Mets Game 125: Loss To Braves
Braves 4 Mets 1
Just for the record: the first-base umpire did not throw the game-winning gopher ball. Further, he did not go 0-for-9 with runners in scoring position.
Mets Game Notes
Jonathon Niese pitched as well as could be expected, striking out 9 and allowing one run on 5 hits and 3 walks in 7 efficient innings (106 pitches). In this outing I saw from Niese a rarity: some of the time, particularly in the first 3-4 frames, there was a clear delineation between the release-point arm angles for the cutter, fastball, and curve. On the one hand, there are a few outstanding hitters who can pick up on that and know what’s coming. On the other hand, it’s the only way Niese can throw both an effectively breaking, 12-6 curve and an effective cutter in the same game — and most hitters won’t pick up the difference in arm angles. As has been the case throughout his career, Niese’s motion gradually became a product of his repertoire — i.e., the cutter, a pitch he used as his primary weapon during this ballgame. The slight over-rotation habit he falls into (and fell into as the game wore on), combined with his damaged and fatigued shoulder, was the reason he broke Jason Heyward‘s jaw in the sixth inning. By over-rotating and being a hair slow with his arm speed, his left arm was a bit behind his body, the release was premature, and the ball flew unexpectedly up and in. He threw a few more pitches toward that spot after the HBP in the 6th and 7th, including fastballs that dipped to 88 MPH; it was a sign of fatigue.
Niese was strong through seven innings, though, and it’s hard to argue with success. Short-term results usually outweigh long-term health. He retired the Braves batters with a steady diet of cutters, using the fastball and curve as occasional “show” pitches to keep them honest. Velocity on the cutter was in the 88-89 range, and the fastball was anywhere from 89 to 91, with a handful of 93-MPH pops.
Go Josh Satin! Two-for-four with a solo homer to provide the extent of the Mets scoring. Shades of Jason Phillips, circa 2003?
Daniel Murphy and Terry Collins were tossed from the game in the fateful tenth for sharing their opinion of first-base umpire Jerry Layne’s safe call on a Freddie Freeman infield hit. The replays proved that the call was wrong — though, it was damn close, and seriously, I can’t fault the ump on that one. Seen objectively, it could’ve gone either way when judged in real-time. Seen from a Mets’ fan’s point-of-view, it was a horrible call that made Don Denkinger look brilliant. But seriously, it was really, really close.
And before anyone points directly to that call as the reason the Mets lost the game, I’d like to point out a similarly close call at second base in the the fourth inning, when Andrelton Simmons was called out trying to stretch a single into a double. Juan Lagares made an absolutely brilliant play to cut down Simmons — but I’m not 100% convinced he was definitely tagged out in time. Daniel Murphy’s glove and Simmons’ hand met the second base bag at exactly the same time. The replays weren’t entirely conclusive from my living room chair — though you may disagree. However, that play happened in the fourth inning, when there was no drama. Yet, it was another play that could’ve gone either way in real-time, and the brilliance of Lagares to make a throw that beat the runner may have played into the out call. What if Simmons is safe there? Then it’s one out and a man on second. Maybe the Braves don’t score there — Niese was dealing, after all — but you never know.
Oh and by the way, Freeman’s comebacker that went off Scott Rice‘s glove was scored a hit. You know where I stand on that one.
So, I own a Cincinnati Reds “Janish” T-shirt, but can’t find an Atlanta Braves companion. Go figure. Let me know if you spot one, as I need to continue the collection.
Next Mets Game
The Mets have a day off on Thursday night, then host the mighty Detroit Tigers. Game one begins at 7:10 PM on Friday night, with Carlos Torres facing Doug Fister.
I’d have to go with the Ump on the Simmons call, none of camera angles I saw (home and away) showed him beating the tag, and the Braves’ announcers had no beef with the call, only admiration for Laguares’ 13th? assist.
That said, expect his assists to decrease, as surely as Byrd will never attempt first-to-third on a ball hit in the direction of Puig ever again. But runners showing caution on balls hit to Lagares adds value as well.
Save it for your Padilla name at metsmerised. Several posters here have defended Valdespin much more than Tejada, because we all saw Tejada in the lineup, but Valdespin in the corner of the dugout. However, Tejada did not perform. If you haven’t noticed, we ride Murphy’s production this year too as being unacceptable.
As far as your opinion of my comments, I frankly don’t give a fk.
Also, your inference that people who call themselves “Tex” side with the KKK just because they take issue with you makes you sound like a bigot.
The MLB store allows you to customize. I just tested this for the “Atlanta Braves Authentic Font Personalized T-shirt by Majestic Athletic”, and it allowed me to select Janish, 4.
http://shop.mlb.com/product/index.jsp?productId=3415172&cp=3306614
Be careful what you wish for — those bang-bang plays go both ways. Further, even with slo-mo replay, there’s still a human being who has to make the decision, and may not necessarily make the right one every time.
I am a baseball fan and I happen to prefer the human element in the game, including umpire calls. If baseball players were perfect and never made errors, I might feel differently, but since robots don’t play (yet), I’m fine with an occasional missed call here and there — it provides argument and conversation.
I also disagree profusely with your assertion that an umpire standing a few feet away should have been able to make the correct call. It took a perfect angle by a high-speed camera to show that Freeman’s foot was about 2 inches from the bag when the ball appeared to hit the leather of Satin’s glove. You really, truly expect the human eye to see that? I don’t, but then, I may not be as much a perfectionist. What if the first baseman was Freddie Freeman and the runner was Juan Lagares? Would you have a different opinion?
Are “most” replays “extremely clear”? I’m not so sure. But let’s assume that they are for a moment. If “most” and not “all” replays are extremely clear, then what’s the point of using the replay if there is still the possibility of making the wrong call? If the cameras can’t perfect the process, then I don’t see much reason to waste the time in using them. Just my opinion, of course.
I’ve played ball, and stood next to close calls many times, and yes even close as these can be seen accurately if one is really looking, fact is we’ve seen umps blow calls that were not as close as this one, frankly most of these are inexcusable, the blown perfect game being an example. And, if it went the Mets way I would of course take it thanking the ump, but not the way I would want to win the game.
So because 1% might be gotten wrong is a reason not to have replay? I think most would disagree with that reasoning.
Everyone wants the right calls, but thinking this is a smart, easy fix is over-optimistic at best.
Regarding the traditionalist point of view, I don’t get that resistance either. I fancy myself a traditionalist, love grass, outdoor games, day games, loathe the DH. However, I am for getting calls correct fast and simple. Field umps can keep their jobs, so its no labor issue, the human element will be there. No one complains about technology when we use it to watch the games, blog about the games, keep the playing fields in condition, us it to improve the equipment, the game prep, conditioning, training, analyze human body movements to prevent injury and improve performance, travel to and from the ballparks, etc., so why should the umps be denied some technological assistance to improve the calls if it can be done quickly and decisively?
I don’t see how improving something is bad for it.
Janish jerseys and t-shirt jerseys in several different colors.
Well, they do, in a way, if you think they have any chance of competing next year. You’ll recall last year at this time the team had hit bottom and was digging for new lows.
As to a positive season in 2014 … well, let’s see what happens in the winter.
Is umpiring worse than it’s been in the past? I’m not sure. What I’m absolutely positive of is that the high-tech camera work — and multitude of angles available — make umpires look terrible.
Here’s my concern, and it goes along with your valid points, Happy — won’t replay make umpiring even worse? Because umpires won’t have the pressure of having to be in the right position to make the right call, since a questionable play will be reviewed by replay?
I don’t believe umpiring has gotten worse over time, it’s just instant replay has brought mistakes to the forefront where everyone can see them, re-play after re-play. Umps are smothered by re-play, nothing they canh do about it without causing union/MLB issues [which they would lose due to the monetary value of TV and it’s re-play].
As for umps with replay looming over them every play, they have perhaps 2 choices, have pride in trying to get the call right with their initial call, or, get lazy and decide if their call is wrong replay will correct it. Seems it would depend on the individual umps character which choice they make.
Joe, I just read an article in Bleacher Reports by a writer advocating the removal of divisions all together believing it would make baseball better! Has something to fo with how many times teams play each other with rivalries losing luster due to playing each other 19 times versus a lesser amount. Egad, just play other teams in other divisions more often.
Seems to me it goes with the issue we discussed a couple months ago about baseball trying to blurr the lines between leagues. I’ll take tradition over “modern” or “progressive” changes in the game.