Much of the focus on last night’s game has centered around the obstruction call that gave the Cardinals a walk-off win. The poor defensive play that allowed the scenario to unfold played a major role, and it has also drawn a lot of attention. Ditto questionable decisions by both managers.

Almost completely overlooked are a defensive play and expertly-choreographed pitch sequences in potentially game-changing innings. Read the rest of this entry »

You may have heard that Game Three of the 2013 World Series had an unusual ending. The kind that nobody could have predicted. Even @CantPredictBaseball had trouble finding the right words to describe the play.

Imagine, if you would, a vast scale of all difficult-to-predict ways a game could end, ranging from unlikely to unbelievable. On the unlikely side of the scale you have something like a 1-2-3 double play. On the unbelievable end is Bud Selig arbitrarily deciding that he’s seen enough (oh wait…). An obstruction call at third base on a play that included a tag out at home plate falls smack dab on the end of the unbelievable side. In case you want to see the play again (h/t @CJZero):

Read the rest of this entry »

“Immediately once we got off the field, and into our locker room, we congratulated Jim. We said ‘great call.’”

Those were the words of crew chief John Hirschbeck, referring to third base umpire Jim Joyce’s obstruction call that gave the Cardinals a 5-4 win in Game Three of the World Series. The Red Sox weren’t so sure.

To say the call was controversial would be an understatement. It rivaled football’s infamous “tuck rule game,” but this time it didn’t benefit a team from New England, nor did it happen in a snowstorm. It happened in a sea of Busch Stadium red, white towels twirling, and ended one of the most-captivating baseball games you’ll ever see.

Boston manager John Farrell’s interpretation is telling. Read the rest of this entry »

The final play of Game 3 of the World Series has generated some very strong opinions. In the poll just below this (that includes a GIF of the play), most of you have sided with the umpires, believing that the obstruction call on Will Middlebrooks was correct. Rather than offer a strong opinion of my own, I’d like to simply offer some connected thoughts that have come from watching the play a few hundred times.

Read the rest of this entry »

No GIF yet, because the game just ended, but let’s assume that most of you that are viewing FanGraphs at this time of day probably watched the end of the World Series.

Posted by Twitter User @CJZero, here’s how game three ended.

Read the rest of this entry »

7:29

:

Read the rest of this entry »

In the afternoon of Saturday, October 10th, 1931, the Cardinals took on the Philadelphia Athletics at Sportsman’s Park in St. Louis. This would be the seventh and final matchup of these teams in that year’s World Series. Philadelphia had gone 107-45 that season (beating their Pythagorean record by 10 games), behind the one-two-three punch of catcher Mickey Cochrane, a young Jimmie Foxx, and outfielder Al Simmons. They also boasted a pitching staff including the likes of Lefty Grove and Waite Hoyt. Though they had won six less games, the Cardinals were no slouches, either. Hall-of-Famers Jim Bottemley and Frankie Frisch manned the infield, with Pepper Martin in the outfield in his first full season. Paul Derringer and the fantastically-named (and HOF spitballer) Burleigh Grimes anchored the rotation for St. Louis. The Athletics were favored to win the series somewhat heavily, as Connie Mack’s club was coming of two consecutive world titles, and had beaten the (more-or-less) same Cardinals team the previous year. It was a fairly evenly-matched series all-in-all, save for Game 6 when the Athletics kicked around the Cardinals to the tune of 8 – 1. Al Simmons was hitting out of his mind that series, and would eventually end up with a 1.030 OPS for the fall classic, while Pepper Martin posted a 1.330 OPS with the Cardinals. Grimes was dealing, allowing only one run over 18 innings, while Grove and George Earnshaw were racking up the strikeouts for the Philly (well, as much as you could rack up strikeouts back then.) Read the rest of this entry »

I’d like to share something with you from last Saturday’s ALCS Game 6. We all know now how that game turned out, but in the top of the sixth the eventual result was still a mystery, and the Red Sox were clinging to a tenuous lead. Given that the score was so close, every pitch was important, and when Clay Buchholz got to two strikes against Miguel Cabrera, a fan in the stands tried to get everybody amped. What he wanted was a standing ovation. What he wanted was mounting two-strike applause. Sometimes it works. You know it when you hear it, and it’s a sure sign of a stadium that’s engaged and invested.

Instead of everyone else standing up, within seconds the highlighted fan sat himself down. The crowd couldn’t sustain proper electricity given the game’s deliberate tempo. After the fan, the camera cut next to Buchholz:

Buchholz took his sweet time. Sure, absolutely, you don’t want to make a mistake there to Cabrera, but you’d think it would be possible to realize how not to make a mistake in a shorter period of time. The crowd had a little life, but there wasn’t a lot of noise when Buchholz delivered his next pitch. Cabrera hit it for a single, knocking Buchholz out of the game. Shortly thereafter, the Tigers took the lead in what could’ve and should’ve been a more pivotal frame. Is there a connection between the lack of noise for Buchholz and the Cabrera at-bat result? Would Cabrera have done something else had the crowd been more lively, had Buchholz worked faster? Probably not, no, but by introducing the questions I can lend a little artificial significance to the rest of this article. We’re talking about pace!

Read the rest of this entry »

In his piece this morning about Carlos Martinez and Trevor Rosenthal, Jeff wrote about Mike Matheny’s decision to stay with Martinez against David Ortiz, rather than go to the left-handed Randy Choate, in the 8th inning: The relevant post-game quote, again:

It’s not an easy decision. Knowing that we have a left-hander up and ready to go. A lot of it has to do with what we see, how the ball is coming out of Carlos’s hands at that time. We have two guys on base, one by an error and another by a ball that made it’s way kinda through the infield. Looked like he had real good life. And if we get through Ortiz, then we have an opportunity to use Carlos’s good life right there against a Napoli, where we don’t have to bring Trevor in more than one. Not an easy call, but we liked the way Carlos was throwing the ball at that particular time.

It’s probably really hard to take Carlos Martinez out of the game, I imagine. When you have that kind of stuff, and he’s been dominating the way he was in the postseason, it has to be tempting to just say “hey, let’s stick with the kid who throws 100.” Martinez isn’t a righty specialist, and as Eno Sarris pointed out before the series began, Ortiz struggled against especially hard fastballs this year, hitting just .238/.284/.365 on at-bats that ended with a fastball of 94+ mph.

Perhaps Martinez’s premium velocity makes him a better match-up there than the platoon splits would indicate. And, as Matheny noted, keeping Martinez in to face Ortiz meant that he also got to stay in to face Napoli, and he put some value on not having to make two pitching changes, including one that would force Trevor Rosenthal to enter the game in the 8th inning, then sit around and wait for the 9th to begin before taking the mound again.

But, while acknowledging that Matheny noted this was a difficult decision, it is not hard to see that decision as part of a broader pattern, as Mike Matheny has consistently chosen the pitcher on the mound over a potentially more attractive match-up available out of the bullpen. In fact, Matheny made perhaps an even more questionable decision to let Ortiz face a right-hander two innings earlier.

Read the rest of this entry »

If you’ve ever wanted to invest in the future earning potential of a professional athlete, say hello to Fantex, a San Francisco start-up that is offering shares in an IPO named after Houston Texans running back Arian Foster. To kick start the new company, Fantex paid Foster $10 million, in exchange for a 20% share of Foster’s future earnings on and off the field for the rest of his life. Fantex is banking on Foster having a huge upside and will work with the player to enhance the value of his “brand.” To recoup its investment, Fantex is banking on football fans and other investors who want a piece of the action.

It’s a simple idea, in theory, and makes you wonder why it’s never been tried before. Well, it turns out that a simple idea in theory is quite complicated in execution, and carries substantial risks for all parties. It also turns out that something similar has been tried before, and failed.

Read the rest of this entry »