bearister said:
From Axios:
"This will be the Dodgers' sixth LCS in the past nine seasons, more than 13 MLB teams have ever played in."
"The controversy: Scherzer nearly got Wilmer Flores to bite on his 0-2 slider with two outs and a man on first. But as you can see above, Flores clearly checked his swing.
The problem? The Dodgers (righly) appealed to the first base umpire, who (wrongly) ruled that Flores went around. Strike three, game over.
What would have happened if Flores' check swing had been called correctly? Who knows. The point is he didn't get the chance, and an otherwise instant-classic was marred by a blatantly bad call."
bearister said:
From Axios:
"This will be the Dodgers' sixth LCS in the past nine seasons, more than 13 MLB teams have ever played in."
"The controversy: Scherzer nearly got Wilmer Flores to bite on his 0-2 slider with two outs and a man on first. But as you can see above, Flores clearly checked his swing.
The problem? The Dodgers (righly) appealed to the first base umpire, who (wrongly) ruled that Flores went around. Strike three, game over.
What would have happened if Flores' check swing had been called correctly? Who knows. The point is he didn't get the chance, and an otherwise instant-classic was marred by a blatantly bad call."
bearister said:
I wonder if The Man was in the house last night.
Let's Go Brandon. pic.twitter.com/Ey9zEseqNI
— 🧢מאק (@beingrealmac) October 15, 2021
Yeah, speaking of:82gradDLSdad said:bearister said:
From Axios:
"This will be the Dodgers' sixth LCS in the past nine seasons, more than 13 MLB teams have ever played in."
"The controversy: Scherzer nearly got Wilmer Flores to bite on his 0-2 slider with two outs and a man on first. But as you can see above, Flores clearly checked his swing.
The problem? The Dodgers (righly) appealed to the first base umpire, who (wrongly) ruled that Flores went around. Strike three, game over.
What would have happened if Flores' check swing had been called correctly? Who knows. The point is he didn't get the chance, and an otherwise instant-classic was marred by a blatantly bad call."
An easy fix, for a lot of these calls is technology. Balls and strikes are obviously tracked better by the current system that is only seen but not used by MLB. Check swings can be better tracked by a camera viewing parallel to the front edge of the plate. This camera angle isn't quite there but it's a better angle than that of the first base ump who basically guesses at a split second vision. Not the end of the world but with most things technology challenges those who don't want to remove the human element from things. In this case no one is paying to see umpires umpire.
Umpire: Doug Eddings
— Umpire Scorecards (@UmpScorecards) October 15, 2021
Final: Giants 1, Dodgers 2#ResilientSF // #Dodgers#SFvsLAD // #LADvsSF pic.twitter.com/MX0tUmJwzs
I would also note that the problem with this sort of analysis is that it ignores the agency of players and the butterfly effect. Urias probably doesn't throw a WP with runners on 1st and 2nd and no outs. There's a good chance he's out of the game but even if he's in the game he would behave differently. Whether that means he chokes and gives up a 3-run bomb or not we'll never know. We also never know if that would have caused the giants pitchers to relax and give up more runs.sycasey said:
Probably more impactful than the check swing call on Flores was Kris Bryant's AB vs. Urias in the 4th. He took five straight balls, two of which were called strikes (the two worst calls of the game, per the above). He then swung at Ball Six (and can you blame him?) and struck out. If Bryant walks the Giants have two runners on with no outs. Urias threw a wild pitch to the next batter, so he could have been in real trouble at that point (though it's debatable if a runner could have made it to 3rd base instead of 2nd on that pitch). Instead he got bailed out by the ump.
Now, just having runners on doesn't mean you'll score so maybe that didn't matter either. And of course there are other calls in other games, and as I've said I think the Dodgers ultimately have the better team. But it would be nice to get the calls right.
All true. The most I can say is that by analytics, the "expected runs" for 1st and 2nd with no outs is a lot higher than runner on 1st with one out. Definitely a far superior scoring chance that never happened.Unit2Sucks said:I would also note that the problem with this sort of analysis is that it ignores the agency of players and the butterfly effect. Urias probably doesn't throw a WP with runners on 1st and 2nd and no outs. There's a good chance he's out of the game but even if he's in the game he would behave differently. Whether that means he chokes and gives up a 3-run bomb or not we'll never know. We also never know if that would have caused the giants pitchers to relax and give up more runs.sycasey said:
Probably more impactful than the check swing call on Flores was Kris Bryant's AB vs. Urias in the 4th. He took five straight balls, two of which were called strikes (the two worst calls of the game, per the above). He then swung at Ball Six (and can you blame him?) and struck out. If Bryant walks the Giants have two runners on with no outs. Urias threw a wild pitch to the next batter, so he could have been in real trouble at that point (though it's debatable if a runner could have made it to 3rd base instead of 2nd on that pitch). Instead he got bailed out by the ump.
Now, just having runners on doesn't mean you'll score so maybe that didn't matter either. And of course there are other calls in other games, and as I've said I think the Dodgers ultimately have the better team. But it would be nice to get the calls right.
sycasey said:Yeah, speaking of:82gradDLSdad said:bearister said:
From Axios:
"This will be the Dodgers' sixth LCS in the past nine seasons, more than 13 MLB teams have ever played in."
"The controversy: Scherzer nearly got Wilmer Flores to bite on his 0-2 slider with two outs and a man on first. But as you can see above, Flores clearly checked his swing.
The problem? The Dodgers (righly) appealed to the first base umpire, who (wrongly) ruled that Flores went around. Strike three, game over.
What would have happened if Flores' check swing had been called correctly? Who knows. The point is he didn't get the chance, and an otherwise instant-classic was marred by a blatantly bad call."
An easy fix, for a lot of these calls is technology. Balls and strikes are obviously tracked better by the current system that is only seen but not used by MLB. Check swings can be better tracked by a camera viewing parallel to the front edge of the plate. This camera angle isn't quite there but it's a better angle than that of the first base ump who basically guesses at a split second vision. Not the end of the world but with most things technology challenges those who don't want to remove the human element from things. In this case no one is paying to see umpires umpire.Umpire: Doug Eddings
— Umpire Scorecards (@UmpScorecards) October 15, 2021
Final: Giants 1, Dodgers 2#ResilientSF // #Dodgers#SFvsLAD // #LADvsSF pic.twitter.com/MX0tUmJwzs
Probably more impactful than the check swing call on Flores was Kris Bryant's AB vs. Urias in the 4th. He took five straight balls, two of which were called strikes (the two worst calls of the game, per the above). He then swung at Ball Six (and can you blame him?) and struck out. If Bryant walks the Giants have two runners on with no outs. Urias threw a wild pitch to the next batter, so he could have been in real trouble at that point (though it's debatable if a runner could have made it to 3rd base instead of 2nd on that pitch). Instead he got bailed out by the ump.
Now, just having runners on doesn't mean you'll score so maybe that didn't matter either. And of course there are other calls in other games, and as I've said I think the Dodgers ultimately have the better team. But it would be nice to get the calls right.
Exactly. Technology should be used to call balls and strikes as well as checked swings. In addition to the botched final call that ended the game, there were many missed calls on balls and strikes that affected both teams. The latter is the case in every baseball game.82gradDLSdad said:bearister said:
From Axios:
"This will be the Dodgers' sixth LCS in the past nine seasons, more than 13 MLB teams have ever played in."
"The controversy: Scherzer nearly got Wilmer Flores to bite on his 0-2 slider with two outs and a man on first. But as you can see above, Flores clearly checked his swing.
The problem? The Dodgers (righly) appealed to the first base umpire, who (wrongly) ruled that Flores went around. Strike three, game over.
What would have happened if Flores' check swing had been called correctly? Who knows. The point is he didn't get the chance, and an otherwise instant-classic was marred by a blatantly bad call."
An easy fix, for a lot of these calls is technology. Balls and strikes are obviously tracked better by the current system that is only seen but not used by MLB. Check swings can be better tracked by a camera viewing parallel to the front edge of the plate. This camera angle isn't quite there but it's a better angle than that of the first base ump who basically guesses at a split second vision. Not the end of the world but with most things technology challenges those who don't want to remove the human element from things. In this case no one is paying to see umpires umpire.
Golden One said:Exactly. Technology should be used to call balls and strikes as well as checked swings. In addition to the botched final call that ended the game, there were many missed calls on balls and strikes that affected both teams. The latter is the case in every baseball game.82gradDLSdad said:bearister said:
From Axios:
"This will be the Dodgers' sixth LCS in the past nine seasons, more than 13 MLB teams have ever played in."
"The controversy: Scherzer nearly got Wilmer Flores to bite on his 0-2 slider with two outs and a man on first. But as you can see above, Flores clearly checked his swing.
The problem? The Dodgers (righly) appealed to the first base umpire, who (wrongly) ruled that Flores went around. Strike three, game over.
What would have happened if Flores' check swing had been called correctly? Who knows. The point is he didn't get the chance, and an otherwise instant-classic was marred by a blatantly bad call."
An easy fix, for a lot of these calls is technology. Balls and strikes are obviously tracked better by the current system that is only seen but not used by MLB. Check swings can be better tracked by a camera viewing parallel to the front edge of the plate. This camera angle isn't quite there but it's a better angle than that of the first base ump who basically guesses at a split second vision. Not the end of the world but with most things technology challenges those who don't want to remove the human element from things. In this case no one is paying to see umpires umpire.
Corner calls are understandable, a machine learning function is not going to make much of a difference on those, but the inside/outside missed calls in HD look ridiculous in 2021.82gradDLSdad said:I can only conclude that MLB is setting the stage for transitioning to their ball/strike technology. It's on every televised game and they even replay a lot of close calls with an animated ball. Why else would they be doing that? It can't be to torment baseball fans. "See, the ump missed another one".Golden One said:Exactly. Technology should be used to call balls and strikes as well as checked swings. In addition to the botched final call that ended the game, there were many missed calls on balls and strikes that affected both teams. The latter is the case in every baseball game.82gradDLSdad said:bearister said:
From Axios:
"This will be the Dodgers' sixth LCS in the past nine seasons, more than 13 MLB teams have ever played in."
"The controversy: Scherzer nearly got Wilmer Flores to bite on his 0-2 slider with two outs and a man on first. But as you can see above, Flores clearly checked his swing.
The problem? The Dodgers (righly) appealed to the first base umpire, who (wrongly) ruled that Flores went around. Strike three, game over.
What would have happened if Flores' check swing had been called correctly? Who knows. The point is he didn't get the chance, and an otherwise instant-classic was marred by a blatantly bad call."
An easy fix, for a lot of these calls is technology. Balls and strikes are obviously tracked better by the current system that is only seen but not used by MLB. Check swings can be better tracked by a camera viewing parallel to the front edge of the plate. This camera angle isn't quite there but it's a better angle than that of the first base ump who basically guesses at a split second vision. Not the end of the world but with most things technology challenges those who don't want to remove the human element from things. In this case no one is paying to see umpires umpire.
Playing devil's advocate, but uncertainty around the strike zone has always been a part of the game. Taking a close pitch in an important situation is a strategy that a player may employ. Do we really want to build in perfection on ball/strike calls? Will that actually improve the game? Seems like we would be motivating players to take more pitches and it could lead to unintended consequences. I get that people feel burned when a call goes the wrong way, but I'm not so sure that perfection is actually going to improve the game.Strykur said:Corner calls are understandable, a machine learning function is not going to make much of a difference on those, but the inside/outside missed calls in HD look ridiculous in 2021.82gradDLSdad said:I can only conclude that MLB is setting the stage for transitioning to their ball/strike technology. It's on every televised game and they even replay a lot of close calls with an animated ball. Why else would they be doing that? It can't be to torment baseball fans. "See, the ump missed another one".Golden One said:Exactly. Technology should be used to call balls and strikes as well as checked swings. In addition to the botched final call that ended the game, there were many missed calls on balls and strikes that affected both teams. The latter is the case in every baseball game.82gradDLSdad said:bearister said:
From Axios:
"This will be the Dodgers' sixth LCS in the past nine seasons, more than 13 MLB teams have ever played in."
"The controversy: Scherzer nearly got Wilmer Flores to bite on his 0-2 slider with two outs and a man on first. But as you can see above, Flores clearly checked his swing.
The problem? The Dodgers (righly) appealed to the first base umpire, who (wrongly) ruled that Flores went around. Strike three, game over.
What would have happened if Flores' check swing had been called correctly? Who knows. The point is he didn't get the chance, and an otherwise instant-classic was marred by a blatantly bad call."
An easy fix, for a lot of these calls is technology. Balls and strikes are obviously tracked better by the current system that is only seen but not used by MLB. Check swings can be better tracked by a camera viewing parallel to the front edge of the plate. This camera angle isn't quite there but it's a better angle than that of the first base ump who basically guesses at a split second vision. Not the end of the world but with most things technology challenges those who don't want to remove the human element from things. In this case no one is paying to see umpires umpire.
Big C said:
I would've liked to have seen this series with Brandon Belt playing, even if it meant the Dodgers also being at full strength. Belt was orange-hot when he fractured his thumb. We really missed that pop in the lineup. Also our Captain, lol. Of course, that's always been Brandon Belt: Things start to go well for him and then he gets derailed by one thing or another.
Yes! Accurately and consistently calling balls and strikes will definitely improve the game. Today there is too much variability from umpire to umpire and even with a single umpire from pitch to pitch.Unit2Sucks said:
Do we really want to build in perfection on ball/strike calls? Will that actually improve the game?
That would also mean the Dodgers had Max Muncy, who tends to kill the Giants.Big C said:
I would've liked to have seen this series with Brandon Belt playing, even if it meant the Dodgers also being at full strength. Belt was orange-hot when he fractured his thumb. We really missed that pop in the lineup. Also our Captain, lol. Of course, that's always been Brandon Belt: Things start to go well for him and then he gets derailed by one thing or another.
Unit2Sucks said:Playing devil's advocate, but uncertainty around the strike zone has always been a part of the game. Taking a close pitch in an important situation is a strategy that a player may employ. Do we really want to build in perfection on ball/strike calls? Will that actually improve the game? Seems like we would be motivating players to take more pitches and it could lead to unintended consequences. I get that people feel burned when a call goes the wrong way, but I'm not so sure that perfection is actually going to improve the game.Strykur said:Corner calls are understandable, a machine learning function is not going to make much of a difference on those, but the inside/outside missed calls in HD look ridiculous in 2021.82gradDLSdad said:I can only conclude that MLB is setting the stage for transitioning to their ball/strike technology. It's on every televised game and they even replay a lot of close calls with an animated ball. Why else would they be doing that? It can't be to torment baseball fans. "See, the ump missed another one".Golden One said:Exactly. Technology should be used to call balls and strikes as well as checked swings. In addition to the botched final call that ended the game, there were many missed calls on balls and strikes that affected both teams. The latter is the case in every baseball game.82gradDLSdad said:bearister said:
From Axios:
"This will be the Dodgers' sixth LCS in the past nine seasons, more than 13 MLB teams have ever played in."
"The controversy: Scherzer nearly got Wilmer Flores to bite on his 0-2 slider with two outs and a man on first. But as you can see above, Flores clearly checked his swing.
The problem? The Dodgers (righly) appealed to the first base umpire, who (wrongly) ruled that Flores went around. Strike three, game over.
What would have happened if Flores' check swing had been called correctly? Who knows. The point is he didn't get the chance, and an otherwise instant-classic was marred by a blatantly bad call."
An easy fix, for a lot of these calls is technology. Balls and strikes are obviously tracked better by the current system that is only seen but not used by MLB. Check swings can be better tracked by a camera viewing parallel to the front edge of the plate. This camera angle isn't quite there but it's a better angle than that of the first base ump who basically guesses at a split second vision. Not the end of the world but with most things technology challenges those who don't want to remove the human element from things. In this case no one is paying to see umpires umpire.
philbert said:
I can't think of a drawback, but how easy is it for the electronic strike zone to account for different sized guys with different batting stances? The zone they use on TV is always the same size regardless of the batter.
I don't think the computer is that smart. I looked it up. It's not. They have to pre-program the strike zone based on the players' measurements.82gradDLSdad said:philbert said:
I can't think of a drawback, but how easy is it for the electronic strike zone to account for different sized guys with different batting stances? The zone they use on TV is always the same size regardless of the batter.
Let's see, cars can drive themselves, I just saw Bezos' rocket land itself back on it's target...I wonder if they can track the strike zone of different size players? I'm going with yes.
sycasey said:That would also mean the Dodgers had Max Muncy, who tends to kill the Giants.Big C said:
I would've liked to have seen this series with Brandon Belt playing, even if it meant the Dodgers also being at full strength. Belt was orange-hot when he fractured his thumb. We really missed that pop in the lineup. Also our Captain, lol. Of course, that's always been Brandon Belt: Things start to go well for him and then he gets derailed by one thing or another.
Big C said:sycasey said:That would also mean the Dodgers had Max Muncy, who tends to kill the Giants.Big C said:
I would've liked to have seen this series with Brandon Belt playing, even if it meant the Dodgers also being at full strength. Belt was orange-hot when he fractured his thumb. We really missed that pop in the lineup. Also our Captain, lol. Of course, that's always been Brandon Belt: Things start to go well for him and then he gets derailed by one thing or another.
Why not re-roll the dice? This didn't work. Anyway, it's academic now...
westcoast101 said:
$300 million payroll and had to add Scherzer and Turner to try and buy another championship to make up for the fake 2020 one.
bearup said:
The answer to the following will help me in watching the remaining games.
Yes, I realize Jansen gave up the winning hit, but......
Why did Roberts go with Gratoral to begin with instead of having KJ pitch the entire ninth?
Last year BG had an ERA of 3.09 and a dynamite WHIP of .900
This year 4.59 and .1.41
GO BEARS!!!
philbert said:
I wouldn't blame Roberts necessarily. He talks to the front office before the game about what pitchers they want to use in particular situations. Probably didn't help that Treinen gave up the winning run the night before.
https://twitter.com/i/events/1450105134072041473?s=20
GMP said:philbert said:
I wouldn't blame Roberts necessarily. He talks to the front office before the game about what pitchers they want to use in particular situations. Probably didn't help that Treinen gave up the winning run the night before.
https://twitter.com/i/events/1450105134072041473?s=20
I would love to hear why they used Urias, who they used in Game 5 vs SF and thus was on 2 days rest, and who they still plan on using on 2 days rest in Game 4.
Down 1-0 on the road, Game 2 is not a must win. You'd love the win! But it's not must win. Putting your Game 4 starter out there was insane, IMO. Because Game 4 is absolutely huge. It's either an attempt to stave off a sweep or the difference between 2-2 and 3-1.
I was a huge Max fan when he was with the Nationals. He was in the bullpen when the final out was made in the World Series. He jumped the fence yelling and it seemed like he made it to the celebration in less than 2 secondsdimitrig said:GMP said:philbert said:
I wouldn't blame Roberts necessarily. He talks to the front office before the game about what pitchers they want to use in particular situations. Probably didn't help that Treinen gave up the winning run the night before.
https://twitter.com/i/events/1450105134072041473?s=20
I would love to hear why they used Urias, who they used in Game 5 vs SF and thus was on 2 days rest, and who they still plan on using on 2 days rest in Game 4.
Down 1-0 on the road, Game 2 is not a must win. You'd love the win! But it's not must win. Putting your Game 4 starter out there was insane, IMO. Because Game 4 is absolutely huge. It's either an attempt to stave off a sweep or the difference between 2-2 and 3-1.
It was stupid just like having Scherzer close Game 5 was stupid.
Max said he was tired last night.
I think the Dodgers will come from behind against Atlanta (again!) but why do they do this to themselves?
dimitrig said:bearup said:
The answer to the following will help me in watching the remaining games.
Yes, I realize Jansen gave up the winning hit, but......
Why did Roberts go with Gratoral to begin with instead of having KJ pitch the entire ninth?
Last year BG had an ERA of 3.09 and a dynamite WHIP of .900
This year 4.59 and .1.41
GO BEARS!!!
Why did he go to Urias?
Roberts does less with more than anyone.
