Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, April 10, 2014

PHOTOS: Is Michael Pineda using pine tar to shut down Red Sox?

zzz

So, as you read this, Yankees right-hander Michael Pineda is dominating the visiting Red Sox in a big way. However, is he doing so with pine tar illegally smeared all over his pitching hand? Check out the visual evidence from Thursday night’s game ...

Thanks to Wormeye.

Repoz Posted: April 10, 2014 at 09:03 PM | 91 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: red sox, yankees

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. Koot Posted: April 10, 2014 at 09:13 PM (#4684182)
They're talking about this on YES now. Michael Kay has managed to, over about three minutes, go from talking about a substance on Pineda's hand to the Red Sox being a bunch of cheaters. Especially Clay Buchholz.
   2. RMc is a fine piece of cheese Posted: April 10, 2014 at 09:16 PM (#4684183)
Burn the witch! BURN HIM!
   3. Depressoteric feels Royally blue these days Posted: April 10, 2014 at 09:20 PM (#4684189)
Sure looks like pine tar to me. But hey -- if people were willing to let Clay Buchholz get away with similarly obvious cheating last year, then I can hardly get too excited about this.
   4. Randomly Fluctuating Defensive Metric Posted: April 10, 2014 at 09:25 PM (#4684193)
Got to love the headline. Did the high nineties fastball and impeccable command have anything to do with the performance?
   5. The Yankee Clapper Posted: April 10, 2014 at 09:25 PM (#4684194)
Looks like Pineda has washed his hand. Still doing OK. Wonder if someone saw the report and alerted the dugout. For all the "controversy", pine tar seems to be routinely used, at least in cold weather.
   6. Mayor Blomberg Posted: April 10, 2014 at 09:37 PM (#4684199)
Pineda's a cheater; Buchholz is a gritty white guy. that's a significant difference.
   7. Nasty Nate Posted: April 10, 2014 at 10:07 PM (#4684205)
Given the buccholz stuff, I hope the red sox make no comment about this.

Pineda's a cheater; Buchholz is a gritty white guy. that's a significant difference.


Why not wait until they are treated differently before complaining that they are treated differently?
   8. the Hugh Jorgan returns Posted: April 10, 2014 at 10:12 PM (#4684207)
Pineda's a cheater; Buchholz is a gritty white guy. that's a significant difference.


Hey, don't bring race into it. We all know Pineda's a cheater because he plays for NY, let's get our facts straight. Red Sock guys never cheat..
   9. Mayor Blomberg Posted: April 10, 2014 at 10:14 PM (#4684208)
let's get our facts straight. Red Sock guys never cheat..

Good point, mate!
   10. Darren Posted: April 10, 2014 at 10:17 PM (#4684210)
That's a big wad of gunk.

   11. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: April 10, 2014 at 10:24 PM (#4684211)
Pineda is suffering from a tragic medical condition known as ickyotrophic manual smudgosis, or Kenny Rogers Disease.
   12. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: April 10, 2014 at 10:29 PM (#4684215)
I thought Pineda looked good though I didn't see "high 90s." The gun on NESN had him 92-94 pretty consistently and I don't remember anything over 95. But he was very good.
   13. Bug Selig Posted: April 10, 2014 at 10:31 PM (#4684216)
Jesus, Michael - did you have to take the whole bucket? I wonder if he was ever able to let go of his hat?
   14. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: April 10, 2014 at 10:47 PM (#4684222)
I thought Pineda looked good though I didn't see "high 90s." The gun on NESN had him 92-94 pretty consistently and I don't remember anything over 95. But he was very good.


Yeah, nothing close to "high 90s", but he's been very impressive the 1st two starts. Fingers crossed he can stay healthy for a while this time.
   15. Weekly Journalist_ Posted: April 10, 2014 at 10:52 PM (#4684227)
it turns out selling high on Montero was a brilliant move on Cashman's part.
   16. Randomly Fluctuating Defensive Metric Posted: April 10, 2014 at 10:55 PM (#4684228)
Mid-nineties, fine. Either way, if pine tar made that happen, I'd pour it on my pancakes.
   17. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: April 11, 2014 at 12:01 AM (#4684247)
Pineda's a cheater; Buchholz is a gritty white guy. that's a significant difference.


No, Clay Buchholz is Theon Greyjoy and we all just feel sorry for him getting his dick lopped off.
   18. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: April 11, 2014 at 12:36 AM (#4684249)
Funny, I completely just noticed that resemblance while watching the game tonight, he really does, especially when he had the scraggle last year ...
   19. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: April 11, 2014 at 12:52 AM (#4684251)
Buchholz should have pulled the "sticky substance" pine tar defense years ago. "Your Honor, I had absolutely no intention of taking those laptops, but..."
   20. DFA Posted: April 11, 2014 at 01:28 AM (#4684253)
Not a flattering picture of Pineda…

I wonder how common it is for pitchers to use pine tar. I assume there is a reason why the Red Sox aren't protesting, beyond hypocrisy.
   21. Bug Selig Posted: April 11, 2014 at 07:15 AM (#4684278)
No, Clay Buchholz is Theon Greyjoy and we all just feel sorry for him getting his dick lopped off.


For me, I definitely see the Theon resemblance, but he reminds me of the wierd bayou cult types from True Detective or WWE.
   22. Steve Balboni's Personal Trainer Posted: April 11, 2014 at 07:41 AM (#4684283)
Maybe Jesus Montero should start using pine tar...
   23. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: April 11, 2014 at 07:42 AM (#4684284)
Clay wasn't stealing those laptops, he was paying the Iron Price. He's the Grand Reaver of Dork.
   24. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: April 11, 2014 at 07:46 AM (#4684287)
BTW PicthFX had Pineda hitting 97MPH once and 96 MPH a few times as well. Here.. I'm excited that he's been able to pitch effectively this early in the season and hope he continues to improve as he rebuilds arm strength.
   25. Jeff R., P***y Mainlander Posted: April 11, 2014 at 08:51 AM (#4684301)
it turns out selling high on Montero was a brilliant move on Cashman's part.


It absolutely was. I could never figure out why he was rated so high. His career line in AAA is .283/.345/.485, which is okay. And that's at ages 20-21, so it's not like he was ridiculously young for his league.
   26. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: April 11, 2014 at 08:56 AM (#4684305)
20 and 21 is pretty damn young for AAA ball.

My opinion is that the Yankees ###### Montero up by insisting he continue catching after it was clear he was not going to be a major league catcher. And the Mariners have kept right along with it, but then, the Mariners are a bad organization so this is not shocking.
   27. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: April 11, 2014 at 09:00 AM (#4684308)
My opinion is that the Yankees ###### Montero up by insisting he continue catching after it was clear he was not going to be a major league catcher.


I can't see how that could possibly scuttle a 21 year-old player's career. He hit pretty well when the Yankees called him up in 2011. Seattle is a tough place to hit and he never got comfortable there, a change of scenery would likely do him well.
   28. Best Regards, President of Comfort, Esq. Posted: April 11, 2014 at 09:01 AM (#4684310)
I could never figure out why he was rated so high.


He regressed in his second AAA year, but his first year, at age 20 (which is quite young for AAA), he hit .289/.353/.517 with 21 home runs. And at 18 & 19 he hit .330/.381/.519. And he was a catcher.

If that's not a top prospect, then there are no prospects. The guy looked like the next Carlos Delgado.
   29. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 11, 2014 at 09:02 AM (#4684311)
My opinion is that the Yankees ###### Montero up by insisting he continue catching after it was clear he was not going to be a major league catcher. And the Mariners have kept right along with it, but then, the Mariners are a bad organization so this is not shocking.

That's a silly criticism.

His bat didn't project to be anything special as a mediocre defensive LF or 1B. If you think a guy is tops a 120 OPS+ MLB bat, you try as long as possible to keep him at C.

If they had moved Jorge Posada to 1B, you turn a HoVG/borderline HOF career into a average one.
   30. Best Regards, President of Comfort, Esq. Posted: April 11, 2014 at 09:04 AM (#4684313)
Montero *was* one of the Biogenesis suspendees, so there's also the possibility that what we saw wasn't his natural talent level.
   31. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: April 11, 2014 at 09:11 AM (#4684317)
Given the buccholz stuff, I hope the red sox make no comment about this.


All the Red Sox that were asked about it after the game said pitchers using sticky stuff to maintain their grip was not cheating, and actually was preferable to the pitcher not knowing where the ball was going. The Sox players defended Pineda more than Girardi who just dismissed it.
   32. AROM Posted: April 11, 2014 at 09:18 AM (#4684324)
It absolutely was. I could never figure out why he was rated so high. His career line in AAA is .283/.345/.485, which is okay. And that's at ages 20-21, so it's not like he was ridiculously young for his league.


He was the youngest player in his league during his age 20 season. The next year, he was the second youngest among those who had at least 100 AB, after Jose Iglesias.
   33. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: April 11, 2014 at 09:35 AM (#4684331)
The Yankees have definitely gotten the best of that Montero trade at this early point.
   34. McCoy Posted: April 11, 2014 at 09:36 AM (#4684332)
If Jorge had been a first baseman or LF'er he likely continutes to be a HOVG player though he may never be considered a borderline hall of famer. There is no way a Jorge Posada that can play a full season without banged up knees, jammed fingers, and a sore back hits only as well as he did as a catcher. At the very least he'd be a Bobby Abreu without the stolen bases.
   35. Best Regards, President of Comfort, Esq. Posted: April 11, 2014 at 09:42 AM (#4684336)
The Yankees have definitely gotten the best of that Montero trade at this early point.


On the other hand, he's still only 24. So he does actually have time to put it back together and be a star player. So the book isn't closed yet.
   36. Nasty Nate Posted: April 11, 2014 at 10:16 AM (#4684374)
All the Red Sox that were asked about it after the game said pitchers using sticky stuff to maintain their grip was not cheating, and actually was preferable to the pitcher not knowing where the ball was going. The Sox players defended Pineda more than Girardi who just dismissed it.


That's a relief. I sort of expected Lucchino to make some boneheaded snide public statement about it.
   37. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: April 11, 2014 at 10:42 AM (#4684402)
The Yankees have definitely gotten the best of that Montero trade at this early point.

On the other hand, he's still only 24. So he does actually have time to put it back together and be a star player. So the book isn't closed yet.


Yeah I just think Seattle was a bad fit for him for a few reasons. I wouldn't be the least bit opposed to bringing him back to the Yankees even though there's really nowhere for him to play, I think the talent to hit well at the major league level is still there.
   38. A triple short of the cycle Posted: April 11, 2014 at 11:01 AM (#4684419)
Daric Barton was a catching prospect but such a gifted hitter that the A's asked him to give up catching and focus on hitting. Billy Beane described his bat as "too valuable" to keep him at catcher. So you never know.
   39. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: April 11, 2014 at 11:02 AM (#4684420)
That's a relief. I sort of expected Lucchino to make some boneheaded snide public statement about it.


Give Larry time, he'll get there.

I thought Orsillo and Remy handled it pretty well on the broadcast. They noted it and even took it to the level of saying it was illegal and cheating but didn't drone on and on about it. They mentioned it, then noted it had been wiped off and carried on. They were more laughing about it than treating it as a big deal.
   40. Avoid running at all times.-S. Paige Posted: April 11, 2014 at 11:52 AM (#4684474)
His bat didn't project to be anything special as a mediocre defensive LF or 1B. If you think a guy is tops a 120 OPS+ MLB bat, you try as long as possible to keep him at C.


I was never a huge Montero fan, but this doesn't match my memory. I thought he was ranked so highly on prospect lists because of and only because his bat. He had an 80 grade on the scale, and there were even whispers of a Miguel Cabrera comp.

I wouldn't be the least bit opposed to bringing him back to the Yankees even though there's really nowhere for him to play, I think the talent to hit well at the major league level is still there.


The corpse of Mark Teixeira is currently at first base (when he is able to play). Why not see if Montero can give it a shot at first?
   41. Best Regards, President of Comfort, Esq. Posted: April 11, 2014 at 11:53 AM (#4684475)
Daric Barton was a catching prospect but such a gifted hitter that the A's asked him to give up catching and focus on hitting. Billy Beane described his bat as "too valuable" to keep him at catcher. So you never know.


Catchers take such a beating on their hands that it does hurt their offense, and having to focus so much on their defense and the rapport with pitchers takes away from time to develop their hitting, so I can see that.

The problem with Montero is that the Yankees had Teixeira locked up at 1B, and A-Rod locked up to probably move to DH or 1B when he couldn't handle 3B anymore, so there wasn't an obvious place to put Montero without blocking him.

I think that, considering what was expected of his bat, he could have been an All Star first baseman had he developed all the way. His minor league numbers were definitely reminiscent of Carlos Delgado.
   42. Best Regards, President of Comfort, Esq. Posted: April 11, 2014 at 11:55 AM (#4684476)
I think that if players are all okay with pitchers using stuff for grip, then just change the rules. Allow players to use pine tar or sunscreen or whatever to get a better grip, so long as they apply it to the fingers, and not directly to the ball (where a glob of pine tar on the side can add an unnatural break to the pitch).
   43. Buck Coats Posted: April 11, 2014 at 03:20 PM (#4684601)
On the other hand, if we want to reduce strikeouts, maybe a stricter application of the "no foreign substances" rule would make sense
   44. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: April 11, 2014 at 03:33 PM (#4684613)
The rules already prohibit applying anything directly to the ball, including rosin. And I suspect that hitters would be objecting if pitchers were loading up the ball with pinetar instead of just putting a little on their fingertips.
   45. hee came hee seop'd he choi'd Posted: April 11, 2014 at 06:43 PM (#4684791)
Mattingly was on Dan Patrick this morning and when he was asked about Pineda his response was basically 'if we complain about this guy, then theyre going to go after all my guys who all use something every now and again for 'grip''

so yeah, everyone does it, nobody cares.
   46. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 11, 2014 at 09:01 PM (#4684859)
Mattingly was on Dan Patrick this morning and when he was asked about Pineda his response was basically 'if we complain about this guy, then theyre going to go after all my guys who all use something every now and again for 'grip''

so yeah, everyone does it, nobody cares.


And there, ladies and gentlemen, is yet another case of the unwritten consensus within the game coming to a common sense conclusion.
   47. Morty Causa Posted: April 11, 2014 at 10:52 PM (#4684881)
Should someone have to complain before anything is done?
   48. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 11, 2014 at 10:57 PM (#4684883)
What's the alternative, if the umpires didn't notice it? Do we really want one team's announcers playing Benghazi on an action that their own team didn't even think was worth mentioning? Do we now need a hot line from interested parties to the umpires' booth?
   49. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: April 12, 2014 at 01:30 AM (#4684931)
Mattingly was on Dan Patrick this morning and when he was asked about Pineda his response was basically 'if we complain about this guy, then theyre going to go after all my guys who all use something every now and again for 'grip''

so yeah, everyone does it, nobody cares.


And there, ladies and gentlemen, is yet another case of the unwritten consensus within the game coming to a common sense conclusion.



It's happening again. Which is why any Baseball Hall of Fame voter of conscience should refuse to support ANY player of this, the Stickum Era.
   50. if nature called, ladodger34 would listen Posted: April 12, 2014 at 02:38 AM (#4684944)
I think that if players are all okay with pitchers using stuff for grip, then just change the rules. Allow players to use pine tar or sunscreen or whatever to get a better grip, so long as they apply it to the fingers, and not directly to the ball (where a glob of pine tar on the side can add an unnatural break to the pitch).


Or just put a pine tar rag on the mound. It seems like most hitters don't actually care if a pitcher is using pine tar so let it be out in the open.
   51. Walt Davis Posted: April 12, 2014 at 02:54 AM (#4684947)
Catchers take such a beating on their hands that it does hurt their offense, and having to focus so much on their defense and the rapport with pitchers takes away from time to develop their hitting, so I can see that.

I do think/suspect that moving a guy away from C early can help the development of his bat. But there's little evidence that, after a few ML seasons, it makes any difference in the quality of their hitting. It can of course have an impact on playing time.

The only example that springs to mind is Biggio who did spend 3+ ML seasons at C and didn't shift to 2B until he was 26. Even in that case it's hard to say for sure whether the improved offense was due to the switch or just a good hitter entering his prime -- i.e. his age 26 season looks just like his age 23 and 25 seasons; it wasn't until adding power at 27 that he became a better hitter.

But, yes, I suspect neither Delgado nor Murphy would have developed as well as hitters if not moved away from C early. Both were essentially moved off C at 22.
   52. Rob_Wood Posted: April 12, 2014 at 03:16 AM (#4684949)

resin helps in warm weather, pine tar (or something tacky) helps in cool weather
   53. Morty Causa Posted: April 12, 2014 at 10:15 AM (#4684997)
48:

There's a picture in the paper/video. Why isn't that sufficient to initiate disciplinary action?
   54. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 12, 2014 at 10:43 AM (#4685006)
There's a picture in the paper/video. Why isn't that sufficient to initiate disciplinary action?

Because nobody outside the Red Sox broadcasters' booth and a few scattered fans in RSN seems to think that it's worthy of disciplining. Maybe Remy and Orsillo can make a citizen's arrest of Pineda if they're really all that hot and bothered about it.
   55. Greg Pope thinks the Cubs are reeking havoc Posted: April 12, 2014 at 11:01 AM (#4685011)
The only example that springs to mind is Biggio who did spend 3+ ML seasons at C and didn't shift to 2B until he was 26.

Todd Zeile's kind of a tweener by this definition. Moved full time off of catcher at 25, but partially during age 24 season.
   56. Morty Causa Posted: April 12, 2014 at 11:21 AM (#4685017)
54:

Wait a minute. Is what Pineda did against the rules or not? Is that picture evidence he broke the rules or not? Since when is a complaint necessary to enforce an obvious infraction? Or at least initiate action into looking into it?

   57. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 12, 2014 at 11:44 AM (#4685020)
Wait a minute. Is what Pineda did against the rules or not? Is that picture evidence he broke the rules or not? Since when is a complaint necessary to enforce an obvious infraction? Or at least initiate action into looking into it?

Wait a minute yourself. If you seriously want to have team broadcasters and other interested parties (cellphone camera owners) flooding the umpires' booth and commissioner's offices with evidence of rules violations, why shouldn't they also be encouraged to send in videos of pitchers who exceed the stated time allowed between pitches, or other violations that nobody else cares about? Jesus, talk about wanting to make a mountain out of a molehill.
   58. Morty Causa Posted: April 12, 2014 at 01:06 PM (#4685042)
Well, let's just say I'm more impressed. It isn't just anyone calling in with any accusation. This is hard evidence of a blatant violation. If this can't be acted upon, then why have the rule at all? Now, if you think there shouldn't be a foreign substance prohibition, fine. Get that law passed. You seem to think that the easier it would be to record infractions, the more they should be discounted. Is this how you feel about law in general--that reports and snitchers should be ignored?
   59. The Yankee Clapper Posted: April 12, 2014 at 01:28 PM (#4685049)
Wait a minute. Is what Pineda did against the rules or not? Is that picture evidence he broke the rules or not? Since when is a complaint necessary to enforce an obvious infraction? Or at least initiate action into looking into it?

This is hardly the first time that such photos or videos have surfaced, and no pitcher has been disciplined solely based on photographic evidence, IIRC. So it seems a little late to start now.
   60. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 12, 2014 at 01:32 PM (#4685052)
Well, let's just say I'm more impressed. It isn't just anyone calling in with any accusation. This is hard evidence of a blatant violation.

Morty, this isn't a whistleblower risking his job to report a suppressed safety violation in an automobile plant, or outing a factory farm dumping waste products in a river. It's two baseball announcers complaining about a minor violation that their own team doesn't even care about. Jesus, talk about being more Catholic than the Pope.

If this can't be acted upon, then why have the rule at all? Now, if you think there shouldn't be a foreign substance prohibition, fine. Get that law passed. You seem to think that the easier it would be to record infractions, the more they should be discounted. Is this how you feel about law in general--that reports and snitchers should be ignored?

Among many cities, Baltimore has a law against cursing inside the city limits. In South Carolina, you have to be 18 to play a pinball machine. In Los Angeles, you need a lifeguard's permission to throw a frisbee on a beach.

And so on. How many of these laws do you think we're required either to enforce or remove? Is "prosecutorial discretion" a concept you're not familiar with?
   61. Morty Causa Posted: April 12, 2014 at 01:51 PM (#4685063)
Well, I'm not an announcer, and I care. There are others like me, I believe. Moreover, the basis for the rule isn't trivial. And I'd care if there were, say, evidence of a pitcher intentionally throwing at a batter. And there are rules about all of that. If they don't mean anything, then why have them It becomes an incoherent cluster #### if rules are arbitrarily enforced as well as unclearly defined? But, of course, they do mean something. And players are called, perhaps not publicly, on it, as they should be.

Yes, the police don't catch every one that runs a red light, but when a driver is caught redhanded, does he get to argue no one cares, it doesn't matter to anyone except some bean counter. Sometimes the police might even catch someone and just give him a warning, or maybe not even stop him (the cops in a hurry, the fish are biting at Dunkin Donuts). But if that becomes an unwritten rules, what do think happens to respect for the rule and the basis of the justification for the rule when it is enforced insconsistently?
   62. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 12, 2014 at 02:09 PM (#4685069)
Among many cities, Baltimore has a law against cursing inside the city limits. In South Carolina, you have to be 18 to play a pinball machine. In Los Angeles, you need a lifeguard's permission to throw a frisbee on a beach.

And so on. How many of these laws do you think we're required either to enforce or remove? Is "prosecutorial discretion" a concept you're not familiar with?


I notice you don't respond directly to those examples. I'm sure that if prosecutors made it known that they were going to start enforcing every law in the book, you'd find plenty of third parties willing to "report" cursers or pinball players or frisbee throwers.

Look, if you really care that much about making a mountain out of a molehill, then perhaps you should take time off from work and/or internet commenting. and confront Bud and Joe with one of Bob Dole's "WHERE'S THE OUTRAGE?" banners. Because what Pineda did obviously was an outrage that's at least on Whitewater levels.


   63. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 12, 2014 at 02:11 PM (#4685071)
Yes, the police don't catch every one that runs a red light, but when a driver is caught redhanded, does he get to argue no one cares, it doesn't matter to anyone except some bean counter. Sometimes the police might even catch someone and just give him a warning, or maybe not even stop him (the cops in a hurry, the fish are biting at Dunkin Donuts).

So what Pineda did is the equivalent of running a red light. Got it.
   64. Monty Posted: April 12, 2014 at 02:20 PM (#4685075)
Seems more like exceeding the speed limit.
   65. Sunday silence Posted: April 12, 2014 at 02:37 PM (#4685080)
isnt Andy the one that has been complaining that they should be enforcing balls and strikes scrupulously? I'm sure there's an explanation here.
   66. Morty Causa Posted: April 12, 2014 at 02:46 PM (#4685086)
He understands what's at stake if it involves his Gollum-like preciouses. It's other people's views and values that can be trivialized.

You know, really, I could have used any number of comparisons besides red lights. I simply thought that could be easily understood in the context of making light of rules to the point where it becomes easy to justify not following them. I think baseball history is replete with examples of that happening.
   67. Sunday silence Posted: April 12, 2014 at 02:51 PM (#4685087)
the other part that is not being mentioned is that MLB has already issued some sort of official statement through Joe Torre. He says they cant enforce whatever happened because the umpires didnt see it but that they would speak to the Yankees about it.

Reality is that pine tar and stuff like that seems to have it's own set of unwritten rules about them.
   68. Morty Causa Posted: April 12, 2014 at 03:16 PM (#4685096)
Yes, the upshot will be: don't cheat, but if you do, do it better. And everyone will laugh and crack another Budweiser.
   69. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 12, 2014 at 03:21 PM (#4685097)
isnt Andy the one that has been complaining that they should be enforcing balls and strikes scrupulously? I'm sure there's an explanation here.

To the contrary, I'm perfectly fine with the pre-replay state of umpiring. And personalized strike zones are a part of that package.

But if BASEBALL wants to see that calls are made "right", it makes little sense to go after only 5% of the bad calls, while ignoring the other 95%. Especially since the game delays involving the 5% are far more time consuming than the non-existent game delays that would involve correcting ball and strike calls.

------------------------------------------

He understands what's at stake if it involves his Gollum-like preciouses. It's other people's views and values that can be trivialized.

Except that it's you who seem to be trivializing the views of the one group---the Red Sox---who actually have some skin in the game. I'd be taking their demands for rule enforcement seriously, if only they'd expressed them. Maybe you can work on that.
   70. Morty Causa Posted: April 12, 2014 at 04:07 PM (#4685108)
No. The game is most definitely not just about the contestants. It's not ultimately about that at all. It’s a business whose product is being sold to buyers. Indeed, that’s the point of the enterprise: it's for the consumers, and rules have been passed to assure the consumers of the integrity of the product being purveyed to them. And of course it can't be left to the competitors--one side or other. They are too self-interested. All sides will cheat if they can--and that can be encouraged or discouraged. Relying on sandlot rules is not a way to insure a good product. Or, for that matter, decide a competition. That's threshold elemental.

If you don't have rules that apply fairly and equally, you don't have anything, and your product will cease to be prized. And that's why you have to have impartial third-party deciders. That's why those judges, and the processes, are deferred to for the most part, even respected and revered. Again, we have instances of this in baseball history.
   71. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 12, 2014 at 04:47 PM (#4685117)
No. The game is most definitely not just about the contestants. It's not ultimately about that at all. It’s a business whose product is being sold to buyers. Indeed, that’s the point of the enterprise: it's for the consumers, and rules have been passed to assure the consumers of the integrity of the product being purveyed to them.

And who besides you and a handful of people---principally two Red Sox announcers in this case---have lost faith in the "integrity of the product" as a result of the Pineda incident? Even the BTF contingent of Red Sox Nation doesn't seem all that much worked up.

I only wonder how baseball has managed to survive all these years without the strict enforcement of Rule Rule 8.02 (a)(4). But maybe this is just one more piece of evidence of a society in decline.
   72. Chip Posted: April 12, 2014 at 06:17 PM (#4685139)
And who besides you and a handful of people---principally two Red Sox announcers in this case---have lost faith in the "integrity of the product" as a result of the Pineda incident? Even the BTF contingent of Red Sox Nation doesn't seem all that much worked up.


Did Remy or Orsillo ever say anything about losing faith in the integrity of the product?
   73. Sunday silence Posted: April 12, 2014 at 06:23 PM (#4685142)
But if BASEBALL wants to see that calls are made "right", it makes little sense to go after only 5% of the bad calls, while ignoring the other 95%. Especially since the game delays involving the 5% are far more time consuming than the non-existent game delays that would involve correcting ball and strike calls.


I dont get it you just called out Marty for arguing for a rigid standard. ANd then to buttress this, you tell us that somethings do not rise to the level of importance. You yourself used the argument that's not as important as running a red light and that's not a whistleblower in a workplace.

Isnt it hypocritical to turn around then say that baseball must be rigid and attempt perfection when you yourself allow for that?
   74. Sunday silence Posted: April 12, 2014 at 06:27 PM (#4685144)

If you don't have rules that apply fairly and equally, you don't have anything,


It can be argued that if both teams as well as both pitchers/hitters are OK with not enforcing it, then indeed it is fair and equal.
   75. Sunday silence Posted: April 12, 2014 at 06:29 PM (#4685147)

I only wonder how baseball has managed to survive all these years without the strict enforcement of Rule Rule 8.02 (a)(4).


the same way it will survive instant replay without replaying all the ball and strike calls. somehow it will.
   76. Sunday silence Posted: April 12, 2014 at 06:35 PM (#4685149)

If you don't have rules that apply fairly and equally, you don't have anything, and your product will cease to be prized. And that's why you have to have impartial third-party deciders
y

we have that. Baseball has umpires, it has a Comm'r; some sort of Rules Committee, some sort Joe Torre VP of whatever.

What exactly are you arguing for? you want uniform enforcement? OK. That's not the same as saying we dont have impartial umps.

We have an official MLB spokeman, Torre, saying the umps didnt see it; we cant go back and call penalties on that game. The third party has spoken.
   77. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 12, 2014 at 06:52 PM (#4685153)
And who besides you and a handful of people---principally two Red Sox announcers in this case---have lost faith in the "integrity of the product" as a result of the Pineda incident? Even the BTF contingent of Red Sox Nation doesn't seem all that much worked up.

Did Remy or Orsillo ever say anything about losing faith in the integrity of the product?


Well, if even they didn't, then that leaves Morty's position even further out on a limb.

----------------------------------------------

To the contrary, I'm perfectly fine with the pre-replay state of umpiring. And personalized strike zones are a part of that package.

But if BASEBALL wants to see that calls are made "right", it makes little sense to go after only 5% of the bad calls, while ignoring the other 95%. Especially since the game delays involving the 5% are far more time consuming than the non-existent game delays that would involve correcting ball and strike calls.


I dont get it you just called out Marty for arguing for a rigid standard. ANd then to buttress this, you tell us that somethings do not rise to the level of importance. You yourself used the argument that's not as important as running a red light and that's not a whistleblower in a workplace.

Isnt it hypocritical to turn around then say that baseball must be rigid and attempt perfection when you yourself allow for that?


I guess for whatever reason you skipped over the first paragraph above. But it's a strange sort of logic that demands perfection for 5% of blown calls, and then shrugs off the other 95%, especially when it'd be much easier to correct the 95% than it is to correct the 5%.

And no, none of this inconsistency affects my view on "the integrity of the game".

   78. Sunday silence Posted: April 12, 2014 at 07:28 PM (#4685166)
I didnt ask what your view on integrity was, my concern was your logic was inconsistent.

on on hand you tell Marty that no one really cares about enforcing this pine tar stuff, and its no big deal. Maybe the reasoning ball and strikes is its not a big deal and no one really cares about it? I mean obviously they care about balls/strikes but no one cares about being 100% accurate on ball/strikes.

You dont see a contradiction in your reasoning here?

And Im not sure what para. you are referring to, assuming its the one about you are OK with the replay system. OK so you're OK with it, then what's the pt about your 95% comment? do you stand by the comment or not? It seems like it stands on its own regardless of whether you're ok with replay.
   79. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 12, 2014 at 08:47 PM (#4685182)
And Im not sure what para. you are referring to, assuming its the one about you are OK with the replay system. OK so you're OK with it, then what's the pt about your 95% comment? do you stand by the comment or not? It seems like it stands on its own regardless of whether you're ok with replay.

I'm referring to the following paragraph. I'm not sure how or why you're reading it as being "OK with the replay system":

To the contrary, I'm perfectly fine with the pre-replay state of umpiring. And personalized strike zones are a part of that package.


And for what must be the 50th time, my preferences would be in this order. Agree or disagree with it, but at least know what you're arguing or agreeing with:

1. No replays at all. Period.

2. Robo-controlled umps for the 95% of existing incorrect calls, no replay for the other 5%.**

3. Robo-controlled umps for the 95% of existing incorrect calls, plus the current replay system for the other 5%.

4. The current system of ignoring the 95% while obsessing over the 5%.

**Two replays in tonight's Nats and O's games took a combined nine minutes. Games drag on way too much as it is, and this is overkill.

   80. Morty Causa Posted: April 12, 2014 at 10:28 PM (#4685205)
We don't have a referendum whenever someone breaks a law or a rule. The only reason I can think for you insisting on one is because that is all you got. There's a rule; it was broken. What is it about this that keeps your ethical gatekeeper asleep on the job? What's next--arguing that no one but haters care about Pete Rose betting on baseball, so let him back in and put him in the HOF?
   81. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 12, 2014 at 10:44 PM (#4685210)
We don't have a referendum whenever someone breaks a law or a rule.

In the case of baseball, we have umpires. If the umpires ignore a silly rule, and nobody complains, that's all she wrote. If you think that every rule in baseball gets uniformly enforced, you're living in a dream world, and if you WANT every rule in baseball to be uniformly enforced, you're proposing a world that few baseball fans would want to live in, once they saw such a world in action.

So what's next? Should we go back to 1983 and reverse George Brett's pine tar home run? At least in that case, it was the Yankees' manager who called attention to the technical rule violation, and not Frank Messer, Bill White, and Phil Rizzuto. That's more than you can say about the Pineda non-call.

The only reason I can think for you insisting on one is because that is all you got. There's a rule; it was broken.

And so are many other rules that get overlooked for reasons of common sense and a desire not to slow down the game even more than it already is. Thank God you're not the ####### Commissioner, or the games would be running 5 hours.
   82. Morty Causa Posted: April 12, 2014 at 10:57 PM (#4685219)
Why does it matter who reported the rule broken? Should that rule be enforced? Should whoever broke that rule be called to task? Have you answered those questions yet?

The Brett Pine Tar incident is really grasping for straws. A claim was made that a rule was broken. The ultimate ruling was that the penalty exacted was uncalled for. How is this relevant to Pineda? What are you--channeling the dearly departed RDP and see how far you can quibble this?
   83. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 13, 2014 at 07:50 AM (#4685295)
Why does it matter who reported the rule broken? Should that rule be enforced?

Yes---at the umpire's discretion, as it has been ever since the rule was established.

The Brett Pine Tar incident is really grasping for straws. A claim was made that a rule was broken. The ultimate ruling was that the penalty exacted was uncalled for. How is this relevant to Pineda?

It's relevant in that in this case the umpires got it right in the first place, but in both cases common sense ruled. And though it was determined that Brett "broke the rule", you'll note that he received no penalty for doing so, just as Pineda will receive no penalty for breaking the rule in this case.

What are you--channeling the dearly departed RDP and see how far you can quibble this?

IIRC it was usually Ray who used to claim that only his interpretation of an incident** mattered. That seems to be the pattern that you're following, since everyone from the umpires to the Red Sox agrees with mine.

OTOH you've got the Red Sox announcing crew in your corner. Go for it!

**In this case, it's your interpretation of a rule vs the rest of the world's. I hope that island you're sitting on has a good supply of coconuts and bananas.
   84. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: April 13, 2014 at 09:17 AM (#4685311)
so yeah, everyone does it, nobody cares.

And there, ladies and gentlemen, is yet another case of the unwritten consensus within the game coming to a common sense conclusion.


Who revived an old steroids thread? And why did the shirts and skins switch sides?
   85. Morty Causa Posted: April 13, 2014 at 02:59 PM (#4685465)
I think you're complicating a pretty straight-forward proposition. It is illegal to doctor the ball.

Is that a good rule or not? Chacun à son goût, but it is official statutory baseball law. If you think it shouldn't be law, then you and yours have your remedy. Ignoring it is not one of your remedies, though. Or, it shouldn't be.

Maybe you think it's no big deal. I disagree, and to more than a little extent, but I agree a first offense certainly isn't a capital crime, and doesn't call for drastic action. Just as the initial decision to nullify the Brett homer in the pine tar incident was an overreach, so would be say, forfeiting the game here. (BTW, you misrepresent that ultimate decision and the reasons for it, I think.) But it does call for action. Maybe a reprimand and a fine, with a warning of heavier penalty if Pineda does it again.

Just as it is irrelevant who reports it, for It isn't just about umpires. It's about stopping cheaters. This, since it's for a past action in a game already played, calls for league action. The point in re steroids in regard to this is well-taken--that was about cheating, too. Now, if everyone is doing it and no one really cares, then we have something like a folk law taking precedence over the formal rule. But I don't think that's the case here. We're not nearly at that point. As with runners of redlights, we certainly don't want summary execution by the roadside lawbreakers, but we do want it discouraged. That means punishment, starting with warnings and reprimands and fines. Running red lights is not good. Neither is doctoring the ball. And it doesn't matter who detects the crime--accomplices and snitches are unsavory characters; they are also often necessary and indispensable.
   86. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 13, 2014 at 03:35 PM (#4685498)
I think you're complicating a pretty straight-forward proposition.

Not really. The pretty straight-forward proposition is that the Red Sox didn't care, their manager didn't care, the umpires didn't care, and the league gave it a perfunctory brush-off.

Maybe you think it's no big deal. I disagree, and to more than a little extent, but I agree a first offense certainly isn't a capital crime, and doesn't call for drastic action. Just as the initial decision to nullify the Brett homer in the pine tar incident was an overreach, so would be say, forfeiting the game here. (BTW, you misrepresent that ultimate decision and the reasons for it, I think.) But it does call for action. Maybe a reprimand and a fine, with a warning of heavier penalty if Pineda does it again.

Here's MLB's reaction to that line of thinking:

MLB says Yankees pitcher Michael Pineda will not be suspended for ‘foreign substance’
Joe Torre, now MLB's VP of baseball operations, says: 'The umpires did not observe an application of a foreign substance during the game and the issue was not raised by the Red Sox.'


But by all means, keep up the good fight. Maybe you can get Ted Cruz to sign your petition.




   87. Morty Causa Posted: April 13, 2014 at 04:02 PM (#4685515)
I have no idea what that last sentence means.

That's a bad decision by Torre, at least on the ground given for the decision.

I don't insist that Pineda should be found guilty out of hand. I say it warrants the league looking into it. And I would bet Pineda got the message, maybe even a message from the powers that be.

If evidence after a game came out that someone in a centerfield hideout with binoculars was stealing signs, and no one during the game reported it to the umpire, would or should that be the end of it?

Like I say, I don't suggest that Pineda should be found "guilty" out of hand. I say it's evidence that should be considered, and if warranted is enough to lead to action. However, I accept Torre's verdict. I think it's wrong--it's sending a message about how to skate by the rules. It even encourages teams engage in collusion.
   88. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 13, 2014 at 04:22 PM (#4685531)
If evidence after a game came out that someone in a centerfield hideout with binoculars was stealing signs, and no one during the game reported it to the umpire, would or should that be the end of it?

The Red Sox didn't complain about Pineda after the game. They're not complaining now. End of story AFAIC.

In the case you cite, I seriously doubt that the opposing team wouldn't have lodged a protest, or that MLB wouldn't have taken it seriously. IOW your analogy fails at a critical point.

Like I say, I don't suggest that Pineda should be found "guilty" out of hand. I say it's evidence that should be considered, and if warranted is enough to lead to action.

I'll only note here that previously you wrote a more conclusive statement:

I agree a first offense certainly isn't a capital crime, and doesn't call for drastic action. Just as the initial decision to nullify the Brett homer in the pine tar incident was an overreach, so would be say, forfeiting the game here. (BTW, you misrepresent that ultimate decision and the reasons for it, I think.) But it does call for action. Maybe a reprimand and a fine, with a warning of heavier penalty if Pineda does it again.

But perhaps you just forgot to put the "if" in there.

However, I accept Torre's verdict. I think it's wrong--it's sending a message about how to skate by the rules. It even encourages teams engage in collusion.

I think the decision simply acknowledges that pitchers often use sticky substances to get a better grip on the ball in cold weather. Usually resin does the job, but as at least one pitcher noted in the aftermath, resin needs to mix with sweat to be effective, and Friday night's weather wasn't sweat-inducing.

And as more than one person said, it's unlikely that a hitter would want to face a pitcher with Pineda's speed and stuff if he didn't have a firm grip on the ball.

If you want to say "fine, then change the rule," I wouldn't necessarily disagree, but in the meantime I'd rather acknowledge reality than want to nitpick over what both teams (and all teams) agree is a trivial problem. As it stands at this point, your position is that of an ambulance chaser without a client.
   89. Morty Causa Posted: April 13, 2014 at 09:36 PM (#4685685)
Complaints must be made by interested parties--and authority can't act unless for the greater good if they aren't made by those parties. That is so stupid both in fact and as a matter of principle.

If there's a leash law, and a cop sees a dog running around the neighborhood loose, does he have to wait for a complaint from someone in the neighborhood before he gets animal control involved? If dog owner, seeing the cop, runs out and puts him a leash, does that mean the cop can't give him a warning? Can the authorities work to investigate and seek to apprehend any criminal without a complaint from someone?
   90. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 13, 2014 at 10:29 PM (#4685705)
Complaints [about matters as trivial as this] must be made by interested parties--and authority can't act unless for the greater good if they aren't made by those parties. That is so stupid both in fact and as a matter of principle. just a matter of common sense and baseball common law over the past umpteen years.

FIFY

An umpire who catches a pitcher in the act obviously can choose to enforce the rule, if he so wishes, and even if by doing so he knows he'll be opening a can of worms. Fortunately MLB's umpires seem to have more sense about this than you do.

If there's a leash law, and a cop sees a dog running around the neighborhood loose, does he have to wait for a complaint from someone in the neighborhood before he gets animal control involved? If dog owner, seeing the cop, runs out and puts him a leash, does that mean the cop can't give him a warning? Can the authorities work to investigate and seek to apprehend any criminal without a complaint from someone?

Most people might agree that there's a bit more of a common interest in not letting unsupervised dogs run around loose than there is in enforcing a rule that nobody but you and a handful of would-be baseball lawyers want to see enforced to the degree that you do.
   91. Morty Causa Posted: April 13, 2014 at 10:49 PM (#4685713)
FIFY

Oh, touche. [clap, clap]

Another who can't read, or won't address what is actually before. And then preens about his common sense in doing so.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
dirk
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP Politics November 2014: Mets Deny Bias in Ticket Official’s Firing
(5058 - 11:03pm, Nov 27)
Last: David Nieporent (now, with children)

NewsblogOT - November 2014 College Football thread
(589 - 10:58pm, Nov 27)
Last: Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams)

NewsblogShould the Red Sox Be Afraid of Hanley Ramirez Being Hanley Ramirez? - Red Sox - Boston.com
(34 - 10:52pm, Nov 27)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

NewsblogDave Cameron: A proposed three-way swap for Red Sox, Mariners, Nationals
(49 - 10:27pm, Nov 27)
Last: Joe Bivens, Minor Genius

NewsblogOT: NFL/NHL thread
(8716 - 9:49pm, Nov 27)
Last: Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams)

NewsblogOT:  Soccer (the Round, True Football), November 2014
(548 - 9:45pm, Nov 27)
Last: Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(1182 - 9:29pm, Nov 27)
Last: PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth)

NewsblogBoston Red Sox prove (once again) that competitive balance in baseball will never exist | cleveland.com
(38 - 9:21pm, Nov 27)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogSandy Alderson says Mets can move quickly if a shortstop becomes available - NY Daily News
(37 - 9:15pm, Nov 27)
Last: Arbitol Dijaler

Newsblog2015 Potential Hall of Fame Ballot | Baseball-Reference.com
(33 - 6:45pm, Nov 27)
Last: shoewizard

Newsblog[Cricketer NOT baseball player] Phil Hughes dies after “pitch” to the head
(11 - 5:56pm, Nov 27)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

NewsblogSource: Tomas agrees to six-year deal with D-backs | MLB.com
(22 - 4:49pm, Nov 27)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogOT: Wrestling Thread November 2014
(85 - 4:43pm, Nov 27)
Last: Tubbs & Minnie Miñoso don't fear Sid Monge

NewsblogJon Lester has plenty of options in addition to Red Sox - Sports - The Boston Globe
(9 - 3:56pm, Nov 27)
Last: Digit

NewsblogNotable Players Available In The Rule 5 Draft - BaseballAmerica.com
(10 - 1:34pm, Nov 27)
Last: Dock Ellis on Acid

Page rendered in 0.6467 seconds
52 querie(s) executed