BJ bashing is all the rage down here on Tampa Sports Talk and most internet message boards. I blame it on a variety of factors: The newness of most of the fanbase, the golden-years age of the fan-base, the fact he came up in the system alongside Dukes/Young, a general lack of understanding of defensive range, a tendency of the common fan to over-value batting average, his power outage, his nonchalant demeanor, and yes...racism (albeit subconscious).

I agree that it was a proper decision for Maddon to sit him for a day for lack of effort. I'm just getting tired of sitting next to fans who tell me that we should trade one of the games young stars for a PBTNL, so we can play 'scrappy' players like Zobrist, Hinske, and Gomes.

“You just can’t pick and choose when you’re going to put your effort out there”

Maybe Joe should watch the Olympics the next couple weeks and take note of all the swimmers and sprinters easing up before the finish in their heat races. Of course, they're more interested in winning than in projecting grit to the public.

BJ hasn't learned what to say, apparently.

i don't see the parallel, greg. the sprinters and swimmers are conserving effort after establishing the fact that they are moving on. they've done their job. they won't dog it in the finals.
i think that's entirely different than a given baseball play. if upton runs it out, he gets on base. the minimum benefit there is that the inning is extended, making the other team work to get the outs. that's the minimum. the maximum return is more runs, thereby making victory more assured. every play a player is involved in he should be putting out maximum effort for just that reason. its not about projecting grit.
and get off my lawn.

also ... i can't see the crack about his legs getting a rest endearing him to anybody. that was pretty flip.

Maybe Joe should watch the Olympics the next couple weeks and take note of all the swimmers and sprinters easing up before the finish in their heat races.

Absolutely right. Joe should have clarified that he meant during games and not during batting practice.

What in the name of all that is holy is a center fielder saving his energy for that he cannot go hard to first base 4-5 times a day? Honestly, this is not a "get off my lawn" issue. This argument that there's some benefit to not going full-board to first is completely nonsensical, and is setting an unbelievably low standard for professional baseball players.

What in the name of all that is holy is a center fielder saving his energy for that he cannot go hard to first base 4-5 times a day? Honestly, this is not a "get off my lawn" issue. This argument that there's some benefit to not going full-board to first is completely nonsensical, and is setting an unbelievably low standard for professional baseball players.

Agreed. The other day I ran across a youtube video of Darrell Green returning a punt for a touchdown against the Bears. The guy is covering Willie Gault, in his prime, all game long, then drops back and returns a punt (hurdling a guy in the process) for a touchdown sealing the game. I was talking to a friend about it who is not a baseball fan and he asked me how often baseball players have to run that hard, and long, that consistently. Uh, never? Maybe a few guys get the occasional triple? These guys really can't run hard for 90 f'n feet? As was said, it's not a "get off my lawn" argument, or "show some grit," etc. The fact that you are paid so much and you can't even run hard for 90 feet is just plain pathetic. The fact that he's being a smartass prick about it says a lot.

There are a few select cases where it's okay not to hustle in this type of situation. That's when the runner is the pitcher, catcher (maybe), or a player nursing a nagging injury.

If Upton uses his energy running hard to first, where he's out anyway, he may well be unable to make a play in the field as a result. That would hurt the team, but I guess it would make you guys (and Maddon) happy.

I'm much more concerned about the collapse in Upton's power, but I think he'll be fine there too. His K:BB ratio is about the healthiest it's ever been (including the minors) and he's still getting a good number of XBHs. If he can get back the power he's going to be a perennial MVP contender. Amazing he's still only 23, he seems to have been around forever.

It's interesting. There was a similar discussion here recently and one poster was completely in favor of players dogging it on routine ground balls under the heading of "preventing an unnecessary injury".

My lowly two cents is that the body responds to what it is asked to do on a regular basis. And if you ask it to move at a rapid pace on a regular basis the body will accept that as a regular expectation. But if running hard is an INTERMITTENT request then the body won't respond as well over time. And THAT will lead to injury.

Folks will drag out individual cases, etc. But this just seems like common sense to me. That and I have just too many guys over the years and the lollygaggers always seem to miss more time than the guys who give it an honest effort each play.

Wait- he's a center fielder, but he can't both play center field and run hard for 90 feet? He's in such poor shape he needs to try to conserve his energy? He's not a professional bowler- if he really can't do both he shouldn't be playing.

Alou:

I am surprised. NO play is preordained. Assuming a negative outcome is a defeatist attitude.

Even setting aside the physical effort it's that MINDSET I find more offensive.........

If Upton uses his energy running hard to first, where he's out anyway, he may well be unable to make a play in the field as a result. That would hurt the team, but I guess it would make you guys (and Maddon) happy.

First of all, the notion that a player of Upton's obvious physical talents wouldn't be able to sprint full bore twice in the span of five minutes is pretty ridiculous.

Second of all, the whole point is had he been running hard, he may not have been "out anyway", as the fielder struggled to field the ball.

If Upton uses his energy running hard to first, where he's out anyway, he may well be unable to make a play in the field as a result.

something is wrong if a pro athlete can't run 90 feet without getting gassed.

enable much?

It's interesting. There was a similar discussion here recently and one poster was completely in favor of players dogging it on routine ground balls under the heading of "preventing an unnecessary injury".

That would have been Ray DiPerna's position.

He mentions it here in post #56, and again here from #152 onwards.

It's an argument which I just can't agree with.

If Upton uses his energy running hard to first, where he's out anyway, he may well be unable to make a play in the field as a result. That would hurt the team, but I guess it would make you guys (and Maddon) happy.

I've noticed a lot of players jogging on and off the field when they could just as easily walk. Heck, get some golf carts for these guys. I see this as a much more pointless drain of valuable energy.

Also, when are teams going to install conveyor belts for the unnecessarily long walk from the water cooler to the bat rack?

Also, on fly outs, why do outfielders risk damaging their arms by throwing the ball back to the infield if there's nobody on? What's the harm in rolling the ball in.

I bet we can find a lot of ways to save players energy without asking them to sacrifice potential baserunners by phoning in their "routine" outs.

It's an argument which I have some trouble agreeing with.

because you have more than half a mind.

It's a hard sort of thing. In soccer one of the things players learn as they move through the ranks are the situations when it is best to conserve energy and the situations where you have to go all out.

So you can certainly see the argument over a 162 game season about conserving your effort for situations where it's likely to yield the most benefit. I'm not sure that necessarily applies to running out grounders, but I suppose it could. Not just in terms of being winded but wear and tear on the joints and so forth. Not the greatest argument, but an argument.

Gary Sheffield was 20 years old and loafed to first on a ground ball to the third baseman who made a bad throw and the first baseman had time to come off the bag, field the throw and still tag the bag.

Supposedly as Gary walked through the dugout and Tom Trebelhorn about to approach Sheffield Robin Yount dryly commented (and Yount hardly ever said "boo"), "If you ran to first like you run your mouth you would have been safe easy."

The whole dugout burst into laughter,.

Tampa Bay are up 8-4, one out, none one, bottom of the 8th. The game is petering to its conclusion, and Upton doesn't give full effort on the play. From my point of view it's not the end of the world. From the perspective of most here (and Joe Maddon) this is a serious matter. OK then, some questions:

1. Which action does more harm to the Devil Rays chances - Upton failing to run out the ground ball, or replacing Upton with Zobrist in the lineup?

2. Look at what Upton said about it, including the pointed lack of any apology or suggestion that he'll run out the grounder next time. Do you think that Maddon's way of dealing with the matter has been successful?

Voros:

It's the difference between an honest effort and the lope-a-dope so prevalent among players. And they aren't thinking about saving energy/wear on joints. It's just not "cool" to look like you are REALLY trying.

Which is why someone like Ryan Braun is fun. Braun doesn't always BUST IT but there is always an effort. And why Braun has six triples and 30 doubles instead of 35 doubles and a triple........

1. Which action does more harm to the Devil Rays chances - Upton failing to run out the ground ball, or replacing Upton with Zobrist in the lineup?

That's the part that makes me disagree with discipline in this fashion. Fine him in Kangaroo Court or something, don't take one of your best hitters out of the lineup in an important game in a pennant race to try and prove a point. They ended up winning the game anyway, but it still doesn't seem like a good idea.

It's a hard sort of thing. In soccer one of the things players learn as they move through the ranks are the situations when it is best to conserve energy and the situations where you have to go all out.

But soccer is a much more minute-by-minute demanding sport than baseball. Soccer players are out on the field, often moving for 45 minutes (each half) with few breaks. Moments are rare when a baseball player is in constant motion for 45 seconds (maybe Prince Fielder hitting a triple).

I have no problem with a manager expecting a player to run hard out of the box on every play. Errors happen.

Alou, both #1 and #2 have nothing at all to do with whether it is too much to ask a professional baseball player to run hard for 90 feet. Both of your questions refer to the outcome of his not running it out and subsequent punishment, which no one is really discussing. If Maddon's benching didn't change Upton's attitude, are you really trying to blame Maddon? So if players loaf you just want him to be ok with it?

Alou:

Every so often a dash of public embarrassment is appropriate as a disciplinary action. And better it be dealt with NOW.

And a lack of an apology is likely reflective of a young person looking to save face. Doesn't mean that in the dugout he didn't get the message.

Bobby Cox did the same thing with Andruw Jones. As have many a manager with players, especially the good players who ALWAYS help set a tone.

I am legitimately stunned you condone a halfhearted effort at any time during a game.......

One of the common themes of Tony LaRussa's Cardinal teams is that every guy, EVERY GUY, gives a legit effort if not a HARD effort on each play. Even Albert, bad foot and all, will run out his ground balls.

It's just understood on Tony's teams. You run.

And it ain't optional.....

something is wrong if a pro athlete can't run 90 feet without getting gassed.

I'm unsurprised that this concept eludes you. It's not a matter of being gassed by a 90-foot run; accumulated fatigue over the course of a marathon season leads to decreased performance and increased risk of injury.

This is inarguable, though many of you appear determined to try.

This is inarguable, though many of you appear determined to try.

maybe because its ########.

accumulated fatigue over the course of a marathon season leads to decreased performance and increased risk of injury.

Okay, but there are certain thresholds under which fatigue doesn't occur. In materials science, most materials undergo failure tests by repeated cycling of loads. For these materials, there exists a certain minimum load under which the material will never fail. It is only when loads above this threshold are applied that fatigue starts to accumulate, and which eventually lead to failure.

While this concept doesn't perfectly translate to pro athletes, I'm inclined to believe that a 90-foot run, absent a previously existing condition, would be something which normally falls below the fatigue threshold.

Greg:

Based on what?

Are there more injuries of players after August 15th relative to other times of the season?

The cumulative performance in September is less for a certain body of players? And if some guys are "failing" other guys have to be succeeding. So is it fatigue or just the natural ebb and flow of the game?

And AGAIN, there is a difference between an honest effort that honors the concept of pacing oneself and loafing regularly.

To me THAT is not a hard concept.

Why do you think the Cards continue to win with a sub-optimal lineup day in and day out? How have they compiled the third-best record in the NL this season?

Look at their current 25-man roster -- outside of Pujols and a healthy Carpenter, is there anyone else you would come close to picking if you were starting a team?

I can only echo what others have said -- any argument that Upton was justified is bunk, esp. the "well, what's the use since he's unrepentant' argument. You lose games, playoff spots and ultimately a winning mindset when you accept obvious half-effort. Maddon's attitude has more than a little to do with overcoming the loser's culture of the TB clubhouse. You don't win on talent alone.

Now get off my lawn.

It's times like these I wish MLB got with the times and allowed short highlight and game clips to be posted on Youtube so that we could all see the play instead of talking out of our collective asses.

as his manager said to enos slaughter many years ago, 'son, if you're tired, we can get someone else in there for you.' i used 'get off my lawn' in a tongue in cheek way, but i'm definitely in that camp. players should hustle, and not just because it can win games. the customers have paid good money to see an honest effort. i really think the underlying ethos escapes many people nowadays. there seems to be a creeping notion among sports fans that it's important to be entertained, that the entertainment of the fans is the reason for the sport. it's easy to think that, what with MLB wanting to promote it as a 'family' activity, and layering on stuff like overamplified music, fan promotions, jumbotrons, $50 caps, what have you. all well and good. it gets fannies in the seats, and pays salaries. but. i could not disagree more with the idea that 'entertainment' is what's important. i want to watch good ballplayers play the game to the fullest of their skills because it makes for the greatest sporting event ever invented, major league baseball. i don't think i'm alone in the idea that if there were no stupid little kids throwing out the first pitch, no rock music blaring, no wave, no crummy expensive concessions, and none of the other diversions and distractions, i would STILL go to see major league baseball. and if i do, i want batters to run out ground balls. THAT is what i am paying to see. i crave a real agon, a real contest on the field. its a way to effect a catharsis if you will, a vicarious outlet for the conflicts that go on in my head over the trials and tribulations of the real world. but if upton decides he's going to be out anyway, and doesn't need to run it out -- without thinking of his teammates and the fans -- and if the fans shrug and say oh well its still fun to come out here and maybe see someone conk a homer which is why i came anyway ... well ... all i can say is there's something missing. and i want no part of it. and i want players with upton's attitude off my team and off the field and so, i guess, off my lawn.

I'm unsurprised that this concept eludes you. It's not a matter of being gassed by a 90-foot run; accumulated fatigue over the course of a marathon season leads to decreased performance and increased risk of injury.

Totally. Pitchers should just lighten up and groove an 82 mph fastball when they are facing a mediocre hitter too. I mean, it PROBABLY won't turn into a run that will lead to a loss... right?

/sarcasm

2bits, even upton admitted he didn't run it out. don't think a clip is going to add much.

I am legitimately stunned you condone a halfhearted effort at any time during a game.......

As a baseball fan, I think it would be nice if he put in more effort. It would make him a better player if he put in more effort (and it didn't hurt him elsewhere). It would, in the long run, show up in his stats and make him more money. But human beings are lazy creatures, it's a fact. I guarantee you that BJ Upton is not the only 20-something male who occasionally gives a halfhearted effort at work when he thinks it doesn't matter too much. So let he who is without sin, etc.

So let he who is without sin, etc.

Excuse me? This is the refuge of foolishness. Now fans are not permitted expectations? Nor the player's "boss"?

Good gravy......

If you followed the "logic" of post 36 wouldn't you just do away with all non-tactical aspects of coaching and, for that matter, any attempt at leadership or guidance in anything?

Having seen the play in question (I've watched nearly every single Rays game this season), the criticism of Upton is entirely justified. The grounder he hit was exactly the sort of ball you should always run out - a squibber that yanked the pitcher (Mujica) out of position and forced him to rush a sloppy throw to 1B. You add the extra pressure of a speedy Upton booking down the line and that quite possibly becomes either an infield single or an error. I don't want to hear about the 8-4 lead...no excuse for B.J. not making an effort there.

On the other hand, Upton does seem to have acquired an unfair reputation for "laziness." This will not help things, but it should be noted that he is normally anything but.

I think it's fairly uncontroversial that there are many ways giving 120% effort at all times can be counter-productive to the player and the ballclub. Pete Reiser, Fred Lynn or Eric Davis running head-first into the center field wall is an obvious example.

The question here is whether Upton's situation qualifies. I'm skeptical, but I can at least see the argument.

Voros:

Again, there is a CLEAR distinction between taking 5.7 seconds to get to first base and giving a solid effort.

And that is not the h*ll-bent approach either. It's termed sensible hustle.......

I think it's fair to question, but I also think it's foolish for a fan to think that they know exactly how to manage athlete's bodies to the best competitive outcome.

even if we can concede that one's 'best effort' doesn't necessarily imply an effort that is reckless, i hardly think it would have been reckless of upton to really run out the ground ball.

i want to clarify that i don't mean to single him out, he just happens to be the focus of a larger debate. it should be obvious that he must have worked pretty hard to get to the level he's playing at now. but i submit, as others have pointed out, that once you are at that level, an unremitting emphasis on playing hard can make the difference between being on a crummy mlb team and a good mlb team, as in the case of the cardinals ...

HW,

I'm not arguing with you, I'm just saying that I think it's important to establish that there are situations where "letting up" is the wise course of action. I'm not arguing that Upton's play was one of them (haven't seen it for starters).

No, Voros, you must agree that players need to run all-out all the time. Forget if certain players have hamstring issues or other injuries that they are playing through. It is universally true that every player must run out every ground ball hard. They must also sprint off the field, unlike that slacker Jose Reyes.

Everyone should play the game like Pete Rose.

Darren:

Well, that isn't my point. I specifically made that distinction between the arms flailing nonsense and the hit the ball, toss the bat and run through the base at a solid pace.

And I am well known "hater" of Pete Rose.

I love to play devil's advocate, but most of us are not advocating '120 percent' or 'all-out all the time'. But if you want to argue that criticism of Upton is unjustified, just spit it out instead of hiding behind the devil.

Phred, for better or worse, posts like #33 keep me coming back here.

I want to see ankles snapping on routine grounders to first damn it!

No, Voros, you must agree that players need to run all-out all the time. Forget if certain players have hamstring issues or other injuries that they are playing through. It is universally true that every player must run out every ground ball hard. They must also sprint off the field, unlike that slacker Jose Reyes.

Everyone should play the game like Pete Rose.

That's awesome. Maybe if this argument goes long enough, those saying that Upton should run to first will be found guilty of accusing the terminally ill of slacking for not getting out of bed.

HW,

But I don't think it's just about "false hustle" versus "real hustle." I think it's also about situations where it's "real hustle" but where the risks far outweigh the likely rewards.

I think it's also the difference between fining the guy and moving on, and making some sort of big deal about it and letting it grow out of control. The psychologically perfect human being doesn't exist and a sort of frustrated loafing on a pop up or weak grounder is a sin worthy of punishment, but not exactly a stoning offense either.

Anybody got a rope?

Voros:

And it's up to a manager to determine when to act overtly and when to take the player aside in a quiet moment and have a discussion. Considering the strides the Rays have made one has to give Maddon the benefit of the doubt.

And after umpteen years of watching the game I think the benefits of "real hustle" FAR outweigh the risks. As to often happens folks place too much weight on outliers, meaning guys who make that "extra effort" and pay a heavy price.

And I go back to my original comment about the conditioning/muscle memory of the body. The body is a tool. Keep it properly maintained and when you push it a bit it can respond. If you are lax in upkeep and then expect a tad more you will likely be disappointed.

I think that's common sense.

I trust Joe Maddon to make the proper distinctions between the sorts of effort he expects of his players - for instance, he doesn't suspend anyone for failing to sprint to first on a walk, even though there's a non-zero chance of a ball getting away from the catcher, or maybe from the pitcher. He chose to punish Upton because he didn't run the way Maddon expects, and that's fair and good.

What rubs me the wrong way are two things. First is the presumption that this tendency to the lackadaisical is anything new - I know of no evidence that this is more common than it used to be, and it all sounds a lot like the "Old Ballplayers Never Die" feature in the Historical Abstract. Second is the citation of football players - in a game where there's 16 games a year, one per week, the calculation as to what styles of play should be proper to a player is completely different. As agreed above, 750 out of 750 MLB players aren't Pete Rose, and this is not a moral failing of any of them. When I read the comparison to football, it sounds to me like you're looking for a Pete Rose, a "football mentality" that is rarely appropriate to the long haul battle of attrition that is a baseball season. There are players insane enough (or jacked on enough amphetamine) to make it work, but when I hear about a "football mentality", I usually assume the player won't make it past 28, if he makes it at all. See John Rocker, for instance.

Excuse me? This is the refuge of foolishness. Now fans are not permitted expectations? Nor the player's "boss"?

Good gravy......

No, fans are permitted all the expectations they like. If you expect every major leaguer to run 100% on every ground ball, some players are going to disappoint you, including some very good ones. But you're within your rights there too. And if you say - as phred does in #33 - that he doesn't want to watch such players or see them on his team, then that's fine too. My problem is with the people on this thread jumping down Upton's throat like it's some kind of moral failing. Spare me.

Of course the Rays have expectations, and I mentioned it from that perspective in #20. Perhaps they are handling the situation well, and perhaps not. I guess time will tell.

What Would Whitey Do?

But it's not just about smashing into walls. It's Cal Ripken's streak, it's pitching on short rest in the playoffs, it's trying to finish your starts even when you're tired and you're stuff is gone, it's postponing surgery to try to play through an injury. There's a certain impulse in baseball, and all sports, that pushes players to attempt these counter productive things because they're appealing to emotion rather than reason. I'm talking about behavior that is both admirable and counter-productive at the same time.

Sometimes you take a mph or two off your fastball against the 8 or 9 hitter. Sometimes you tell the manager when your arm really is hurting. Sometimes jogging out a routine popup with a lingering hamstring problem is beneficial to sprinting around the bases. I think there's at least a little room for discretion here. I'm not saying Upton specifically applies here, but it's certainly possible to imagine common situations where the emotional desire to give it your all should be vetoed by what really is in the best interests of the team and player.

If you watch the game today, there is a subtle change..Almost every ballplayer when he hits the ball will pause a few milliseconds to a lot longer than that to see what he's got. Foul, fly ball, possible hit..Mean it's freakin epidemic. Most of them run a normal looking sprint but, the pause is there for a reason - to see if it's worth their while for a REAL sprint.

Makes you appreciate Rose. The man had no brain. On a ball field -all out.

And if you say - as phred does in #33 - that he doesn't want to watch such players or see them on his team, then that's fine too. My problem is with the people on this thread jumping down Upton's throat like it's some kind of moral failing.

we're talking past each other. i don't like upton's attitude as reflected in this incident and his subsequent flip remarks, which bothered me even more. he didn't hustle on a play he should have hustled on. period. and his one game suspension is fitting to the deed. end of story. put him back in, and see if he tries a little harder in the next similar situation.
i didn't want him to run until his ankles snapped or whatever. i don't like being characterized, even remotely, as having a 'football' mentality. nothing could be further from the truth. i despise football and the over adrenalized atmosphere that prevails. if you're arguing that over the long haul of a season, the good ballplayer knows when to apply himself, i'd say that situation fits the criteria of a need for a burst of effort if anything does. a chance to get on base. a chance to extend an inning. a chance to extend a lead. a chance to assure a win. in a division that is no cakewalk. how much incentive does he need?

Morlity's got nothing to do with it. It's just good, sensible baseball to run balls out. You increase your chances of reaching base, while putting additional pressure on defenders to make plays without booting the ball.

World Series games have been affected by decisions to run out--or not run out--ground balls and fly balls out. The Mets cost themselves the first game of the 2000 WS by assuming the results of balls put into play. Todd Zeile and Timo Perez know too well about that. On the opposite end, one of the turning points of the '71 WS came in Game Three, when Clemente hit a ball back to Mike Cuellar. Clemente ran hard from the start, forcing Cuellar to hurry and make a bad throw to first base. That set up a key rally for the Pirates, who had been staggering after getting blown out in the first two games of the Series.

One other point: I've been watching games since the early 1970s, and there have always been guys who didn't run the ball out. I think the difference today is that it happens more often, or maybe we just see it more often because more games are televised. Either way, it was an example of bad baseball then, and it's bad baseball now.

there have always been guys who didn't run the ball out.

bingo. i mentioned an incident early in enos slaughter's career. he said it turned his head around, and he never stopped running. boy did that hurt him. there was a well known incident early in yogi berra's career where he failed to run out a pop up, and dimaggio ripped him a new one. what i hope is that upton gets the message cuz from what i hear he has the talent.

If Upton wasn't so slovenly, shiftless, and naturally-gifted this would not be an issue.

If you'll allow a tangent for just a moment...

Today I had the Iowa-Northwestern women's softball game on (I needed some background noise while I did the dishes) and the situation was runner on second, one out (maybe a runner on first as well.) Ball hit into the outfield, shallow, CFer makes the catch and throws into the infield. Hits the shortstop on the foot and the ball just rolls into the infield.

So the fileder rushes after the ball, and the girl on second races to third, slides, stretches her arm out... and she's at least a foot and a half short of the bag. Strike me down, Lord, if I am lying in the least. Arm stretched out as far as she can reach, and she's not even close to touching the bag.

And she still has time to crawl to the bag and make it in safely. Crawl.

So I'm staring at the television in disbelief - why on earth are you sliding if the ball is still on the infield grass somewhere? - and the annoucer says "That's some heads-up baserunning there."

And I'm really, truly sorry, but that's all I can think of when I read some of these odes to grit, hustle and determination. I would rather watch lazy but exceedingly talented B.J. Upton instead of scrappy, utterly determined players like Girl Who Has To Crawl Into The Base.

While this concept doesn't perfectly translate to pro athletes, I'm inclined to believe that a 90-foot run, absent a previously existing condition, would be something which normally falls below the fatigue threshold.

You're making the standard mistake of assuming that volume equals workload. The workload is influenced by volume, the distance, AND the intensity, how fast, how much force he generated over that distance.

No, fans are permitted all the expectations they like. If you expect every major leaguer to run 100% on every ground ball, some players are going to disappoint you, including some very good ones. But you're within your rights there too. And if you say - as phred does in #33 - that he doesn't want to watch such players or see them on his team, then that's fine too. My problem is with the people on this thread jumping down Upton's throat like it's some kind of moral failing. Spare me.

I read this thread and I must have missed the posts where people were saying they need to run 100% of the time. Harvey definately didn't say anything remotely approaching that. I have an opinion that players who can (and yes there are several players who can't) should bust out of the box until they determine the likelihood of being out, then they can go to cruise control. But until the play is done legitimate effort should be expended.

I agree that there is a lot of 'get off my lawn' comments from former players, and the funny thing is that they actually will say something like "in my day if you didn't run out you got benched" and there is an assumption that people always ran things out when the comment alone if taken at it's face proves that they didn't always run it out if there was a "rule" in place to force the situation.


and I join Phred in disliking Uptons comments more than his actions. His comment tells me he didn't get the point, a typical thought process of a prima donna athlete. As it stands, if that comment is proof of his true attitude, I really hope his career never does take off.

You don't win on talent alone.

No, you don't. You also win on how hard you work during practice. On making sure you work out regularly and taking care of your body. On eating the correctly. On getting enough rest.

Maybe teams should start suspending fat players? Or players who enter the season clearly out of shape?

I'm unsurprised that this concept eludes you. It's not a matter of being gassed by a 90-foot run; accumulated fatigue over the course of a marathon season leads to decreased performance and increased risk of injury.

This is inarguable, though many of you appear determined to try.

This might be the dumbest thing ever said around here.

To the larger point this reminds me of when Aaron Rowand made the greatest catch I have ever seen and numerous souless automatons around here criticized him for trying too hard.

And I'm really, truly sorry, but that's all I can think of when I read some of these odes to grit, hustle and determination. I would rather watch lazy but exceedingly talented B.J. Upton instead of scrappy, utterly determined players like Girl Who Has To Crawl Into The Base.

odes to grit and determination? where? I will state in the example you gave, the girl probably slid because it's actually a better way to stop and less wear and tear on your legs with a hard stop. Her skill at judging sucks, and of course comparing a low level athlete to the top 1000 or so isn't really the same thing.

Fans should have a reasonable expectation that the player is trying, too many potential infield hits are probably loss because of a lackadaisacal attitude. Heck if you have a strong reputation as being a guy who doesn't run stuff out, then the infielders can play deeper, effectively giving them better range and hurting the team in two different ways. (losing infield singles, and closing the gaps in the infield)

BJ Upton, batting average on ground balls: .257
AL average, batting average on ground balls: .238

Just look at all the hits he's costing his team! It's, like, -3 hits!

I would argue that there are a lot more bases 'lost' with players pulling up after rounding first and COASTING into 2nd base on balls hit into the OF gaps or over outfielders heads than there are bases lost with guys not hustling down the line on infield grounders. Yet, none of them are disciplined by their managers - it's become almost expected and accepted.

This happens with ALMOST all players, including Tony LaRussa players. Ryan Braun is one of the few players I've seen this year who actually runs all the way to 2nd base in anticipation of a possible triple.

And I'm really, truly sorry, but that's all I can think of when I read some of these odes to grit, hustle and determination. I would rather watch lazy but exceedingly talented B.J. Upton instead of scrappy, utterly determined players like Girl Who Has To Crawl Into The Base.

I think Harveys, and phred and a bunch of us realize that hustle, grit and determination get overpraised. We all know that ultimately talent trumps these traits. But it seems like folks are creating a false dichotomy: either you're a good hitter or you're a scrapper. Why does it have to be either/or? A good hitter can run out every ball, and become an even better hitter in the process.

Of couse, it's dumb to go all Hobson on the baseball field and run into every wall. No one is asking for that.

It's simply running out of the box when the ball is struck. That's it. No one should ever get gassed on a baseball field, or wear down in October because he ran out his ground balls. And frankly, I doubt few ever have. The prick who's No. 1 in games played, with monthly splits that don't demonstrate any seasonal slowdowns, is Exhibit A.

BJ Upton, batting average on ground balls: .257
AL average, batting average on ground balls: .238

Just look at all the hits he's costing his team! It's, like, -3 hits!

I'm sorry, but this is incredibly stupid. If anything you need to look at infield hits and not ba on ground balls. All this shows is that Upton's ground balls get past the infield at an above average rate (probably because he hits the ball hard, possibly because he's lucky at finding the gaps).

What it doesn't show is how many hits he's cost his team by not running all out.

Emotional issue. Appeals to reason won't convince anyone who doesn't already agree with you.

My guess is that this was not the first time Upton's failed to put out the effort that Maddon expects from his players. You don't sit a guy for a game for a single transgression, normally.

Ultimately, I think this is about the manager's authority over the team. Maddon sets the rules, and it's Upton's responsibility to follow them. If (as I assume) this has been a continual problem - and it may not be limited to just failing to run out a ground ball - Maddon risks losing the rest of the team by NOT taking action.

-- MWE

But it seems like folks are creating a false dichotomy: either you're a good hitter or you're a scrapper. Why does it have to be either/or? A good hitter can run out every ball, and become an even better hitter in the process.

Repeated for emphasis. It is really silly and dangerous to equate running out a ground ball to being a gritty Pete Rose type. This is pretty fundamental to the game, and as I said before shrugging at a failure to provide this simple effort lowers the standard of expectation for professional ballplayers.

To be clear, my interest in this argument is not to dun Upton specifically or pat Maddon on the back for sitting him. I agree with those who think Upton's response was not the best possible, but I also agree with Harvey's that it's likely the reply of an embarrassed young player looking to save face more than an indication that he didn't get the message.

To me, the message is the thing. I'm not looking to send every player headlong into Ray Fosse. I just don't want running out the bases on every at bat, this fundamental part of playing the game, to reach apathy level in the fanbase. Hearing somebody argue that not running saves energy is ridiculous -- what is the energy being saved for? Basketball players would save energy, and probably score more points, if they didn't run back to play defense. But what kind of game is that?

Phredbird and Harveys and Dobbs have stated my position better than I have. I just have these last things to add:

1. These are world class athletes. The 750 best baseball players in the world. These are not guys who should get winded climbing a flight of stairs. They should be held to the highest standards of performance. That's why we pay to see them play.

2. The rules of baseball have pretty much not changed at all in 100 years or so. The 162-game schedule has been around for coming up on 50 years. Athletes are better conditioned today than they have ever been. And the standard of running out every play has been around in the game forever. Why this should change now, why anybody thinks the game needs this change, is far beyond me.

3. I am not quite yet part of the "get off my lawn" set, so I can't speak for them. However, being a member of this set should not discount every observation they have as worn out and in need of change. As I get older, in fact, I am finding quite the opposite to be true. The broadcasters, former players, and posters here who are upholding tried-and-true behaviors are quite often doing so because their experience and extensive testing shows that they work better than the alternatives. Given that I've never, ever heard a former player argue the "energy conservation" position on ground balls I think says more than I can about its importance.

1. Which action does more harm to the Devil Rays chances - Upton failing to run out the ground ball, or replacing Upton with Zobrist in the lineup?

Short term, the latter, long term, maybe the former.

2. Look at what Upton said about it, including the pointed lack of any apology or suggestion that he'll run out the grounder next time. Do you think that Maddon's way of dealing with the matter has been successful?

The Rays could always trade him to the Dodgers.

I'm with Harveys et al. on this one. Upton is going on 24, he's a fast runner, a five-run lead is significantly better than a four-run lead, and dogging it in that situation has been the downfall of athletes ever since the tortoise raced the hare. Upton is slugging .390 this year. His core job description is "run to first base." It's pretty simple.

Running hard to first doesn't get you injured. Inproper training and insufficient medical attention do.

I agree with Harveys and co. It's just good baseball sense. If a fast major leaguer can only add some 10 points to his BA by running hard on every ball, it would mean quite a bit over a season and a career, not to mention the errors forced or double plays avoided. Moreover, that 10 points or so of BA is slump proof. A slumping Jose Reyes batting .250 is going to help the Mets more than a slumping Reyes batting .240.

World Series games have been affected by decisions to run out--or not run out--ground balls and fly balls out.

The most (in)famous example, the Denkinger play wouldn't happen without Orta running hard to first.

Mookie's speed might or might not have influenced the Buckner error.

I would argue that there are a lot more bases 'lost' with players pulling up after rounding first and COASTING into 2nd base on balls hit into the OF gaps

not to reverse fields, but i think the difference here is marginal. we have to remember that the players are doing several things: checking to see if the ball is being fielded, checking the 3rd base coach, and mentally checking the game situation. by getting to second, the player is already in scoring position. players are also urged repeatedly not to make the first out or the last out at third. so i think in the main, if a runner is coasting into second, he almost always has the endorsement of coaches and manager. we're still in a big offense era. baserunners have more expectation of being driven in from second than in the deadball days.

On the opposite end, one of the turning points of the '71 WS came in Game Three, when Clemente hit a ball back to Mike Cuellar. Clemente ran hard from the start, forcing Cuellar to hurry and make a bad throw to first base.

Something similar happened in the 1960 World Series in the eighth inning of Game 7. Clemente hit a chopper to Bill Skowron at first, which looked like an easy play - easy enough so that Jim Coates apparently took it for granted and didn't get off the mound to cover first. Clemente again ran hard every step of the way, and Skowron couldn't beat him to the base. Coates made a huge mistake, to be sure - but if Clemente hadn't been putting out the effort, Skowron very likely would have been able to make the play himself. The run that scored on that play brought the Pirates within one, and Hal Smith hit a three-run homer immediately afterward to put the Bucs in front.

-- MWE

I am not quite yet part of the "get off my lawn" set, so I can't speak for them. However, being a member of this set should not discount every observation they have as worn out and in need of change. As I get older, in fact, I am finding quite the opposite to be true. The broadcasters, former players, and posters here who are upholding tried-and-true behaviors are quite often doing so because their experience and extensive testing shows that they work better than the alternatives. Given that I've never, ever heard a former player argue the "energy conservation" position on ground balls I think says more than I can about its importance.

I think this gets at a lot of it. Each generation is a little mini-revolution. The current youngsters in baseball and baseball fandom are fighting back, more effectively than ever, against the notions of their predecessors. This is, in many ways, a GOOD THING. However, like every revolution there is a tendency to throw out everything the older generation valued. Playing Pete Rose style is, in many respects, needlessly stupid. But that doesn't mean that running hard to first base on ground balls to the infield is stupid. Just because playing the Rose did was stupid doesn't mean playing exactly the opposite of Rose is smart. Taking the opposite position as a matter of principle is not the thinking position but the lazy position.

There's a reason Roberto Clemente is beloved by a lot of people (a lot more than love BJ Upton, to be sure :), and it isn't his pedestrian-for-a-HOF-outfielder OPS+.

I am not quite yet part of the "get off my lawn" set, so I can't speak for them. However, being a member of this set should not discount every observation they have as worn out and in need of change. As I get older, in fact, I am finding quite the opposite to be true. The broadcasters, former players, and posters here who are upholding tried-and-true behaviors are quite often doing so because their experience and extensive testing shows that they work better than the alternatives. Given that I've never, ever heard a former player argue the "energy conservation" position on ground balls I think says more than I can about its importance.

It's the Burkean Theory of Baseball!

Totally. Pitchers should just lighten up and groove an 82 mph fastball when they are facing a mediocre hitter too. I mean, it PROBABLY won't turn into a run that will lead to a loss... right?

Well, this is a real change in baseball- 40 years ago IT WAS an optimal strategy for a pitcher to just groove the ball to a quite a few 7th, 8th and 9 hitters and conserve energy for the better hitters- one reason (among many) why SPs back then could pitch so many more IP

There's a reason Roberto Clemente is beloved by a lot of people

Oddly enough, Clemente while he was playing was regarded by a fair number of people as a "malingerer" because he had a habit of sitting out with what were reportedly "minor" (and in some people's minds, non-existent) injuries and illnesses.

-- MWE

I also think it's foolish for a fan to think that they know exactly how to manage athlete's bodies to the best competitive outcome.

As a general theoretical guideline, OK.

In this case . . . WHAAAA???

He hit a groundball. He's supposed to run those things out. [24 font with exploding fireworks]THIS IS SOMEHOW CONTROVERSIAL?[/24 font with exploding fireworks]

The debate here seems to be between: 1) players should hustle and go all out unless there's a good reason not to, vs. 2) you shouldn't critique a player when he doesn't go all out unless you can give a give reason why he ought to.

Take two teams with the same talent level, have one adopt the first course and the other the second, and the first team will win 20-40 more games in a season.

Edited to fix tag.

There is a line. Some players run out pop-ups even though 98-99% are converted into outs. Most players do not run out pop-ups fully, and nothing is said about it. Running out a grounder to short is a must because the out conversion rate is low enough that it makes a difference often enough. A routine grounder back to the mound, which the pitcher fields cleanly, falls between these two poles. Personally, if I was managing, I would prefer if batters ran out grounders from the outset rather than thinking about whether they are going to have the opportunity to let up if the pitcher fields it cleanly.

As for the people complaining about Upton being taken out of the lineup harming the team's chances ... he's not going to play every game the rest of the year, is he? He shouldn't; players should have days off. So while it may have hurt the Rays chances the next day (they won), it didn't necessarily have an impact on their chances to win the division, and if it inspires Upton may help them win a game later.

BJ Upton, batting average on ground balls: .257
AL average, batting average on ground balls: .238

Just look at all the hits he's costing his team! It's, like, -3 hits!

As someone else, posted, COME ON!

Here is something that may or may not mean anything: AL batters reach on error on 2.5% of groundballs. (Unfortunately, I don't have the platoon split on that.) Tampa Bay batters reach on error on 2.7% of groundballs.

BJ Upton has not reached on an error on a groundball one time this season.

Last year he was at 2.8%. But it is odd that he hasn't this year, whether or not his effort is a contributing factor.

A routine grounder back to the mound, which the pitcher fields cleanly, falls between these two poles.

Barely. Pitchers convert those to outs over 97% of the time.

Also, someone above said that the ball actually took the pitcher away from the mound. If true, that's not a standard comebacker.

an unremitting emphasis on playing hard can make the difference between being on a crummy mlb team and a good mlb team, as in the case of the cardinals ...

Late to the party. I was dogging it.

No doubt LaRussa and Co deserve a lot of credit this year for their attitude and performance. But this is over-the-top fanboyism. I saw the play; Upton should have run it out.