Paul Byrd Can Shove It

by Jeff on Apr 7, 2007 11:16 AM PDT in Regular News Comment 148 comments

Someone seems to be taking this harder than most everyone else. And I quote from the Beacon Journal:

Byrd didn't feel any better minutes later when he checked out the Mariners' bench.

``It's hard to take when you see their guys laughing in the dugout,'' Byrd said. ``They looked like they'd gotten away with something. And I think they did.''

The only thing the Mariners got away with was not losing a game that never should've been played in the first place. You, meanwhile, were one strike from getting away with a bullshit win you didn't deserve. I understand the competitive desire to win at all times no matter the circumstances, but at some point on days like yesterday you need to recognize that you're not playing baseball anymore, shake hands with the opponent, and move on to the next game with no hard feelings.

Maybe Byrd doesn't realize that the weather was the only reason his team was ahead. Do you think Adrian Beltre makes three errors in normal conditions? Do you think Ho Ramirez throws 98 pitches in four innings and walks six guys if he isn't staring into a whiteout? Do you think any of those like half-dozen long Mariner fly balls stay in the park if they aren't being pushed to the ground by a metric ton of falling sky? Paul Byrd has the right to be annoyed - I think we're all pretty ticked, really - but he has no right to complain, because the entire course of the game was shaped by the weather, and that's not how baseball is meant to be played. Baseball's a clear weather sport, and since there wasn't any clear weather in Cleveland yesterday afternoon, there shouldn't have been any baseball.

Some people will argue that the Indians were adjusting to the snowfall just fine, and that therefore the Mariners don't have a leg to stand on, but then, so what? For one thing, Cleveland's used to cold weather, and for another, the Mariners had never practiced in snow before because baseball isn't supposed to be played in it. If I'm running in a track meet against five other guys, and we all suddenly get bit by cobras, and everyone falls down and starts convulsing and I slowly manage to crawl my way to the finish line first, that doesn't make me the best runner - it makes me a guy who was best able to withstand being bit by a cobra. So congratulations to the Indians on being a better snow baseball team than the Mariners. Unfortunately for them, snow baseball games don't count in regular baseball game standings, but if they want to celebrate their snow baseball championship, well, they've got a free Saturday to throw one hell of a party.

You'd think Paul Byrd would've known that something was wrong when he saw that Paul Byrd had thrown 4.2 no-hit innings. Conditions were unplayable, and when I say "unplayable" I don't mean that it was physically impossible to plow through a few innings; I mean it was physically impossible to carry on a normal game. And that's what it comes down to. Byrd may think it was cheap of Hargrove to stall the way he did with one strike to go, but then if Hargrove hadn't stalled, it would've been cheap for Byrd to pick up the W by throwing one more strike, so as far as I'm concerned it all balances out. It's in everybody's best interests that they forget yesterday ever happened, and the sooner Byrd can let it go, the better off he'll be.

(Oh, and the laughing? That's what happens when you have a few players who've never seen it snow before in their lives. You know why there are a few players who've never seen it snow before in their lives? Because you DON'T PLAY BASEBALL IN THE SNOW.)

0 recs | Comment 148 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

The cobra paragraph

Caused uncontrollable laughter on my end. Nice work, Jeff.

by Graham on Apr 7, 2007 11:29 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Amen to that

Paul Byrd is a friggin' douchebag. Must be still bitter about Mariners handing him his ass last year.

by ThundaPC on Apr 7, 2007 11:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Byrd's trying to make it personal

Which bothers me.

Remember when he was with the Angels a couple years ago? And the M's donated a bunch of signed balls and other memorabilia for an auction for his charity?

He doesn't have to go making it a thing that the team was laughing. They weren't. They weren't laughing at the fact that Cleveland was denied a victory. Nor were they laughing at the fact that he missed out on a no-no by one strike. It was because the circumstances surrounding everything were ridiculous.

no signature necessary

by Katal LM on Apr 7, 2007 11:46 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Truthfully if I was in the dugout

there would be a piece of me that was saying, "Wow we just got lucky here". I agree with everybody else's points though.

by Edgar for Pres on Apr 7, 2007 12:03 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Technically they did get lucky.

But only because they were saved from something ridiculous that never should have happened anyway.

by Jeff on Apr 7, 2007 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

"Wow we just got lucky here"

Yeah - there's a part that feels that way. But it's the same kind of "lucky" feeling you get when you're on a 2-lane highway, and suddenly find yourself almost face-to-face with a driver headed the other direction who's passing another car in a blind spot.

When he suddenly dives back onto his side of the road, you feel "lucky", but it's "luck" you really shouldn't have needed.

by Steve Nelson on Apr 7, 2007 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Great work Mike!

This was definetly Hargrove's best move as Mariner's manager.

by djhatesthtejews on Apr 7, 2007 12:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

M's did get lucky

but that's what happens over the course of the season. And if Paul Byrd is hung up on it... good. Maybe it'll piss him off enough that he'll implode in his next start.

And hopefully the Mike Hargrove tracking spreadsheet will chalk one up to the Grover. I didn't see it, but comments suggest he saved the Mariners from taking a loss there.

by johnbai on Apr 7, 2007 1:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Anyone else surprised no one from

Let's Go Tribe has come over here? Looking over there they generally seem to share Byrd's sentiments, re: the postponement.

Hot potato is an entirely different game when you're starving

by Mariner John on Apr 7, 2007 2:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Heh and how they're commenting on this article

"Has anyone seen the writeup on the Mariners page? Really ridiculous."

"I am not sure if we were watching the same thing, but then I felt better when I realized the Mariners suck and Grover is their manager."

"That cobra one barely even makes sense."

Oh SNAP! He says the Mariners suck! We just got BURNED!

No sir, I don't like it. ~Mr.Horse

by Goose on Apr 7, 2007 3:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

So instead

Of looking at Victor Martinez hitting the DL and going 'gee, maybe that was a function of the conditions, playing more might not be a great idea if we want to keep players on both sides healthy' they get irritated and point out that we suck?

Well, yes, we do suck. So why are they getting angry they were screwed out of a win when the Tribe can beat us normally anyway?

by Graham on Apr 7, 2007 3:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

They key being "barely".

"Barely" implies that it makes at least a shred or two of sense. I consider it a compliment.

by Jeff on Apr 7, 2007 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not sure how

An individual point can make differing degrees of sense. Surely it's a binary sense-nonsense type thing?

by Graham on Apr 7, 2007 3:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't really know.

I just felt like talking about cobras.

by Jeff on Apr 7, 2007 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hey, I'm always up for

An imaginary cobra anecdote or two.

by Graham on Apr 7, 2007 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

They're calling

Jeff's comments ridiculous now. Tee-hee.

I sort of understand how they feel, but I know damn well that if the tables were reversed I'd still have wanted that game erased (although before first pitch would have been preferable).

by Graham on Apr 7, 2007 3:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

HOORAY for 2007 Snow Baseball MVP Paul Byrd!

What a whiner. He's just pissed because that's far and away the best performance he's ever had.

by Gomez on Apr 7, 2007 3:03 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

If you watched the game

5 balls that came off the M's bats were GONE off the bat. And then they came back down at the warning track. Seriously, I learned what it was like to be Dave Niehaus for 5 innings.

Ibanez, Lopez, Beltre, Vidro!?, Sexson all hit the ball well enough to leave the yard under normal conditions, except the snow was so heavy the flyballs just died out there.

by Graham on Apr 7, 2007 3:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

And that's what it took

for him to pitch so well. I bet Washburn wishes the sky would snow on his opponent's flyballs.

Ditto Spiroid. He should quit whining for run support and ask for some snow support from god.

by Gomez on Apr 7, 2007 3:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly, but yeah don't hear us bitching and

moaning about that right off the bat. Why? BECAUSE WE KNEW IT WAS BECAUSE OF THE FREAKING BLIZZARD!

No sir, I don't like it. ~Mr.Horse

by Goose on Apr 7, 2007 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Byrd just got blue-balled

So close to a cheap, worthless no-hitter that he was sure of getting after walking 3 straight on 16 pitches. And then:

Dave1: Lopez at 1-2 and... I heard the bat, sounds like a hit but with the snow...
Dave2: Can't see it really but there's some movement in left-center field...
Dave1: One run in and we still can't pick up the ball out there...
Dave 2: Second run scores and one of the outfielders is running in with what looks like the head of a snowman in his glove
Dave1: Jojima is half way to home and here comes the snowman's head rolling in toward the shortstop...
Dave2: The relay is just a little slow, and Lopez is in a rundown between home and 3rd...
Dave1: Byrd covers home and Lopez lunges head first, right into the snow drift in front of the plate... He's safe! It's a tie game! Extra innings!

JPWood

by JPWood on Apr 7, 2007 3:05 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

And here's the throw to the plate...

Oh, but the runner has had time to build a snow fort around the plate and the throw is blocked by the wall! The runner is safe! The runner is stuffing snow into Victor Martinez shorts! My oh my, what the fuck is wrong with these people that the gam is still going?

by Mere Tantalisers on Apr 8, 2007 6:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oh Paul,

you look so cold and hungry. How about a nice hot dish of STFU?

Memories Only 'R Us

by Paytheline on Apr 7, 2007 3:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I think he just needs a cup.

No sir, I don't like it. ~Mr.Horse

by Goose on Apr 7, 2007 3:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Paul Byrd

Instead of bitching to the media, you should take a page from another Bird, Mark Fidrych, bend over and talk to your balls.

by Gomez on Apr 7, 2007 3:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Couple things

First, "Do you think Ho Ramirez throws 98 pitches in four innings and walks six guys if he isn't staring into a whiteout?"... actually I do, from what I know of HoRam.

Second, I thought they made a rule change this year that made it so that if the game was called in the 5th inning, the game would be restarted from that time in the game at a later date. It wouldn't be redone from start, and it wouldn't be counted as a win.

Right?

Die Angels Die!
Visting A's fan.

by Zonis on Apr 7, 2007 4:37 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

wrong

new rule only applies to tie games after 5 innings.

by Rollo Tomasi on Apr 7, 2007 4:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Come to think of it

yeah, you're probably right on Ho.

by Jeff on Apr 7, 2007 4:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ramirez BB/G

3.6 last year.

by Graham on Apr 7, 2007 4:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The pitch count is probably there

though with a couple more innings and half the walks. I'm not deluded enough to think HoRam pitches a gem, but he doesn't suck this bad in more normalized conditions.

by Gomez on Apr 7, 2007 5:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

98 pitches in 4 innings with 6 BBs aside...

Take away the 3 Beltre errors - which nobody can argue against being a product of the snow - and it's still tied at 0 in the 5th.

We want the funk! Give up the funk!

by thejew4u on Apr 7, 2007 10:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Did anyone save the game

on MLB.tv from yesterday?

I want to see it but its been pulled

Shop smart......Shop s-mart...... YOU GOT THAT!!!!

by Scruffy Lefty on Apr 7, 2007 4:51 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I doubt anyone did.

But you didn't miss much, unless you like white things.

by Jeff on Apr 7, 2007 4:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

embarassing

Jeff, my man. This is ... well, it's not your finest moment. I'd say you've embarassed yourself, but I know the ranting homer nonsense is playing well with your readership. I've already covered, in the course of smackingn down another obnoxious M's fan, why this shafting of the Indians is of questionable legitimacy at best.

First and foremost, I'd like to note that in general, you and several of your readers are being whiny little bitches about this whole thing. That would be okay, except that you're the ones lucked out here. By which I mean to suggest, we Indians fans are the ones who are entitled to act like whiny little bitches here, not you.

Paul Byrd hurt your feelings? Who cares? You escaped a loss! Get out of jail free!

The Mariners were celebrating, and they have a right to be. Byrd is pissed, and he has a right to be pissed. Both reactions are only natural. Byrd did not accuse the players of wrongdoing, nor would I. He said they looked like they got away with something. Well, they did. They got away with having their asses handed to them for half a game before it got wiped off the books. What exactly is wrong about saying that? It's not like they did it on purpose -- the players, that is.

There is not one person here who can claim that he himself -- or any Mariners starter -- would react any differently. Anybody would be pissed. And he basically admitted that he was pissed at himself for not getting through it faster.

Second, whining about the weather just doesn't make sense. Seriously, Jeff, nobody likes the cold -- is Seattle balmy and I don't know about it? -- and nobody practices in the snow.

Four Indians got hits yesterday. Michaels (two singles) is from Florida. Peralta (two-run double) is Dominican. Barfield (single, BB) is from Venezuela, and had never seen snow before being traded to the Indians a few months ago. So that leaves Sizemore, who's from Seattle -- can a 24-year-old from Seattle really have a climate advantage over a team that plays in Seattle?

I would compare to the hometowns of the Mariners who got hits, if there were any. So I will merely note that Beltre is in his third year as a Mariner while Marte notably struggled to adjust to cold temparatures last April. Both Beltre and Marte are Dominican, but you didn't see Marte making three errors. So I fail to see where these Indians had any advantage over the Mariners due to climate. The whole idea is possibly the dumbest thing ever to appear in an SBN blog.

I'll give your readers the answer they can't come up with themselves: Byrd is a flyball pitcher. If the wind was doing what you say it was doing -- debatable, but possible -- then maybe it would give Byrd an advantage -- debatable, but possible. But as I said earlier, weather is often a factor, and one that both teams have to deal with.

So really, the only constant we have to work with here is that the Mariners suck.

To us: Better luck next time with the game.
To you: Better luck next time with your capacity for abstract thought.

by Jay on Apr 7, 2007 5:06 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Thank you for that.

I appreciate it.

by Jeff on Apr 7, 2007 5:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

my pleasure

Anything to drive traffic.

by Jay on Apr 7, 2007 5:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

To be fair

Marte had one ball hit to him all night, and that was by Jose Vidro (i.e., the ball could have evolved into a semi-sentient life form, got up, and walked to the bag before Vidro made it halfway to first).

by Fett42 on Apr 7, 2007 5:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

C'mon, RevHalofan

This was too obvious. You're going to have to do a better job of disguising yourself next time.

by JLC on Apr 7, 2007 5:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nah, he didn't make any references to coffee

or Nirvana or Bigfoot when trying to insult us. Can't be The Rev.

No sir, I don't like it. ~Mr.Horse

by Goose on Apr 7, 2007 5:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, but

The faulty logic, the condescension, the feeling of superiority, and the arrogance? They're all there.

Hmmmm, do you think he might be related to The Rev?

by JLC on Apr 7, 2007 5:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

well ...

The faulty logic ... nobody has pointed out any.

I think condescendion is when you act like someone is stupid. I didn't do that, I just said you wrote some very stupid things.

The feeling of superiority ... right here.

As for the arrogance, check out the season previews from ESPN, SI, Hardball Times, Baseball Prospectus ...

by Jay on Apr 7, 2007 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

see ..

I can't even spell condescension right.

by Jay on Apr 7, 2007 5:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Heh.

Is that why you posted a link to a comment thread where you PWNEDZ0RED a "Mariner fan"?

In case you were wondering, no one here read your 20 page long thesis of responding to a troll. I don't personally know that, but I think it's a safe assumption.

by JLC on Apr 8, 2007 10:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

like I care

by Jay on Apr 8, 2007 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I have to say

If you were looking for a way to insult me, you did a good job. You basically said I could be mistaken for an Angels fan, which = I don't know anything about baseball at all.

Ooh, look at the monkey! Exciting!

by Jay on Apr 7, 2007 5:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah he's right.

Come on Noname, that's going to far.

No sir, I don't like it. ~Mr.Horse

by Goose on Apr 7, 2007 5:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Y'all are ignoring

the only thing that really matters. Whether or not Cleveland's scoring and Seattle's inability to score was based on weather is irrelevant. All that is relevant is this: When Jose Lopez was up with two outs in the fifth, the game was not legitimately playable. Therefore, calling it off was the right thing to do. Asking Jose Lopez to continue batting in those conditions would have been absurd. It is patently untrue that the Mariners only pulled this move when it seemed that they would lose; when he walked, Johjima told the umpire he couldn't see the ball. What's more, Jose Lopez fouled off a pitch with two strikes in that at-bat (according to gameday). If Hargrove had really been waiting until his batter was down to his last strike, he would have come out a pitch earlier.

by Rollo Tomasi on Apr 7, 2007 5:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

According to the umpire

Lopez told the umpire he couldn't see earlier, and the umpire told him "one more pitch." He still couldn't see, and that's when they stopped and called the game.

by Fett42 on Apr 7, 2007 5:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hi, Jay

That rant and the other rant you link were rather obnoxious, but hey, aren't we all? Welcome!

That game shouldn't have even been started in the first place, and the conditions varied over the course of the game. The fact is, whether or not the conditions were more playable during the rest of the game, that they turned for the worse during those final 3 ABs, that the game should have been stopped, and it was.

We can debate the merits of absolving Beltre for his 3 errors and the Mariners lineup for their inability to hit yesterday, or the Indians' advantage of having lived and practiced in this cold weather while Seattle had to fly in and play in it cold turkey, or that the Indians were able to score four easy runs on a team that as a result couldn't get their footing or balance in conditions that the Indians were more prepared for, or Paul Byrd having a right to bicker about not getting a snow-aided no hitter despite conditions that clearly turned unfair for his opposition in the top 5th... but honestly, this game should not have been played in these conditions, period, and it took one of our hitters going, "LOOK, I CAN'T SEE IN THIS SHIT," and Hargrove coming out and basically staging a sit-in to get the umps to do what they should've done 4.2 innings and another hour before.

You can even argue that the Indians, who basically demanded the game be played, demanded the game go on not because it was opening day or for the fans, but because, given the conditions, they knew they had an absurd advantage over the visiting team.

However, your dismissive 'the Mariners suck' crack pretty much crossed the line of what had otherwise been a spirited effort to establish a reasoned debate, whether or not that point is imperatively true, and I must now ask you to go bite a cock.

Again, WELCOME!

by Gomez on Apr 7, 2007 5:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

thanks

I appreciate the generous reception. I would however argue that stating that the Mariners suck actually qualifies a serious analytical comment in this case.

The Indians practice in Florida. The weather advantage thing, you should drop it. It's sad.

by Jay on Apr 7, 2007 5:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Seems to me

Their first series was played in Chicago, which was pretty darn frigid.

by Fett42 on Apr 7, 2007 5:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

2006 records:

Mariners:78-84
Indians:78-84

Just saying.

No sir, I don't like it. ~Mr.Horse

by Goose on Apr 7, 2007 5:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

How silly of you

to use facts and statistics in a "your team sucks" debate.

by Rollo Tomasi on Apr 7, 2007 5:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

everyone knows you shouldn't use stats

to make a point only to embellish a point. God!

by Matthew on Apr 7, 2007 5:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wow

This is the sort of snark you see on politics blogs.

by Gomez on Apr 7, 2007 5:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The weather thing is...

Truly stupid, IMO.

I think Jay's comment has been the most level-headed I've seen on the game.

Yet, I still don't like the M's acting like little kids about it, while the Indians went out and did business. And I tend to use the M's as a punching bag more because A) Hargrove has been more of a wuss than Wedge, B) the Mariners have been losing more than the Indians the last three years and C) the M's have been emotionally volatile for a long time.

Just on a side note, I think JOlderdude at SportSpot mentioned it, but pre-gametime, the game is usually decided by the home team.

Detect-O-Vision

Favor the Bold

by IcebreakerX on Apr 7, 2007 5:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well,

Slightly level-headed.

The Mariners only slightly suck. About 4/5ths of the rotation, 1/9th of the starting lineup, and Willie.

Detect-O-Vision

Favor the Bold

by IcebreakerX on Apr 7, 2007 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

fair enough

Maybe I'll do a more thorough analysis of how much (or little) the M's suck later in the series (if there is one).

About the M's reaction, the Indians have a pretty professional, level-headed clubhouse -- they actually do significant psych profiling of acquisitions -- and they have a history of shipping off players who are considered immature (Phillips, Bradley).

That said, while I think the Indians wouldn't have been high-fiving and yukking it up, I'm not at all sure of that. It was, all things considered, a pretty absurd situation.

by Jay on Apr 7, 2007 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well,

Our team has been been a snowball (ha!) of losership towards August, and its showed the last few years.

To the point where Ichiro goes yapping about it (Ichiro of all people!), the Seattle PI reports on it wrong, and the Seattle Times has to go out to fix it.

Detect-O-Vision

Favor the Bold

by IcebreakerX on Apr 7, 2007 5:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

And actually...

Detect-o-Vision reported it first, the PI plagiarized it and the writer got shipped out.

Detect-O-Vision

Favor the Bold

by IcebreakerX on Apr 7, 2007 5:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

the sucky Mariners won 78 games last year, as opposed to the powerhouse Indians who won 78 games last year.

by Rollo Tomasi on Apr 7, 2007 6:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not saying snow favours

The Indians as a team.

If favours fly ball pitchers at the expense of ground ball pitchers. The Indians had a (crappy) fly ball pitcher. We had a (crappy) groundballer.

This isn't hard, folks.

by Graham on Apr 8, 2007 1:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Christ on a handbag.

Are all Indians fans as bizarrely incapable of grasping a simple point as you?

by Graham on Apr 8, 2007 1:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

well Graham

I can assure you, if there were a standardized test for "grasping a simple point," I think I'd get at least an average score.

I agree that your point is simple. It is, in fact, simplistic.

Your problem is that you can't tell the difference between a "good point" and a "point that makes you feel good."

Eighteen players contended with the weather. One of them made three errors, the other 17 made zero errors. That's a good point, and every bit as simple as your point.

The only difference is, you won't like it.

As for Indians fans, I can assure you, M's fans have no standing to criticize anything about them.

by Jay on Apr 8, 2007 7:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: well Graham

Weather shouldn't have been an issue in the first place.

If you play a game in the rain, and one guy throws five innings of shutout baseball while the other guy walks in a few runs, that doesn't mean a thing. You know why? Because baseball games get called when it's raining. It doesn't matter who does and doesn't adjust well to the weather because the weather is something that should preclude the start of the game.

by Jeff on Apr 8, 2007 8:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Off the top of my head

Sexson, Betancourt, Beltre, Johjima, and Ichiro were the only M's fielders to make plays. Sizemore, Marte, Garko, Martinez, Shoppach, Byrd, and Micheals made plays for the Indians.

Beltre, Betancourt and Sizemore all made mistakes while fielding. Beltre had three, and since they buggered up the play, they were errors. This means that when Beltre can't feel his hands, he doesn't do so well, I suppose. What a terrible fielder.

Personally I counted about 3 cleanly fielded ground balls (I missed the top of the first), two of them on your end, one on ours.

Groundballs + snow are harder to deal with than flyballs + snow. Cleveland hit a lot more ground balls than Seattle hit. I'm trying to make this point as simplistic as possible just to find a way to insert it into your head.

by Graham on Apr 8, 2007 8:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

selective memory

Cleveland hit a lot more ground balls than Seattle hit.

That's the only part you got right.

There were, in fact, eight successful groundout plays in four innings -- not three.

The Mariners turned five, including two groundball double-plays; the Indians turned three.

Still think it was impossible it was to field groundballs?

The real story of the actual baseball game was that the Indians piled up 14 baserunners -- including five hits and six walks -- yet only scored four runs. They were helped by Beltre's three errors. But Sizemore made three outs on the bases, and two more were erased on groundout double-plays.

It was, in fact, an outstanding defensive performance by the Mariners infield, including Johjima and Ramirez, and excepting only Beltre.

Facts. They help.

by Jay on Apr 8, 2007 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

You're missing the point.

The fact that other players besides Beltre were capable of making plays in the snow doesn't mean that Beltre should be expected to do so. Why? Because he's a baseball player, and baseball isn't played in snow. It was snowing in the top of the fifth, therefore it was the right decision to call the game.

by Rollo Tomasi on Apr 8, 2007 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I didn't say successful

I said clean. What part of 'clean' is unclear to you?

by Graham on Apr 8, 2007 4:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Haha

We give you Choo and Cabrera, the least you can do is give us a non-loss that shouldn't have happened.

by I'm NOT Corco on Apr 7, 2007 5:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

well

That is true. We are still scratching our heads trying to figure out how that happened. I'd have thought those moves would stand as Bavasi's trademark deals, but the Vidro trade really overshadows them completely.

by Jay on Apr 7, 2007 5:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Speaking of which

How has As-Cab worked out for you guys? Last we heard, he was having a lot of trouble against AAA pitching.

by Gomez on Apr 7, 2007 6:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

cabrera

Personally, I'm loving Cabrera, though other fans are not as impressed. He was promoted directly from Single-A to Triple-A not because he was ready for it -- he clearly wasn't -- but because of a crowded middle infield in the upper levels of the Mariners system. You could argue that it was irresponsible of the Mariners to do that to him; it was clearly not the best thing for his development.

When the Indians acquired him, I did a little checking and found that he was, in fact, the youngest player in all of Triple-A last season. In fact, there were only a dozen or so players even in Double-A who were as young as 20. Most prospects at age 20, even elite prospects, are still in A-ball (or college). And both scouts and stats guys will tell you, a hitter is likely to see significant jumps in performance through age 23 -- for Cabrera, that means through 2009, a long way away.

For these reasons, you have to take Cabrera's Triple-A numbers from 2006 and "translate down" at least to the Double-A level -- where you would fine that he had a decent season at the plate, still ahead of the curve at age 20. The Indians have in fact sent him to Double-A to start this season -- a move that I believe is less of a demotoin and more of an adjustment, simply putting him where he ought to be as a 21-year-old who isn't yet an advanced hitter. (The Indians also want demoted utility man Hector Luna to work on his defense at shortstop at Triple-A.)

Anyway. Bottom line, Cabrera was a medicore hitter in Triple-A, arguably two levels higher than he should have been. But he wasn't overwhelmed there, and he has lots of time and projectability. I'm as confident that he'll be a major leaguer, and probably a starter, as I am about any position player in the Indians system.

by Jay on Apr 8, 2007 8:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, that's why we're really excited about Adam

Jones. He put up pretty good numbers in AAA last year and did it at just 20 years old(didn't turn 21 till August) and did it while learning a brand new position. And he's off to a fast start again this year(5-10 with a homer and a 3/2 BB/K).

Cabrera I think will end up as a guy who could win a gold glove or two if it wasn't for Yubet being in the same league(most people said he was the best non Betancourt defender in our system)and he might put up decent to good OBP numbers while hitting for a little power. Something along the lines of .280/.360/.420 or so.

No sir, I don't like it. ~Mr.Horse

by Goose on Apr 8, 2007 8:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Jones

Jones is a terrific prospect, obviously. It is unfortunate that he was moved off shortstop, but it now appears that he can be a well above-average defender in CF, so that is definitely some consolation. His K/BB numbers are troubling, but like Cabrera, he has a long time to work on those things (and not as far to go).

I do think the Mariners blundered by calling him up last season -- based on the new CBA, Jones doesn't even need to be on the 40-man roster yet. They've now used up two options on him, with only one remaining, where with a little foresight, they could have ended the 2007 season with all three options still unused.

Understand, Jones has a solid chance to be a permanent major leaguer by the end of 2008, in which case the options are irrelevant. But he may not be. Those K/BB numbers put him in a unique category -- he may need a few years to put it all together, but he's so young that he would still be an elite prospect, even if that.

At that point, you're bleeding over into service time issues. Specifically, why are you using this guy at age 20 and 21, when you could let him develop his plate approach at Triple-A for another year or so, then have him in the majors for ages 22-29? And that plays into the larger issue of a front office that is pretending that the team can contend now, which hurts the team long-term.

by Jay on Apr 8, 2007 8:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The M's aren't real careful with

Service time and promoting prospects early.

See: Morrow, Brandon.

by Graham on Apr 8, 2007 8:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

yeah

I don't know everything about that situation, but it looks like a classic GM/manager-on-hot-seat conflict of interest. Didn't they draft him over Andrew Miller just to avoid putting a fresh draft pick on the 40-man roster? Now they've basically done the same thing.

The Indians could have done this with Adam Miller, who was drafted in 2003, dominated Double-A for the whole second half of 2006 and didn't give up a run in Spring Training. He's still not on the 40-man. That's a difference in organizational philosophies, namely, that the Indians have one.

by Jay on Apr 8, 2007 9:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Surprise surprise

Another thinly veiled cheapshot.

by Robert on Apr 8, 2007 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

sorry

I don't mean it as a cheap shot. I thought it was generally accepted among M's fans that the current regime is terrible -- which I can only imagine is very frustrating since the prior one was fairly excellent. If that isn't considered "stating the obvious" around here, then I'll stop. I meant no offense.

by Jay on Apr 8, 2007 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Its like telling somebody from Cleveland

how the Browns won a Super Bowl only after they left town. You really don't need to remind them because they were the first to realize the painful irony of it.

by Robert on Apr 8, 2007 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

point taken

by Jay on Apr 8, 2007 11:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The prior one was excellent?

You have no idea what you're talking about.

by Graham on Apr 8, 2007 4:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Take your own advice

# You are a guest here, rooting for another team. Since trolling is not allowed here, the onus is on guests such as you to avoid being obnoxious, and let me assure you, you have not done that.

by Matthew on Apr 7, 2007 5:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

sorry

I didn't know trolling wasn't allowed here.

I am trying to be nice, but a few things had to be said.

by Jay on Apr 7, 2007 6:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I was refering to the obnoxious part

by Matthew on Apr 7, 2007 6:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

obnoxious

is in the eye of the beholder.

by Jay on Apr 8, 2007 9:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hi Jay

I can indeed claim I would react differently. You know why?

Because if I was an Indians fan I've just lost Victor Martinez. Whoops.

We were screaming for the game to be called as early as the second inning. It's not our faults that nobody did anything about it until the third.

Oh, and those hits? Apart from the Peralta double - all ground balls. This is a function of facing a ground ball pitcher. I'm pretty sure you'll see where this point is going.

by Graham on Apr 8, 2007 1:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

sure

Where it's going is this: Luck is always a factor on balls in play, weather is often a factor as well.

by Jay on Apr 8, 2007 7:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Are you honestly so dense that you cannot

capture the point that baseball is just not played through precipitation?

I cannot find your point here. Is this whole thing about how the M's were "lucky" to get the game called? No one is disputing that. However, the Indians were equally as "lucky" that the game was even started in the first place and that they built that 4-0 lead.

If you want someone to go bitch at, bitch at the umpiring crew which made the heinous decision to cancel the game for pussy reasons like "the grass is icy" and "its dangerous to be out there". What assholes.

by Matthew on Apr 8, 2007 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

my point ...

However, the Indians were equally as "lucky" that the game was even started in the first place and that they built that 4-0 lead.

... is that the above is bullshit.

They were not lucky that the game started. We are seeing right now the consequences of not having completed that game, regardless of whether it was the right decision. Making a good-faith effort to start the game, and complete the game, was the right thing to do. All parties participated in it, and the game was halted whenever conditions were dangerous. There was no luck involved.

The four-run lead was also not luck. Beltre made errors -- you want to blame the weather, fine, but his teammates did great with the weather. And as noted above, the Indians got 11 baserunners in four innings -- four runs is not a "lucky" result from that. Beltre's mistakes were more than cancelled out by the Indians' baserunning and the Mariners' other defenders.

Even the three-run, two-error inning included two walks and two line drive hits to the outfield. That is not luck, that's a great-hitting team and a not-terrific pitcher.

Finally, major league baseball is played in light or medium precipitation every week of the year. I can only assume that the fact the M's play with a roof has made many of you oblivious to this fact, but it is a fact nonetheless.

by Jay on Apr 8, 2007 9:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Light precipitation.

Not fucking blizzards.

by Jeff on Apr 8, 2007 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

He said precipitation, not blizzards.

by Jay on Apr 8, 2007 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It was so bad

That they had no problem canceling the other games even after they knew about how totally fucked up the schedule will be now.

by Robert on Apr 8, 2007 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

more cancellations

My understanding is that the persistently low temperatures are preventing them from making the field playable. They put enormous effort into making it playable for a game on Friday, but those weather conditions were different -- higher temperatures mainly, but also many long breaks in the snow were expected.

by Jay on Apr 8, 2007 11:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

and I'll say it again

There is not one shred of evidence -- zero, zip, nada -- that Martinez's injury was related to the weather conditions.

It may have been -- and you would like for it to fit your argument -- but you've got nothing there.

There is, in fact, no evidence that the umpires put the players at significant risk at any point during the game. You have just blown this issue up in your head in order to rationalize the deleting of the game.

by Jay on Apr 8, 2007 7:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ahhh...I hate to disagree, but...

If Cleveland adjusted to the weather better than you, they deserved to win. Baseball is a game played out of doors, and sometimes its windy, and sometimes there's glare, and sometimes it's really damn hot.

I agree that snow is an odd weather circumstance, but--correct me if I'm wrong here--it snowed in the bottom of the innings as well. Cleveland played better through it, and hypothetical handwaving about 3 Beltre errors or a Horacio Ramirez start or how-COULD-Paul-Byrd-throw-4.2inningsofaperfectgame! won't change that.

So I don't know whether you "got away with one" or not, as I didn't see the game. But you're complaints and rationalizations are off base. The Indians deserved to win this one, because they played baseball better than did the Mariners.

by Stealfirstbase on Apr 7, 2007 5:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

you're should be your...

It's snowing outside as I typed that, so I couldn't perform very well at my posting.

by Stealfirstbase on Apr 7, 2007 5:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's okay

Under those conditions, you probably shouldn't have been posting in the first place.

Just a friendly little joke. =)

by JLC on Apr 7, 2007 5:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Other teams saw fit to cancel games thay day

Due to the cold alone, never mind the snow/wind. The game probably wouldn't have ever been started had it not been a home opener.

by Fett42 on Apr 7, 2007 5:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

They didn't play better baseball for a full

official game, so it doesn't matter. Weather forced the umpires to cancel the game before it became official. All Mike Hargrove did was point out what was obvious to everyone who wasn't retarded. And because they were retarded enough to even start the game in those conditions, Martinez got injured. That's why you don't play in the snow: people get injured.

by Rollo Tomasi on Apr 7, 2007 5:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah like I said earlier

When Mike Hargrove is the one looking smart here, you know there had to of been some REALLY stupid decisions happening.

No sir, I don't like it. ~Mr.Horse

by Goose on Apr 7, 2007 5:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

And sometimes it's rainy

...and when it rains, there's no game.

And there shouldn't have been a game that day. That's the problem. There's no game that anyone "deserved" to win because there shouldn't have been one in the first place.

The general consensus in the game thread was "Call off this game!" I understand that it's the home opening and that they had to find a way to play through at least that game but that doesn't make playing the game any less nonsensical.

The funny thing is if Paul Byrd was actually pitching well this wouldn't be an issue and the game would've been official. Instead, his luck ran out and he started to fall apart before getting the final out.

by ThundaPC on Apr 7, 2007 5:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, the big issue here is the players health

One guy already went down, a few more guys were saying how scary it was out there. And Jeff already explained the possibility for FATAL injury.

The whole thing should of never happened at all.

No sir, I don't like it. ~Mr.Horse

by Goose on Apr 7, 2007 5:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would agree ...

except that I think this is really being overplayed. The umpires had to OK playing the game, and playing it as long as they did. I don't believe they would have played the game over the strong objections of one team or the other -- and I haven't read anything to the effect that anyone in the M's organization was objecting. So the whole "Indians conspiracy" aspect really doesn't hodl water.

And while everyone's saying Martinez's injury was related to the weather, there actually is no evidence of that at all. He came up lame while charging down the first base line. He didn't slip at any point. You can blame the cold, but it was the bottom of the third inning -- and besides, nobody's saying they should have called the game just for coldness.

This is not to say that the game conditions didn't become dangerous at some point. But the M's allowed it to get to that point, too.

by Jay on Apr 7, 2007 6:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

They called the game in Chicago

because of coldness.

by Matthew on Apr 7, 2007 6:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Isn't it...

Usually warmer when it snows?

Detect-O-Vision

Favor the Bold

by IcebreakerX on Apr 7, 2007 6:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, but as far as baseball goes

snow comes with the side effect of there being snow.

by Matthew on Apr 7, 2007 6:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The game...

Probably should have been called when the Ibanez AB went for an hour.

But don't the umpires usually look at radars or something?!

Detect-O-Vision

Favor the Bold

by IcebreakerX on Apr 7, 2007 6:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

They did

that's why the tried to get in another hour of baseball because they saw a clean pocket coming through.

by Matthew on Apr 7, 2007 6:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

This whole argument seems kind of silly to me

I think we can all agree that the decision to start the game, given the knowledge of the coming weather, was not a good one -- regardless of who made it.

It also seems clear that Hargrove's timing on trying to end the game one strike before it would have become official worked to the Mariners' advantage. But seriously, the whole idea of trying to squeeze in pitches and at-bats in between the snowstorms is completely ludicrous. The whole five-inning official game thing should really only be used when unpredictable changes in playing conditions force a game to be ended early. For the umpires (and Wedge) to try to get players to play through dangerous conditions just to get to the point where they can declare the game to be official is completely indefensible.

That said, the rules are what they are, and with Byrd one strike away from winning the game (bogus no-hitter or no), I can completely understand why he might complain about the Mariners acting in what seemed like an unprofessional manner. He had just worked his ass off trying to pitch through shitty conditions, and even if the game never should have been played in the first place, who can blame him for being angry that his effort was all for nothing?

In my opinion, there's no point debating whether or not the game means more for the Indians or Mariners, whether or not the Indians are more used to such conditions, or even whose interests were served by playing more or ending the game. Jeff's original point stands: YOU DON'T PLAY BASEBALL IN THE SNOW.

by Nadingo on Apr 7, 2007 7:41 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Well said

by phil333 on Apr 7, 2007 7:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm just a little drunk

so I'm going to go ahead and agree with this post without saying anything further.

by Jeff on Apr 7, 2007 7:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That reminds me

There's a lounge down the street that I'm currently not drinking at. I should go change that right now.

by Gomez on Apr 7, 2007 8:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Go go go

and order a little Chimay Trappist Ale.

by Jeff on Apr 7, 2007 9:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dammit

Some private party commandeered the lounge. There's Earl's, but I don't want to order a Bud Light and end up dead from alcohol poisoning. So I just came home. I'm sure my brain cells will thank me in about 24 hours.

by Gomez on Apr 7, 2007 10:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Is that the lounge on 45th

I walk by there and it seems nobody is ever there. I would have gone to Big Time or maybe the CIP. Earl's sucks soooooo much!

by Edgar for Pres on Apr 7, 2007 10:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes

There are days when it's pretty packed and days where, as I'm walking in, I'm wondering if they're closed because it's so dead. Strange place that way.

by Gomez on Apr 7, 2007 10:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Also

I can't believe I didn't think of either of those places. Even with the crowds, they're not bad options for beer.

by Gomez on Apr 7, 2007 11:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

this might be the beer talking

but I feel like we should have an LL night where we all meet up in Boston, get plastered at like 10am, and spend the day walking around cursing the city and heckling Red Sox fans.

by Matthew on Apr 7, 2007 9:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oh man am I ever game.

by Jeff on Apr 8, 2007 6:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Roadtrip!!!!

Is anyone else?

I have a month between the 20th of April and the 20th of May where my schedule (including weekdays) is almost completely wide open thanks to the end of classes and the delay of graduation.

by Matthew on Apr 8, 2007 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I was just there a few weeks ago

and actually took a tour of Fenway. I only dropped a few cynical remarks about Red Sox fans and I don't think anybody picked up on them. Probably a good thing that Red Sox fans only have 1/2 a brain.

by Edgar for Pres on Apr 8, 2007 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Geoff Baker says things aren't looking good for

tomorrow either.

"I'd love to tell you the weather has gotten better in Cleveland, but frankly, it's now even worse than last night. There is so much snow on the ground it feels like the middle of January. And wow, is it ever cold. A real, damp, bone-chilling cold. It's now 7 p.m. (PDT) and I can tell you that no one from the Mariners knows whether they will be able to get any games in tomorrow."

Seriously Cleveland, get a roof or something.

No sir, I don't like it. ~Mr.Horse

by Goose on Apr 7, 2007 8:43 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

God.

I mean, on the one hand I'd rather not spend my entire Sunday on baseball when I have chem work to do, but on the other, this is ridiculous.

by Jeff on Apr 7, 2007 8:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Man, what a sucky week

Only three Mariner games? Brilliant!

by ThundaPC on Apr 7, 2007 8:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I've waited so long to watch baseball

and this is some higher power telling me I don't have time. Thank you, you are making sure I might actually graduate this quarter.

by Edgar for Pres on Apr 7, 2007 9:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

lol

every other team has played like 10 games.

Pretty soon the standing are going to be like this.

Angles 12-4
Mariners 2-1
A's 7-9
Rangers 5-11

by MFAN on Apr 7, 2007 9:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Fuck it

Somebody just needs to build the Allied weather control device from Red Alert 2

by Robert on Apr 7, 2007 9:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Heh

I wish I had one of those in C&C 3 right now. I can't beat "Cologne" mission in the GDI campaign. The Scrin air attack insane.

No sir, I don't like it. ~Mr.Horse

by Goose on Apr 7, 2007 9:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

No way

Then we'd have lightning storms instead of snow. I don't want our players getting electrocuted!

by I'm NOT Corco on Apr 8, 2007 12:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know

If Vidro got struck, then we would have a nice Easter ham.

by Robert on Apr 8, 2007 1:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well then

by Gomez on Apr 7, 2007 10:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

This is insane

Right now more snow in Cleveland, feels like 15 degrees out there according to weather.com. Umm, I don't think that's baseball weather. How are they going to make up this series?? Even if they double up tomorrow that's 2 games that need to be made up, and it really is unfair for Cleveland if they aren't played at the Jake.

by phil333 on Apr 8, 2007 5:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Fucking crazy

We might miss this entire series.

Goddamnit, I didn't wait 6 months just to watch 1 series of baseball and then have to wait forever to watch more!

No sir, I don't like it. ~Mr.Horse

by Goose on Apr 8, 2007 5:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wow, this just dawned on me

Mariner Trash Talking Guide

"A few things to make fun of for every team in the league, should a nasty situation arise with a fan of somebody else and you don't want to think for yourself. Because sometimes being a total dick is the only satisfaction a fan of a crappy team gets to have.

Indians:

For Novices: Jhonny Peralta's h, 1999 ALCS, 2005 pseudo-choke
For Veterans: Jose Mesa (be careful), curse of Rocky Colavito, Ten Cent Beer Night, whatever happened to Brandon Phillips, Drew Carey
Avoid Mentioning: Mike Hargrove, front offices, 14-2"

by ThundaPC on Apr 7, 2007 9:33 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

They choked in the 99 ALDS

by Robert on Apr 7, 2007 9:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Cheater's Guide to Baseball...

Part 1 - Chapter 5, page 56.

"Delaying the Game for Fun and Profit"

I have two things to say about all this:

Mike Hargrove pulled a Casey Stengel. He went out and used the weather to influence the game in the favor of his team. On the flipside, not only did Paul Byrd not help his own situation out by not throwing strikes and just letting the opponents get themselves out, but by giving up walks to allowed the snow situation to get worse.

The conclusions? Hargrove apparently has read DMZ's book, or knows his "old school" baseball history. Paul Byrd has not and knows not.

Hargrove is managing for his job here. For him to go out and perform this blatant delay tactic to save a loss is nothing short of brilliant. Indian fan can bitch all they want, but yesterday's game didn't happen. End of story.

Two, stadiums without roofs or retractable covers, should be banned from baseball. SafeCo Field wasn't built with a retractable roof because we hated the Kingdome. It rains in Seattle and not just a little bit. Jacob's Field is not old and could have been built with something similar. This concept and idea is not novel as Skydome had it well before Jacob's Field was even planned.

To sum up:

Hargrove > Indians
Roof > Jacob's Field.

If you can fight, fight. If you can't fight, defend. If you can't defend, flee. If you can't flee, surrender. If you can't surrender, die. - Sima Yi

by TIF on Apr 7, 2007 10:38 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Well to be fair

It's not like this happens every year.

No sir, I don't like it. ~Mr.Horse

by Goose on Apr 7, 2007 10:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

snow on the field or hargrove making a good

decision? because I agree, both are very rare.

by Matthew on Apr 7, 2007 11:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

So apparently if we play tommorow

The first game is gonna be at 10:05 AM and the next game is gonna start 20 minutes after that one gets over.

And the quote of the day comes from Richie Sexson, who agrees with us on Hargrove:

"Sexson said he never experienced anything like Friday's weather in any game. But one thing's for certain, he added. Hargrove earned clubhouse respect for getting his players off the frigid, soppy field.

"That was Grover's best managerial move right there," he said. "

No sir, I don't like it. ~Mr.Horse

by Goose on Apr 8, 2007 1:01 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Christ

Even the players realize they are being managed by a complete idiot.

by Robert on Apr 8, 2007 10:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Somebody on the Indians board had a good idea.

"A few years ago the Marlins had to play "home games" against the Expos at US Cellular Field due to hurricanes in Florida. As a Chicagoan, I'm more than willing to offer up Sox Park again for make-ups."

I like this idea. If we can't get any of the games in this series in, how about moving them to a neutral park. Have Hargrove and Wedge get together and come to an agreement on a location and then schedule games accordingly.

No sir, I don't like it. ~Mr.Horse

by Goose on Apr 8, 2007 5:51 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Let's have them at Rogers Centre

since nobody's bothering to go to Blue Jays games anyway.

by Gomez on Apr 8, 2007 1:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Or the Astrodome

Hot potato is an entirely different game when you're starving

by Mariner John on Apr 9, 2007 12:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

signing off

Hey, guys, I'm leaving from this thread. I've tried to make some actual points and engage in some actual discussion, occasionally even using some actual facts. Some folks are responsive to that sort of thing, some are not, which is par for the course on a web forum. Thanks to everyone who read with some semblance of an open mind and sparred. Feel free to stop by our joint any time, I promise you'll be kicked around with equal respect.

by Jay on Apr 8, 2007 11:18 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs