20, 2009
give him the Monkey Business!
Emelie - October 20, 2009
Hart was getting laid. No number of cameras can negate the risk taken to get laid.
stuartscottslefteye - October 21, 2009
How can you tell his arm is at his side?
The video has been pulled from YouTube, but based on the photograph above, can you ascertain where his right hand really is? Seems to me any illusion caused by the angle of the lens would encompass his hand as well.
ballhawk - October 20, 2009
Try doing that yourself.
If you hold your right hand below your mouth (presuming your head is at the same straight-on angle that Rivera’s is), you would have to be holding it at an awkward angle — bending your fingers at almost a 90-degree angle — to have your right hand directly below your mouth so you could spit on the ball.
It’s a trick of the camera angle.
Al Yellon - October 20, 2009
Playing devil's advocate,
these ball players aremasters on the art of spitting. They can put one wherever they please.
chilango2 - October 20, 2009
Like I said.
Take a baseball, put it in your hand, then try holding it directly below your mouth in a way that shows your fingers like they are in the photo.
It’ll hurt like hell.
Al Yellon - October 20, 2009
Apparently,
the expectorate passes in front of the ball, debunking the accusation for good.
chilango2 - October 20, 2009
do you have alligator arms, Al?
I have no problems holding a baseball and duplicating the finger positioning in that photo. And I can swivel my arm (at the elbow) so the ball could be right below me or off to the side. It doesn’t hurt at all nor does it feel the least bit unnatural.
Personally I don’t think he did it, but not because of the “arm-at-the-side” argument.
ballhawk - October 20, 2009
It figures...
I finally decide who I want to be in the World Series, and of course it’s the two teams on the short end of the stick.
Aside from ABY (Anyone But Yankees), I’m hoping for Dodgers/Angels just to see what Fox does with the starting times. Would east coast prime time trump home team local preference, even if it meant playing through dark shadows (cue Barnabas Collins music)? Probably.
In 2002, it was Angels/Giants but I can’t remember what times games were played. I’m guessing east coast prime time but not sure. Before that, gotta go back to 1989, A’s/Giants, which I think was before the Evil Empire Fox got their grubby hands on baseball. But I recall seeing plenty of sunshine during the earthquake coverage so I’m guessing that was east coast prime time as well.
ballhawk - October 20, 2009
Starting times won't be late for an all-West Coast WS.
They’d start around 7:30 Chicago time — 5:30 on the West Coast. There have been enough games already that have run late in California this year that I think you could see that a 5:30 start there wouldn’t cause too many shadow problems.
In the two all-CA World Series that you mention, starting times were generally somewhere between 7 and 7:30 Chicago time.
Al Yellon - October 20, 2009
It just irks me that here you have (or would have) two teams that have fought long and hard all season
to earn the right to play for baseball’s highest prize, and they have to disrupt their schedules because a bunch of people live on the other side of the country, most who probably don’t care as much as they normally would because their team (or a team they have a connection to) isn’t in it.
ballhawk - October 20, 2009
At the same time...
… I can see the networks’ point. If you start these games at 10:15 (approximately) Eastern time, you are pretty much giving up the entire East Coast as a viewing population, especially if no team from that time zone is in it.
At least a 5:30 start time in California is close to when many people are getting home from work, and with the length of these games they last well into prime viewing time in PDT.
Al Yellon - October 20, 2009
Understood
just once though, it’d be nice to see the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many or the Bud.
ballhawk - October 20, 2009
On the other hand...
… if games started at 7:30 PDT, with the length they run, people would be fast asleep even in California before they were over.
Al Yellon - October 20, 2009
The earthquake
Happened at 5 pm Pacific time. Those of us here remember that vividly, because the freeway (Cypress structure) that collapsed in Oakland would have killed many more people on an ordinary commute day, but people speculate that many people left work early that day to watch the game at Candlestick or on the tube.
vonde6 - October 20, 2009
Regarding those world series,
In 1989, most of the games started at around 5:30 PM. I’m guessing Pacific Time Zone here.
In 2002, the games started either just after 5 PM (Anaheim Angels home games) or just about 5:30 PM (San Francisco Giants home games). Again, I am assuming the Pacific Time Zone here.
Vermont Cubs Fan - October 20, 2009
Fitting the LCS's has been so good....
…since the divisional / WC races for the most part (outside of the AL Central) were a non-story in September.
Certainly the Cubs poor season had an impact, but this was a very boring regular season. Lets hope we get paid back with more post season pandemonium!
JB 23 - October 20, 2009
To Al and Zeke:
Thanks for clearing up the confusion last night. I got the calls of Jack Buck and Vin Scully confused regarding Kirk Gibson’s home run.
Vermont Cubs Fan - October 20, 2009
Com'on now, I posted that Stark linky last night!
dtpollitt - October 20, 2009
If you read the post...
… I even SAID it had been posted in the game thread.
Al Yellon - October 20, 2009
He wanted credit and a bit of limelight, I reckon.
chilango2 - October 20, 2009
here ya go... ;-)
ballhawk - October 20, 2009
Thanks. I need a few of those right now.
chilango2 - October 20, 2009
Oh, no, I read it all. I was just excited that you mentioned it, too.
dtpollitt - October 20, 2009
Another VERY interesting factoid
The Phillies win over Colorado on Monday the 12th was only the second time in the 109 year history of the playoffs that a team was down to their last out in a game and came back to win the game and take the series with that win.
The first time?
The night before when the Angles did it to Boston.
I love this game!
Archie - October 21, 2009
Angels shot their wad
Yankees in 5.
It’s a Yankee year. Learn to love it.
Worf - October 20, 2009
Took 'em long enough.
They must be into that tantric stuff like Sting.
daver - October 20, 2009
Saucy.
chilango2 - October 20, 2009
thanks for not posting a graphic to go along with this
vonde6 - October 20, 2009
don't tempt the fates
/SWL
Emelie - October 20, 2009
Not sure how to embed via iphone
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3271/2639389363_7061f19fab.jpg?v=1215290866
eths - October 21, 2009 via mobile
Not sure how to embed via iphone
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3271/2639389363_7061f19fab.jpg?v=1215290866
eths - October 21, 2009 via mobile
Hey Worf, how is Alexander doing?
Vermont Cubs Fan - October 20, 2009
Score of today's game?
Somebody? Anybody???
Vermont Cubs Fan - October 20, 2009
5-0 spankees
jesus christos - October 20, 2009
o.0
Yuck.
Vermont Cubs Fan - October 20, 2009
Hey guys, I just got a phone call from MLB
Looking for people to replace the umpiring crews for next year.
Awful.
heine41 - October 20, 2009
I just got a text message along the same lines.
Vermont Cubs Fan - October 20, 2009
its really really pathetic
heine41 - October 20, 2009
Ladies & Gentlemen, the fix is on
That’s crew chief Tim McClelland at 3rd base, one of the most respected and finest umps in the game. And he’s screws up an easy call – right in front of him!
ballhawk - October 20, 2009
i hear cb bucknor was seen at a halloween store buying a tim mclelland costume
might be him…
jesus christos - October 20, 2009
an inning after calling out swisher for leaving the bag to early on a sack fly, when replayed showed he wasn't EVEN LOOKING AT THE BAG!
heine41 - October 20, 2009
Okay, that's just wrong.
How does he know that if he’s not looking at the bag?
Vermont Cubs Fan - October 20, 2009
eyes on the side of his head
jesus christos - October 20, 2009
Baseballs Mantra
Get it wrong, but quickly.
heine41 - October 20, 2009
One more thing.
To anyone who was watching the game, what did the announcers on Fox say when the replays showed this?
I’m willing to bet it was nothing against the umpire.
Vermont Cubs Fan - October 20, 2009
actually, McCarver was pretty blunt
he said something to the effect of “how could he miss that?”
ballhawk - October 20, 2009
I'm not sure how ANYONE could screw up that call. Does it get any more obvious than that?
Urbanfury - October 20, 2009
Let's see ...
Tags one runner with ball, then puts foot on bag, and tags the other runner out.
And what did the umpire say happened???
Vermont Cubs Fan - October 20, 2009
Where was the ump during the play?
N Oakley - October 21, 2009
Just to the left of 3rd base coach (#59)
I think that might be his shadow right behind Posada (the guy being tagged in 2nd photo). So it’s possible that Posada could have been blocking him from getting a clear view of the tags and the bag. But…
1) It’s his damn job to get into the proper position! That play unfolded slow enough that he should have seen what was going to happen and been able to move 3 feet to get a better view.
2) Assuming they were close to their original positions, the home plate umpire and the LF line umpire should have had perfect views of everything as well. Why was there not at least an umpire confab?
The only thing that makes me happy in all this is yet another ugly stain gets dolloped onto Bud Selig. It’s a shame it has to come at baseball’s expense though…
ballhawk - October 21, 2009
I was surprised no part or apendage of the Ump
was visible in either picture. I’m assuming, from looking, the two photos were in quick succession, but if the ball can move roughly 5 feet, an ump (already moving) to be in position for a view of the play should at least be in the left pocket of the third base coach.
The good thing is the game was a blow out so a run or two didn’t matter. This also makes the case for situational replays and another crew member onsite with access to video.
N Oakley - October 21, 2009
I think the sac fly call
was a makeup call for missing the pickoff at 2nd. If the pickoff had been called correctly the fly ball would have been the 3rd out.
Now, when two guys standing near (not on) 3rd base are tagged and only one is called out – that I can’t explain.
ChipSet - October 20, 2009
maybe we should trade hoff fox and marmol to angels for morales
jesus christos - October 20, 2009
Question.
I know the NFL grades its officials on the number of calls they get right, and the ones who do the best get the playoff games every year.
Does MLB do the same thing with its umpires? If not, how are the umpires picked for the playoff series? Because the umpiring during the playoffs this year has been terrible.
Vermont Cubs Fan - October 20, 2009
Several corrections:
“The NFL grades it officials every year, and the ones who do the best get the playoff games.”
and
“The umpiring during the playoffs this year has been worse than terrible.”
Specifically, the fair/foul ball in the Twins/Yankees series, the umpire at first base (C.B. Bucknor?) blowing three calls in one game, and the two calls heine41 mentioned above.
Vermont Cubs Fan - October 20, 2009
brett gardner in the alcs is reminding me of theriot
jesus christos - October 20, 2009
Rudy Jaramillo is a Cub!
lexmarklover - October 20, 2009
Excellent!!!!!!
Link?
Vermont Cubs Fan - October 20, 2009
Kaplan reported that Jaramillo will be named the Cubs' new hitting coach on Wednesday.
it’s Kaplan though
lexmarklover - October 20, 2009
IT'S KAPLANING!!!!!!!
ballhawk - October 20, 2009
ITS HAPPENING???
jesus christos - October 20, 2009
IT'S HAPPENING!?!?!?!??!
lexmarklover - October 20, 2009
Bears and Cutler agree on extension through 2013!
lexmarklover - October 20, 2009
Is he left-handed?
ballhawk - October 20, 2009
Recap:
UMPIRES SUCKED TONIGHT
Yankees hit the bal far and spanked the Angels.
The Yankees are going to have home-field advantage in that crap-tastic juice box they call a park for the World Series.
I blame Bud Selig for all of this.
dtpollitt - October 20, 2009
By the way...
…here is a link to the Jaramillo’s-been-hired story, from Bruce Levine
neonverse1 - October 21, 2009
Excellent!
Fraggin Judge - October 21, 2009
So does this mean we will become more fundamentally sound with respect to situational hitting?
Moving the runner over from 2nd to 3rd with no outs, scoring the runner from 3rd with less than 2 outs, hitting with RISP and 2 outs; you know, that kind of thing?
Just wondering.
I guess I should be excited the Cubs just gave a 3 year contract to a hitting coach- but I’m not.
Maybe I will in hindsight- as the Cubs are raising the WS trophy next year.
OK, maybe then. But for now, “meh”.
Zeke - October 21, 2009
we can only hope the Cubs get better at situational hitting.
I really believe the value of hitting coaches comes in spring training and in the drills that the batting coach makes the players go thru pre-game throughout the season. I guess I am “old school” in that I believe how you practice is how you play. Some teams have very disciplined methods to pre-game warm-up and it shows up in consistent performance on the field.
It is a mindset that carries over to the game. If Jaramillo helps to change this with the Cubs, I am all for it. Whether it has been Dusty or Lou, I have been very disappointed with plate and overall discipline of the players and the apparent DECLINE in discipline and increase in mental errors with each year that each guy has managed.
I hope Lou’s bad trend line ends in 2010!
LAcarl519 - October 21, 2009
Agreed. +2.42 Million...
I’m old school too. I like players who are thinking team first rather than padding their stats. That’s why (even as a Tigers’ fan) I admire the Twins organization. They do this to the “nth” degree, getting the absolute most out of their roster. Sure, they have a couple of superstars, but everyone on that team plays “team first” baseball, or they don’t stick around long.
I’d love to see that approach by the Cubs and that sense of “urgency” to do whatever it takes fundamentally to WIN the game. Hitting behind the runner, hit and run, straight steals, bunts, squeeze bunts- whatever it takes. The old “Earl Weaver 3-run homer” approach is not the ONLY way to win a game. Too often though, it seems like today’s players think the latter, rather than the former…
Zeke - October 21, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Bleed Cubbie Blue to post a comment.