#27TheDominator Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Ticket prices for NLCS skyrocketing 34m The average ticket re-sale price for the three NLCS games at Wrigley Field is $1,228.16, according to TiqIQ. That's nearly double the previous high for an LCS series this decade, which was $662.64 for the Giants in 2012. The average prices for the games in New York is $838.40. 2 Shares JiF is going to have a tougher time selling his girl now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Ticket prices for NLCS skyrocketing 34m The average ticket re-sale price for the three NLCS games at Wrigley Field is $1,228.16, according to TiqIQ. That's nearly double the previous high for an LCS series this decade, which was $662.64 for the Giants in 2012. The average prices for the games in New York is $838.40. 2 Shares Tickets go on sale today. So that's brokers, not individual resellers. People are trying to pawn their codes off on CL for a stack per, it's insane. That said when individuals purchase later today prices should drop. This is exactly what happened with the NLDS tickets out here (I live in Chicago) and you could get tickets the day of for under $150. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 You can get tix to some of the rooftops right now for about $200, but truth be told those aren't the best environments for away fans in the playoffs. It's all you can drink up there and there were some incidents when the Cards were in town. Granted that's a huge rivalry, but Wrigleyville bros have a habit of getting way too sauced up and acting like jackasses it might not be worth the risk. Worth noting though that I've been rocking Mets gear nonstop the past couple months and everyone yells go Mets at me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 You can get tix to some of the rooftops right now for about $200, but truth be told those aren't the best environments for away fans in the playoffs. It's all you can drink up there and there were some incidents when the Cards were in town. Granted that's a huge rivalry, but Wrigleyville bros have a habit of getting way too sauced up and acting like jackasses it might not be worth the risk. Worth noting though that I've been rocking Mets gear nonstop the past couple months and everyone yells go Mets at me. I am really suggesting you get one of those rooftop tickets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsfan80 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Can't it have both been a troll move by Mattingly AND be the right decision at the same time with your season the line? I say yes. Was Mattingly a dumb coward for failing to use him at Citi Field? Yes. Is he still a bad manager? Yes. Is it annoying when people answer their own questions? Decidedly yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faba Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Mattingly will be out as manger -our service to the LA region Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Can't it have both been a troll move by Mattingly AND be the right decision at the same time with your season the line? I say yes. http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/eye-on-baseball/25341560/dodgers-nlds-exit-a-good-excuse-for-dodgers-to-fire-don-mattingly We can do the math here, right? I can just imagine Game 5's late decisions unfolding in front of Friedman and Zaidi's faces. Mattingly double-switches A.J. Ellis into the spot due to hit second in the ninth inning. He pinch hits for Joc Pederson with Chase Utley. On surface, you have perfectly justifiable moves. Ellis brought in a long postseason hitting streak while Pederson has a terrible batting average since the All-Star break. Look deeper, though. The Dodgers were only down by one run. Leading off with Pederson you need one of two things: Get on base or hit a home run. Pederson's second-half on-base percentage was still .317. He'd already drawn two walks in Game 5. Utley had a .291 OBP since joining the Dodgers. Pederson was more likely to get on base. Plus, Utley only hit eight homers all year. Pederson has light-tower power and hit 26 homers, six coming in the second half. Pederson was more likely to homer, too. Whether the leadoff man gets on base or not, wouldn't everyone rather take their chances with the dynamic talent that is Yasiel Puig than Ellis? Puig didn't have a good season, but he's still immensely talented and most would rather have him in the box with the season on the line than Ellis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faba Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 David Purdum, ESPN Staff Writer Close Joined ESPN in 2014 Journalist covering gambling industry since 2008 Follow on Twitter 112 Shares Email Print Comment The Toronto Blue Jays head to the American League Championship Series as the favorites to win the World Series. The Blue Jays are 7-4 to win the World Series at the Westgate SuperBook, followed by the Chicago Cubs (9-4), Kansas City Royals (3-1) and New York Mets (4-1). The Blue Jays will face the Royals in the ALCS, beginning Friday night. Toronto is a -145 favorite over the Royals in the series at most sportsbooks. The SuperBook, facing liability on the Royals, opened with the Blue Jays slightly lower at -130. The Cubs are -150 favorites over the Mets in the NLCS, which starts Saturday. The Cubs, who haven't won the World Series since 1908, are always a popular bet in Las Vegas. This year is no different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GimmeShelter Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 And how big of a trolling coward is Mattingly? Never brings Utley up in NY, finally brings him in for a situation where it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Only reason for bringing Utley up in that situation is to be a dick. Dude deserves to be fired, and more importantly he deserves to get heckled whenever he shows his face in NY again. I believe TBS said Utley was 3-3 against Familia and he did hit the ball on the nose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GimmeShelter Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 And holy f*ckin sh*t what a f*ckin game that was! I was drained, yet still couldn't easily fall asleep. Today will be a very unproductive Friday. True that! I ended up surfing prom post game to postgame just enjoying the aftermath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 I didn't know you were a relationship guy, lol. I'm typically not...but this one seems to be sticking around but it does have an expiration date. She'll be moving back up north soon and I'm never leaving the coast and the sun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 I believe TBS said Utley was 3-3 against Familia and he did hit the ball on the nose. Pfffffft. Mattingly didn't care about winning the game at that time, he just wanted to be a "dick". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Don't gators wear the pants in the family? Typically. This one went to West Point, though. So it's a bit of a battle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsfan80 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 True that! I ended up surfing prom post game to postgame just enjoying the aftermath. At first glance I read that as "surfing porn". lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsfan80 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 I'm typically not...but this one seems to be sticking around but it does have an expiration date. She'll be moving back up north soon and I'm never leaving the coast and the sun. That sucks. Who the f*ck moves NORTH these days? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Daniel Murphy has very much a feel of what Ray Knight did with the Mets '86 run. Not a guy that gets all of the acclaim, but a guy who is gritty and battles through. Like Knight, Murphy is a free agent. I hope like Knight, Murphy gets to be an MVP. I know he will not be a Met next year, but I do admire what he has done for this team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 I am really suggesting you get one of those rooftop tickets Pfffffft. Mattingly didn't care about winning the game at that time, he just wanted to be a "dick". Totes not a stalker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lizard King Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Ladies, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afosomf Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 I wonder if Bartman will be invited to games, I have a feeling until he is treated like a king, cubs have no chance winning world series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 I wonder if Bartman will be invited to games, I have a feeling until he is treated like a king, cubs have no chance winning world series. Little chance of that happening. They've offered him throwing out the first pitch a few times through his agent (only has one to decline all the offers he gets) and he always declines. It's a real shame. Majority of the city wants to apologize to him the right way and the only thing he wants is to not be famous anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Little chance of that happening. They've offered him throwing out the first pitch a few times through his agent (only has one to decline all the offers he gets) and he always declines. It's a real shame. Majority of the city wants to apologize to him the right way and the only thing he wants is to not be famous anymore. Moises Alou helped elevate that situation where it shouldn't have gone. Alex Gonzalez was the real culprit there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Totes not a stalker. Totes get a sense of humor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyHector Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 I was at my lucky seat in the bar last night and the dude next to me played ball with Murph (he's from Jax), he took a picture of the group and sent it to him. Glad to see that during my absence, nothing has changed... did you play pinochle with Paul Posluszny after the game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afosomf Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Little chance of that happening. They've offered him throwing out the first pitch a few times through his agent (only has one to decline all the offers he gets) and he always declines. It's a real shame. Majority of the city wants to apologize to him the right way and the only thing he wants is to not be famous anymore. Maybe Joe Madden can get him to come to lockerroom and meet the team. Bartman could have been me you any of us. we all would have tried to catch the foul ball. Charlie Manson would have been treated better by the Cubbie fans, IMO cubs wont win until Bartman is back in wrigley and the whole city makes amends Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyHector Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Joe Namath hosted event on Sat. Heading to the NYCWFF, eh? I'm going to be over at the Grand Tasting with my boys Wally Szczerbiak and Speedy Claxton. Maybe we can get a 3v3 game going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Glad to see that during my absence, nothing has changed... did you play pinochle with Paul Posluszny after the game? A Penn State guy wouldn't have anything to do with Jif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyHector Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 A Penn State guy wouldn't have anything to do with Jif Not sure if serious or softball for a Sandusky joke... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Not sure if serious or softball for a Sandusky joke... One in the same Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Maybe Joe Madden can get him to come to lockerroom and meet the team. Bartman could have been me you any of us. we all would have tried to catch the foul ball. Charlie Manson would have been treated better by the Cubbie fans, IMO cubs wont win until Bartman is back in wrigley and the whole city makes amends The 30 for 30 that they did on him was very good. There were 7 other fans that went for that ball, he just happened to be the guy that it got closest to. The ordeal that guy went through that evening had to be nothing short of terrifying. Beers thrown on him, his life threatened, the guy had to move. The sh*ttiest part about it is that he was there with 3 friends, and they just left him to fend for himself with stadium staff after the game. Some friends. I'd be shocked if they hadn't already extended some sort of invite for the NLDS. He's gotten opening day offers multiple times. From what his agent says he just wants to be left alone and not known for this anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Mets fans during free agency be like... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lizard King Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 I dont be like that. i love that the guy comes up big in wild moments but i'm ready to see him and Duda be like "adios." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyHector Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Fangraphs article discussing how Ethier catching the ball in foul territory and allowing the tying run to score was technically -EV, though a difficult decision (omitting most of the animated GIF's): The High Cost of the Dodgers’ Small Mistakes by August Fagerstrom - October 16, 2015 For an athlete, a constant struggle in decision-making exists between the body and mind. When presented with a choice, there are two routes a person can take. The most informed route, typically, is to hand over the keys to the mind. The mind can think logically and, with ample time and preparation — sometimes just a few extra seconds — the mind can parse out a number of options, choose what it believes to the best one, and send the correct signal to the body. But the body reacts faster. Under pressure, when an instantaneous decision is required, the decision-making process defaults to the body’s reaction, because it gets to skip the step of the mind parsing information and sending a signal. This is an involuntary response. The mind still parses, and still sends its signal, it’s just, sometimes, the body beats it to the punch. So it’s hard to fault someone when they choose the body’s reaction over the mind’s conclusion, because all that means is that the mind didn’t have enough time, in the moment, to trump the body’s reaction. Yet, here we are. Before you can question Andre Ethier for his choices in Thursday’s fourth-inning sacrifice fly that scored Daniel Murphy and tied Game 5 of the Dodgers-Mets NLDS at 2-2, you’ve got to take a step back and examine how we got there.For those unaware, Murphy scored on a sacrifice fly, caught by Ethier, that maybe shouldn’t have happened. It maybe shouldn’t have happened because Ethier had another option, but we’ll get to that in a minute, because there’s a few others reasons why it maybe shouldn’t have happened. It almost didn’t happen, because Murphy nearly got doubled off first base on a shallow fly ball caught by Joc Pederson earlier in the inning: Perhaps my use of “nearly” is a bit liberal here, as the play really wasn’t all that close, but if Murphy had gotten in one more step towards second base before his mind signaled to his body to retreat, maybe Pederson’s strong throw gets him and that’s the play we’re here analyzing, rather than Ethier’s. It almost didn’t happen because Lucas Duda, who took a ball four that set Murphy in motion toward third base, nearly didn’t walk. At least, he didn’t think so: The pitch was low, definitely, but catcher Yasmani Grandal presented it well to the umpire, and Duda momentarily second-guessed himself. I do wonder if this initial confusion had anything to do with the events that transpired in the immediate aftermath. It’s such a minor thing, and it didn’t seem to have any tangible effect on the Dodgers’ infielders, but it is an unusual moment that led to a larger unusual moment, so it must be considered. You’ve probably heard about what happened next: Your browser does not support iframes. In a brilliant display of heads-up baserunning, Murphy went first-to-third on Duda’s walk, largely because the Dodgers had been playing Duda in a shift. Not just that, but something of an unusual shift: Rather than each infielder shifting one spot to his left, per the norm, rookie shortstop Corey Seager and second baseman Howie Kendrick remained in their positions to keep the standard double play pairing in tact, with third baseman Justin Turner plugging the hole on the right-hand side of the infield. This alignment is somewhat atypical, though not entirely uncommon for the Dodgers. Upon Duda’s walk, Turner began the trek back to his typical territory, working in time for a chat with second base umpire Alan Porter: Zack Greinke decided it was a good time to kick some dirt: So did Mets third base coach, Tim Teufel: Seager and Kendrick convened at second base, as they would after any walk: But this wasn’t any walk. This walk included a pitcher thinking about a close ball four, a third baseman on the opposite side of the field, and a rookie shortstop left to cover the left side of the infield: In the play’s aftermath, the broadcast crew remarked that it’s either Greinke or Turner’s responsibility to protect third base in that situation, but manager Don Mattingly put it on Seager in his postgame press conference. It’s unreasonable to expect Turner to run back to his position from second base after a walk, and Greinke is the pitcher — the infield isn’t his responsibility. Seager, really, just had to take a few steps toward third, rather than take a few steps toward second, and Murphy wouldn’t have had the room to run. It’s easy to fault Seager here, because he is the one at fault. To play Devil’s Advoctate, though, he’s a rookie, and shifts like this are used sparingly, if ever, in the Minor Leagues, so it’s entirely possible this is the first time Seager’s ever been in this particular situation. He was also never out of position in the shift, so, subconsciously, there was nothing particularly out of the ordinary about his post-walk responsibilities. His body’s reaction was to just do what he always does after a walk. I assume this is something that was covered by the coaching staff when this alignment was instituted, but even then, someone probably have reminded Seager of his responsibility when this individual shift was engaged to avoid the exact situation that ended up happening. So that’s the story of how Daniel Murphy got to third base. Now, for how he got home: Ethier tracked a fly ball off the bat of Travis d’Arnaud deep down the right field line and made the routine catch. The argument, here, is that Ethier should have let the ball drop — he had no chance of throwing out Murphy at home and a foul ball for a strike is still technically a positive outcome — but this is where we re-enter the body vs. mind, decision-making, Devil’s Advocate portion of the program. While it may have initially appeared the ball might drop near the line, its trajectory slicing toward the stands, along with Ethier’s proximity to the wall, should have let him know that he was going to end up in foul territory. And I think Ethier probably did know that. The question, here, is whether you can fault Ethier for not knowing the percentages well enough to have have the wherewithal to let this ball drop. Essentially, the question is: can you fault Ethier for making a decision based on his physical instincts in a play that lasted six seconds? Technically, you can fault him, because, again, Ethier is at fault here. In a perfect world, he should have let the ball drop. Of course, the defense will almost always taken an out if given to them, but Matt Holliday showed last year that it’s not impossible for an outfielder to fight his instincts in this situation, in favor of a more cognitive thought process: Consider d’Arnaud was already in an 0-1 count, which would have been 0-2 had Ethier let the ball drop. After 0-2 counts this year, Greinke got the batter out 88% of the time, and d’Arnaud got himself out 78% of the time. Of course, some of those outs include ground balls or sacrifice flies that would have scored Murphy anyway, but they also include inning-ending double plays and non-advancing outs, too. Diving deeper into the math, the Mets’ win expectancy, trailing 2-1 with one out in the fourth, was 37% before Duda’s walk. When Duda walked, it boosted to 42%, and when Murphy went first-to-third, it increased to 46%. At this point, Murphy is expected to score — first and third with one out leads to at least one run nearly 7-out-of-10 times. Ethier caught the ball, Murphy scored, and the Mets’ win expectancy became 47%, the score tied 2-2. Now, let’s assume Ethier lets it drop. Ethier lets it drop, the count runs 0-2 to d’Arnaud, and runners are still on first and third with one out. In this situation, Murphy is no longer expected to score, because, in an 0-2 count, Greinke will likely retire d’Arnaud, and as long as d’Arnaud makes a non-advancing out, the Mets’ chances of scoring a run with runners on first-and-third plummets from 7-out-of-10 with one out, to 3-out-of-10 with two outs, due largely to the elimination of the potential sacrifice fly. I hope that’s explained clearly enough, because it’s a bit complicated. Dan Szymborski ran a simulation that considered the distribution of all possible outcomes in an 0-2 count for Greinke vs. d’Arnaud matchup, and found that, had Ethier let the ball drop, it would have been something like a 7% swing in win expectancy, in favor of the Dodgers. Maybe it’s best to just think about it this way: So, you want to fault Andre Ethier and Corey Seager for helping let a run score in a game the Dodgers ended up losing by one. That’s totally acceptable! But we already walked through why Seager’s situation is difficult, and you saw how much math and explaining it just took to draw the conclusion that Ethier, mathematically, made an incorrect decision. Maybe you think it’s unreasonable for Ethier to know the percentages to that extent, in-game, and that the fielder should just take the out when it’s given to him. Maybe you think Ethier’s played enough baseball in his life to have a good enough feel for the odds that he can confidently let the ball drop, as Holliday did. Me? I’m not totally sure where I stand, to be honest. Seager’s is probably more inexcusable, but I think you can go either way with Ethier. I’m fully aware that’s a cop-out answer, but I also don’t think there’s really an incorrect position. I’m just just trying to see both sides and make you think about baseball a bit. It’s up to you to decide whether you can fault an athlete by reacting with his body — which is largely how they make their living — before his mind has a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Fangraphs article discussing how Ethier catching the ball in foul territory and allowing the tying run to score was technically -EV, though a difficult decision (omitting most of the animated GIF's): The High Cost of the Dodgers’ Small Mistakes by August Fagerstrom - October 16, 2015 For an athlete, a constant struggle in decision-making exists between the body and mind. When presented with a choice, there are two routes a person can take. The most informed route, typically, is to hand over the keys to the mind. The mind can think logically and, with ample time and preparation — sometimes just a few extra seconds — the mind can parse out a number of options, choose what it believes to the best one, and send the correct signal to the body. But the body reacts faster. Under pressure, when an instantaneous decision is required, the decision-making process defaults to the body’s reaction, because it gets to skip the step of the mind parsing information and sending a signal. This is an involuntary response. The mind still parses, and still sends its signal, it’s just, sometimes, the body beats it to the punch. So it’s hard to fault someone when they choose the body’s reaction over the mind’s conclusion, because all that means is that the mind didn’t have enough time, in the moment, to trump the body’s reaction. Yet, here we are. Before you can question Andre Ethier for his choices in Thursday’s fourth-inning sacrifice fly that scored Daniel Murphy and tied Game 5 of the Dodgers-Mets NLDS at 2-2, you’ve got to take a step back and examine how we got there.For those unaware, Murphy scored on a sacrifice fly, caught by Ethier, that maybe shouldn’t have happened. It maybe shouldn’t have happened because Ethier had another option, but we’ll get to that in a minute, because there’s a few others reasons why it maybe shouldn’t have happened. It almost didn’t happen, because Murphy nearly got doubled off first base on a shallow fly ball caught by Joc Pederson earlier in the inning: Perhaps my use of “nearly” is a bit liberal here, as the play really wasn’t all that close, but if Murphy had gotten in one more step towards second base before his mind signaled to his body to retreat, maybe Pederson’s strong throw gets him and that’s the play we’re here analyzing, rather than Ethier’s. It almost didn’t happen because Lucas Duda, who took a ball four that set Murphy in motion toward third base, nearly didn’t walk. At least, he didn’t think so: The pitch was low, definitely, but catcher Yasmani Grandal presented it well to the umpire, and Duda momentarily second-guessed himself. I do wonder if this initial confusion had anything to do with the events that transpired in the immediate aftermath. It’s such a minor thing, and it didn’t seem to have any tangible effect on the Dodgers’ infielders, but it is an unusual moment that led to a larger unusual moment, so it must be considered. You’ve probably heard about what happened next: Your browser does not support iframes. In a brilliant display of heads-up baserunning, Murphy went first-to-third on Duda’s walk, largely because the Dodgers had been playing Duda in a shift. Not just that, but something of an unusual shift: Rather than each infielder shifting one spot to his left, per the norm, rookie shortstop Corey Seager and second baseman Howie Kendrick remained in their positions to keep the standard double play pairing in tact, with third baseman Justin Turner plugging the hole on the right-hand side of the infield. This alignment is somewhat atypical, though not entirely uncommon for the Dodgers. Upon Duda’s walk, Turner began the trek back to his typical territory, working in time for a chat with second base umpire Alan Porter: Zack Greinke decided it was a good time to kick some dirt: So did Mets third base coach, Tim Teufel: Seager and Kendrick convened at second base, as they would after any walk: But this wasn’t any walk. This walk included a pitcher thinking about a close ball four, a third baseman on the opposite side of the field, and a rookie shortstop left to cover the left side of the infield: In the play’s aftermath, the broadcast crew remarked that it’s either Greinke or Turner’s responsibility to protect third base in that situation, but manager Don Mattingly put it on Seager in his postgame press conference. It’s unreasonable to expect Turner to run back to his position from second base after a walk, and Greinke is the pitcher — the infield isn’t his responsibility. Seager, really, just had to take a few steps toward third, rather than take a few steps toward second, and Murphy wouldn’t have had the room to run. It’s easy to fault Seager here, because he is the one at fault. To play Devil’s Advoctate, though, he’s a rookie, and shifts like this are used sparingly, if ever, in the Minor Leagues, so it’s entirely possible this is the first time Seager’s ever been in this particular situation. He was also never out of position in the shift, so, subconsciously, there was nothing particularly out of the ordinary about his post-walk responsibilities. His body’s reaction was to just do what he always does after a walk. I assume this is something that was covered by the coaching staff when this alignment was instituted, but even then, someone probably have reminded Seager of his responsibility when this individual shift was engaged to avoid the exact situation that ended up happening. So that’s the story of how Daniel Murphy got to third base. Now, for how he got home: Ethier tracked a fly ball off the bat of Travis d’Arnaud deep down the right field line and made the routine catch. The argument, here, is that Ethier should have let the ball drop — he had no chance of throwing out Murphy at home and a foul ball for a strike is still technically a positive outcome — but this is where we re-enter the body vs. mind, decision-making, Devil’s Advocate portion of the program. While it may have initially appeared the ball might drop near the line, its trajectory slicing toward the stands, along with Ethier’s proximity to the wall, should have let him know that he was going to end up in foul territory. And I think Ethier probably did know that. The question, here, is whether you can fault Ethier for not knowing the percentages well enough to have have the wherewithal to let this ball drop. Essentially, the question is: can you fault Ethier for making a decision based on his physical instincts in a play that lasted six seconds? Technically, you can fault him, because, again, Ethier is at fault here. In a perfect world, he should have let the ball drop. Of course, the defense will almost always taken an out if given to them, but Matt Holliday showed last year that it’s not impossible for an outfielder to fight his instincts in this situation, in favor of a more cognitive thought process: Consider d’Arnaud was already in an 0-1 count, which would have been 0-2 had Ethier let the ball drop. After 0-2 counts this year, Greinke got the batter out 88% of the time, and d’Arnaud got himself out 78% of the time. Of course, some of those outs include ground balls or sacrifice flies that would have scored Murphy anyway, but they also include inning-ending double plays and non-advancing outs, too. Diving deeper into the math, the Mets’ win expectancy, trailing 2-1 with one out in the fourth, was 37% before Duda’s walk. When Duda walked, it boosted to 42%, and when Murphy went first-to-third, it increased to 46%. At this point, Murphy is expected to score — first and third with one out leads to at least one run nearly 7-out-of-10 times. Ethier caught the ball, Murphy scored, and the Mets’ win expectancy became 47%, the score tied 2-2. Now, let’s assume Ethier lets it drop. Ethier lets it drop, the count runs 0-2 to d’Arnaud, and runners are still on first and third with one out. In this situation, Murphy is no longer expected to score, because, in an 0-2 count, Greinke will likely retire d’Arnaud, and as long as d’Arnaud makes a non-advancing out, the Mets’ chances of scoring a run with runners on first-and-third plummets from 7-out-of-10 with one out, to 3-out-of-10 with two outs, due largely to the elimination of the potential sacrifice fly. I hope that’s explained clearly enough, because it’s a bit complicated. Dan Szymborski ran a simulation that considered the distribution of all possible outcomes in an 0-2 count for Greinke vs. d’Arnaud matchup, and found that, had Ethier let the ball drop, it would have been something like a 7% swing in win expectancy, in favor of the Dodgers. Maybe it’s best to just think about it this way: So, you want to fault Andre Ethier and Corey Seager for helping let a run score in a game the Dodgers ended up losing by one. That’s totally acceptable! But we already walked through why Seager’s situation is difficult, and you saw how much math and explaining it just took to draw the conclusion that Ethier, mathematically, made an incorrect decision. Maybe you think it’s unreasonable for Ethier to know the percentages to that extent, in-game, and that the fielder should just take the out when it’s given to him. Maybe you think Ethier’s played enough baseball in his life to have a good enough feel for the odds that he can confidently let the ball drop, as Holliday did. Me? I’m not totally sure where I stand, to be honest. Seager’s is probably more inexcusable, but I think you can go either way with Ethier. I’m fully aware that’s a cop-out answer, but I also don’t think there’s really an incorrect position. I’m just just trying to see both sides and make you think about baseball a bit. It’s up to you to decide whether you can fault an athlete by reacting with his body — which is largely how they make their living — before his mind has a chance. You do not give up an out in the 4th inning. You just do not do it. If that fly ball is allowed to drop, and say that d'Arnaud then hits a double in the gap to score 2 runs on the next pitch, Ethier is fitted with all-time goat horns. You just do not give up a chance at an out in the 4th inning in that situation. You don't do it. These sites and their statistics and information after the fact are really easy to do. Especially in the game of baseball. But, if their facts were so solid, and they were so good, they would be betting baseball games and making money, rather than second guessing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyHector Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 These sites and their statistics and information after the fact are really easy to do. Especially in the game of baseball. But, if their facts were so solid, and they were so good, they would be betting baseball games and making money, rather than second guessing. Not sure you get how this works. They're analyzing discrete events to show how they affect the outcome of the game, or rather, how they alter the probability of the possible outcomes. Nobody is suggesting that they have some uber nerd crystal ball that allows them to see into the future. If Familia hits a 3-run homer after Mattingly chose to walk Flores in the 9th, does that make it a bad decision? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.