Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine

So apparently there was a baseball game on Tuesday night -- a Major League Baseball game, even, although it's true, it was an "exhibition." (Wait, this time it counts -- is that still an "exhibition"?) Some guy named Barry O'Bama (I think -- is that Irish?) threw out the ceremonial first pitch.

Roy Halladay started the game for the winning team -- that's a sentence not written frequently enough in these parts! -- and the same team that always wins this game, they won the game. Woo -- surprise, surprise, surprise.

So our Question(s) of the Day ... Did you watch any of it? Did anyone watch all of it? If so (or if not), why? (or why not?) For those who did watch, did anything stick with you as truly memorable?

Question of the Day: Um .. so? | 20 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
StephenT - Wednesday, July 15 2009 @ 01:50 AM EDT (#202647) #
I watched the entire game.  Sportsnet showed the (well done) MLB International feed, including the Canadian national anthem, unlike the Fox telecast (not that I blame Fox for skipping it).  A lot of the game though I listened to the ESPN radio broadcast (as Shulman and Campbell are my favorites).  I thought the sloppy play in the first inning (e.g. Pujols error) might be from the extended ceremonies before the game (not the ideal way to prepare for 90mph action).  Halladay still hasn't had his good control since the DL stint, though no announcers seem to realize that (the announcers were blaming "butterflies" for the problems, please).  I've said before that I wish the Jays' outfield fence would be shortened to give fielders a chance to catch home runs (the play of this game couldn't have happened at the dome).  An entertaining game --  I'm not a Selig fan, but the people who criticize that the game counts are so wrong; it really is better now that something is riding on the game.

soupman - Wednesday, July 15 2009 @ 01:58 AM EDT (#202648) #
i caught most of the game while doing work (my usual practice) - it was fairly uneventful. Personally, I'm not a fan of the "try and play EVERYONE" approach to managing the all-star game, nor am I very fond of the expanded rosters. Of course, I think the game and the weekend (...isn't this usually a weekend thing?) is aimed at kids - so what do I know?
There were a lot of quick innings - I think Edwin Jackson threw 4 pitches. a couple decent grabs, the crawford one possibly being the most stand-out-ish. hey - at least it ended before midnight.

mathesond - Wednesday, July 15 2009 @ 07:45 AM EDT (#202650) #
Normally I would have watched, however my wife and I had Neko Case tickets and well, the opportunity to hear that voice in Massey Hall rendered any sort of debate moot. I did check the boxscore when we got home (very surprised to find out it had already ended, then I realized it wasn't a WS game), and saw Halladay got roughed up and Hill went 0-3. Very seldom does it seem that the Blue Jays rep(s) have a good game in these events.
rpriske - Wednesday, July 15 2009 @ 08:26 AM EDT (#202652) #

Our feed was definitely better. Have you heard the people complaining about Fox's horrible coverage of Obama's first pitch? Apparently they used a close-shot so you couldn't tell whether the pitch made it to Pujols or whatever.  I read this and my reaction was, "What? I saw the whole thing..."

Paul D - Wednesday, July 15 2009 @ 08:30 AM EDT (#202653) #
An entertaining game --  I'm not a Selig fan, but the people who criticize that the game counts are so wrong; it really is better now that something is riding on the game.

I watched the whole game, and was surprised at the speed and quality of the game this year, but I couldn't disagree more.  The 'this time it counts' thing is one of the worst things Selig has done.  It's turned the premier exhibition game in sports into some kind of joke.  I hate it.
Mike Green - Wednesday, July 15 2009 @ 10:07 AM EDT (#202655) #
Mathesond and I had the same idea.  Neko Case's voice in Massey Hall is better than watching Joey Gathright jump over Carl Crawford to pull one back. 
jmoney - Wednesday, July 15 2009 @ 10:09 AM EDT (#202656) #
OMG Halladay didn't look good this can only lower his trade value! :P
Flex - Wednesday, July 15 2009 @ 10:30 AM EDT (#202658) #
I didn't watch the game. It used to be I was proud to see Blue Jays represented in the All Star Game, and I'd fret about how they performed. Now, frankly, it's meaningless to me.

I don't know if that's my fault or baseball's fault or the All Star Game's fault. Probably mine.
Chuck - Wednesday, July 15 2009 @ 10:53 AM EDT (#202659) #

Those of us a little longer in the tooth will recall when all-star games were huge events, back when baseball games were rarely televised and your only exposure to a certain league's players -- AL players in my case as I was living in Montreal -- was during this game. In the 1970's, I had my family schedule our yearly camping trips around the game. One year they did not comply and I missed it. I was not pleased.

Nowadays, I could care less about the game. Part is just just due to the transition to adulthood. Part is due to the easily available 24/7 baseball access which removes a great deal of the mystique about the more infrequently seen players.

My all-star game alternative was an evening spent with the very underrated Bryan Cranston and season 2 of Breaking Bad.

christaylor - Wednesday, July 15 2009 @ 11:34 AM EDT (#202663) #
I watch the first two innings closely (for obvious reasons, also was it just me or was Halladay not going all out and his pitch selection wasn't as varied as usual) and half paid attention to the rest (had it on in the back ground as I did other work).

I too remember when the AS game was a big deal, I remember being impressed by Tony Gwynn and Ozzie Smith as one rarely got to see them. Thinking back that's the one benefit to inter-league play - seeing the other leagues stars. I suppose these days I would just flick on mlb.tv but getting a chance to see the NL stars at the dome is nice. I wish that inter-league was restructured and the natural rival thing dropped. I was kind of upset to miss the Mets this year (they're my favourite team in the NL).

So all in all: HR derby game boring but some of that might be that it couldn't measure up to Hamilton's heroics last year and the game last year was definitely the best AS game I remember.

Two more things: I don't know if the original poster but Obama is 1/4 irish (on his mother's side of course). During the campaign CNN went to the hamlet his grand-daddy hailed from... although something about that story didn't sit right because it had the tone of "why make so much of his black heritage and not his Irish heritage".

Second: I wonder when the imbalance in the leagues will shift. Not only is the AL better on average than the NL (as the inter-league record shows) but the best players are better as well (the last 13 years are no fluke). There was a time when the NL cleaned up in AS games but we had no interleague data. From hearing interviews, it seems like a feedback loop, mediocre pitchers avoid the AL, which means teams can get by and win with less potent offenses which attracts more mediocre pitchers. Then there's the effect of BOS/NYY attracting high-priced hitters and the need for other teams to keep up.
92-93 - Wednesday, July 15 2009 @ 02:04 PM EDT (#202670) #
"Not only is the AL better on average than the NL (as the inter-league record shows) but the best players are better as well (the last 13 years are no fluke)"

The last 13 years certainly ARE a fluke. It's a statistical improbability when 2 teams with comparable talent have such an odd win distribution.
Dewey - Wednesday, July 15 2009 @ 02:30 PM EDT (#202672) #
I watched Doc's innings, and only enough of the rest to remind me why I don't watch the entire broadcast of any major sports event anymore.  Talk about over-produced!  The Kentucky Derby, the Super Bowl of course, the World Series, and doubtless many others are now major, major productions—and that's before the games even start.  It might be minimally better if some of the talking heads  weren't so relentlessly familiar, and so openly stupid in some cases. (eg., those bozos who 'choose' the winner of the Derby; and sometimes Rick Huneycutt comes awfully close in baseball).

Blair's column today about getting rid of anthems is correct, but the U.S. would burn its flag first.  And must the military be involved in every damned thing Americans do?  A platoon of troops to hold up a football-field-sized flag?  Why?  And why in God's name must a Stealth Bomber do a flyover?  (Wonder what the cost of that was--in dollars, and in wasted oil?)  And Blair said Obama was booed by a substantial part of the crowd, while an appearance of Bush on a screen eveoked cheers.  Rush Limbaugh country in those parts.

Bread and circuses.
Parker - Wednesday, July 15 2009 @ 02:42 PM EDT (#202673) #

The last 13 years certainly ARE a fluke. It's a statistical improbability when 2 teams with comparable talent have such an odd win distribution.

I think that was the point.  The two teams do not have comparable talent.

Mike Green - Wednesday, July 15 2009 @ 03:13 PM EDT (#202677) #
And Blair said Obama was booed by a substantial part of the crowd, while an appearance of Bush on a screen eveoked cheers.  Rush Limbaugh country in those parts.

Maybe now, but it doesn't look like that was the case when the votes were counted in November.  Back to baseball. 
deep dish - Wednesday, July 15 2009 @ 03:22 PM EDT (#202678) #

And Blair said Obama was booed by a substantial part of the crowd, while an appearance of Bush on a screen eveoked cheers

I think this had something to do with the White Sox jacket he was wearing...  That said, I thought the AS game was a clunker and I wish they would stop holding it. 

I used to be a major baseball fan (and fairly good player) but have almost completely drifted away from the game, I think there are some quite serious structural problems with the sport at both the professional and grassroots level.  Perhaps I would feel a little better if the Blue Jays could make a serious, long-term run at the playoffs. 

Dewey - Wednesday, July 15 2009 @ 03:30 PM EDT (#202679) #
"Back to baseball."

Exactly, Mike.  But MLB itself must get back to basebal, rather than inflicting extended displays of patriotic pageantry and hoopla upon us.    Like the singing of "God Bless America" at Yankee Stadium, they're the ones mixing up sports and politics.

By the way, the link you provided reminds us that Missouri did vote Republican (albeit by the smallest of margins).  St. Louis itself was more enlightened.
andrewkw - Wednesday, July 15 2009 @ 04:44 PM EDT (#202681) #
I watched the whole game, and generally regard the all star game as the best day of the summer.  While it's true nowadays we get to see pretty much everyone play a couple times a year, be it during interleague play or digital tv / mlb.tv broadcasts.  I still like watching the all stars play together for fun.  I don't think the game should count in the least.  It should be about showcasing the players the fans want to see, who usually are but aren't always the best players.

It's too bad Wakefield couldn't pitch but he was probably a good choice to save as the longman since whoever had to catch him would have a really tough time, but generally I think every player should get into the game even if its just one at bat or whatever.  Of course in the NL you can run out of hitters and have to watch the pitchers hit which can get silly.

The game moved at a very fast pace but it's just too bad they have to play so late.  If it had been a 4 hour game I likely would have been falling asleep on the couch before it ended.   I don't like the military, politics and all that mixed in with baseball but when I attended the game in 2005 in detroit I was very impressed with the stealth bomber flying over the stadium.  I never saw one in real life before, probably never will again and i'm sure a lot of other people were the same.  All in all it's just a fun game, the 162 schedule is a great grind, I enjoy watching as much of it as possible, but for one night it's fun to see many of your favorite players playing just for fun.

zeppelinkm - Wednesday, July 15 2009 @ 05:08 PM EDT (#202683) #
I think at the top end, the talent level is very similiar. I think it's a stretch to say the AL all-stars are better then the NL all-stars. A lot of what makes the AL dominate in inter-league play is stronger teams, top to bottom. Not stronger all stars, but stronger 6/7/8/9 hitters and stronger #4/#5 starters, etc.  Better depth.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/NLS/NLS200907140.shtml

Is the AL team noticably better?

Would you rather an infield of A-Rod, Jeter, Hill,Teixeria, Mauer over one of Wright, Rameriz, Utley, Pujols, McCann ?

Which outfield is better?

Crawford, Granderson, Bay or Braun, Beltran, and Upton?

Top 4?  Halladay, Greinke, Beckett, and F Hernandez or Lincecum, Billingsly, Santana, and Haren?

I think the bullpen is clearly an AL strength this year to be honest.

But really - you can't really attribute who wins the all star game to more then good fortune and opportunitistic hitting. I think the talent levels are pretty darn close.  Personally, I'd rather have all those NL stars I listed than the AL stars. Yes, I totally threw in some subjectivity, but all the players I picked were on the team with the exception of A-Rod. 


christaylor - Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 01:36 AM EDT (#202700) #
If one thinks the talent of the teams are equal there's a very easy way to calculate the binomial probability of 12 wins out of 13 games. Same as calculating the probability of flipping a fair coin 13 times and getting 12 heads/tails. If one does this, one gets a very small number, which says it is very unlikely that the coin is fair, or in our case the talent level of the AL/NL all-stars is the same.

I know subjectively it seems the talent level is equal for the starters, but that's not the way they're used in an AS game. Each team is represented and typically a manager will try to get every player into the game. I think this has contributed to the lop-sidedness, but I honestly do think that the talent of the AL teams has been better for the last decade. Perhaps not so wildly discrepant as the binomial probability would suggest, but still there and definitely telling.
zeppelinkm - Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 03:37 AM EDT (#202701) #

But we also know that the outcome of 1 run games is mostly based off luck (or if you'd prefer a more statistically proper term, random chance), and the AL has won 5 of the last 7 games by 1 run. If the NL wins 3 out of those 5, that binominal probability of the AL winning 9/12 becomes much more feasible. Sure, it is still improbable but more believable. Luck plays a role, and when the talent level is that great and the gap that small, luck plays a larger role than one would normally expect, especially in this extremely small sample.

And I think that's the key, that this is a really small sample. I mean, we are talking about baseball, where normally they play 162 games to try and smooth out those improbable streaks in an attempt to allow us to arrive at the probable conclusions.

 

 

Question of the Day: Um .. so? | 20 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.