I was scrolling the page here and noticed a tweet last night by Berselius:
A poorly defended, poorly pitched, poorly managed game might be exciting, but it’s no classic. This is a terrible display of baseball. – MO
I couldn’t disagree more. Games don’t become classics because of how well they were played. There’s generally something about each game we consider a classic that stands out. When I was a kid I’d talk about the 1-0 classics. They happened a bit more frequently when I was a child than they do today, but it was ridiculous.
The 1-0 games then and today consists of two offenses that performed horribly. Even a Roy Halladay vs Tim Lincecum matchup should yield more than a run. The Giants may actually be projected to score 0 against Halladay with last year’s offense since it was so bad, but put an average offense on both teams and there would be about 6 to 7 runs scored in that game. If it was 1-0, the offense was horrible.
The batters more than likely swung early and often. They probably allowed the pitchers to get through 9 innings having thrown less than 120 pitches. There may have been as many as 20 strikeouts and 0 walks. Many of the balls they did put in play were easy outs. Whatever runners they did put on, it’s likely some of those were quickly erased on a double play or caught stealing. There may have even been signs missed and the manager undoubtedly allowed his pitcher to hit when he should have been pinch hitting. He left a pitcher on the mound when he was better off having a reliever out there.
In such a game it’s also likely the manager needlessly pinch hit for a catcher or pinch ran when someone got on base. Wouldn’t even be surprising if the pinch runner was immediately picked off. The overall baserunning in these games is terrible. In the average 1-0 game, literally half of it is complete shit.
If the standard for being a classic game is that it’s well managed, well executed, performed at a very high level and one with as few mistakes as possible, we’re talking about a 4-3 game. Some of them are even classics. It entirely depends on how the runs were scored, but I refuse to believe that a classic game has to be one that is played well. It is simply not true.
Albert Pujols can hit 3 home runs in a game. Halladay can strikeout 13 and walk none. An offense can pound out 23 hits and score 18 runs. The pitcher can issue 9 walks. The managers can make mistakes. A defense can make 3, 4, 5 or more errors. All of these things happen throughout the season. Defenses make mistakes, baserunners get caught off guard, pitchers walk too many batters, offenses strike out way too much, and so on. It’s a human game. There is no such thing as perfection.
A well pitched game is a game with good defense and bad offense. A well played game with Halladay and Lincecum on the mound is about a 4-3 game entering the 9th inning. The closer does his job and the everybody goes home. Maybe there’s some great defense along the way, and incredible slide at the plate, a very long home run and maybe even the manager appears to make no mistakes whatsoever. Maybe that happens. I haven’t seen it yet, but it sounds awesome and as boring as it sounds entering the 9th and leaving the 9th, I’m sure nobody but a few people would consider it a classic game.
We can look at the average 10-9 game and know it was played poorly in many ways. The pitching was not good. The defense was not good. On defense it seemed like nobody could come through when needed. The manager made mistakes. We can get a really good idea how well a game was by nothing other than the score. And 10-9 has some elements in it which were played very poorly. Kind of like a 1-0 game.
Here’s a 12-11 game that was without a doubt a classic. There was 23 runs allowed, 27 hits allowed, the defenses made 3 errors and there was 21 runners left on base. Ryne Sandberg was thrown out at 2nd trying to stretch a single into a double. The starting catchers allowed 6 stolen bases and not once did they throw anybody out. A batter was hit and 5 were intentionally walked. Both of the teams walked 9 batters. One of the teams struckout 9 times and the other 5. The starting pitchers threw a combined 6.2 innings, allowed 12 hits and 12 runs. One of the best closers allowed 2 runs in 2 innings while another great closer allowed 3 runs in 3 innings. There was a wild pitch and even a balk.
Under no circumstances was this a well played game. The pitching was terrible. The defense was less than average. There was a stupid baserunning mistake. Five guys were intentionally walked. FIVE. What was great about this game was the offense.
What made this game a classic is much the same reason that last night’s game was an instant classic. In the bottom of the 9th inning, the home team trailed by 2 and tied it up. In the top of the 10th the visiting team scored 2 while the home team again scored 2 in the bottom half. Sound familiar? We all remember this as The Sandberg game because Sandberg twice hit game tying home runs off Bruce Sutter who pitched like shit. And the hero of the day, may have cost the Cubs the win in regulation by being thrown out at 2nd base earlier in the game. This was an ugly game, but it was just so fucking awesome at the same time. That game, before it even ended, was a classic. Last night’s game, before it even ended, was a classic. The two games were nearly identical.
The difference? One saved the team from elimination in the World Series. A relatively unknown player having a 1.045 WPA in a game in June in 1984 or a relatively unknown player having a WPA of .953 in the elimination game of the World Series in 2011? If only one of these was a classic, it’s the one last night. It meant something, but we don’t need to pick just one. Both of those games are classics and both of those games were poorly played and poorly managed. But just so fucking exciting.
Maybe you’ll see how similar these games are if you look at the WE graphs.
Source: FanGraphs
Source: FanGraphs





“This is about motherfucking classics”… (dying laughing)
To be fair, I was quoting MO and was still half asleep when I tweeted that. (dying laughing). Split th difference and call it both a classic and a shambolic display of managing and execution.
[quote name=Berselius]call it both a classic and a shambolic display of managing and execution.[/quote]sums up every time I’ve gotten laid
[quote name=Rice Cube]
[/quote]Too bad he’s probably off fucking his cousin.
Tonight’s game will probably be a blowout. The baseball gods must restore balance to the universe.
[quote name=ACT]Tonight’s game will probably be a blowout. Matt Harrison must restore balance to the universe.[/quote].
Ot a bit here…but I’d be curious, in light of the Fangraphs Fielder article, to know what Pujols’s projections are for the next few years.
Considering Fielder’s girth would Pujols be that much more of a risk going forward?
[quote name=Berselius]To be fair, I was quoting MO and was still half asleep when I tweeted that. (dying laughing). Split th difference and call it both a classic and a shambolic display of managing and execution.[/quote]When I started thinking about the game more today, I was reminded of Game 3 in the 2001 WS: http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/NYA/NYA200110300.shtml
The offenses were pretty bad. The final was just 2-1. There was only 10 hits combined and 4 errors. Roger Clemens started for the Yankees, but the Dbacks sent out a horrible starter and still gave up only 2 runs. They also made 3 errors. What I remembered about the game was how damn close the Dbacks were to taking a 2-1 lead in the game and a 3-0 lead in the series. I had to look for the details, but it was the 6th inning. The Dbacks had a little rally going with guys on 1st and 3rd and Matt fucking Williams at the plate. Williams was on his last leg at that point in his career, but he was one of the most underrated players in the game. It was awesome to see him come to the Dbacks for their first season and even better to see him standing there in their first World Series.
Clemens gets out of it and the Yanks take a 2-1 lead in the bottom half of the inning. Nobody remembers that game now. It was only game 3, but at the time there was so much intensity during the game. It was the first WS game at Yankee Stadium after 9/11. It was huge. And it was a great game. Everything you want in a game. Both teams had chances to take leads and right after the Dbacks piss one away the Yankees do and Mo comes in and closes it. It was a very poorly played game (especially by the Dbacks who damn near won).
I only remembered how poorly it was played because I was thinking about other WS games. The vivid memory from that game for me was Matt Williams batting in the 6th with runners on 1st and 3rd and a chance to take a 3-0 lead in the series. The New York media called it a classic, but since it was only game 3 it’s been forgotten. That’s in part because there were bigger moments later in the series.
As for last night’s game, I figure the expected runs was probably about 9 between the two teams. If it’s 1-0 it’s considered a classic by most people, but that’s 8 runs fewer than expected. Last night they scored 10 runs more than expected. About the same to me. The 1-0 game would have been a lot of fun too, but as many mistakes as the 10-9 game.
[quote name=Smokestack Lightning]Ot a bit here…but I’d be curious, in light of the Fangraphs Fielder article, to know what Pujols’s projections are for the next few years.
Considering Fielder’s girth would Pujols be that much more of a risk going forward?[/quote]I was thinking the same thing when I read that article. I’d think Pujols would have to be in the heavy group, but he’s not overweight like Fielder is. I think Pujols is way out of shape and any team that signs him for 8 or 10 years for the money he wants is nuts. If I’m the Cardinals I offer 6/150 and call it a day. I’d really like to keep Pujols, but he’s already in his 30s and coming of a year a bit worse than he’s used to. Could be nothing. Could be the beginning of the decline.
This was a classic because of an error: http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/NYN/NYN198610250.shtml
Another 10-9 classic: http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/PIT/PIT196010130.shtml
The 8-running inning by the Marlins (yeah, you know the game): http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN200310140.shtml
Speaking of that game, it’s interesting to me that game has never been considered a postseason classic. You had the team coming back from defeat to win the game and later the series. You had the awesome young pitcher on the mound who gave them up. You had a team who hadn’t won in a million years giving the series away. Is it because we only remember a fan? Is it because there aren’t that many Marlins fans and that’s definitely not a game Cubs fans want to remember? Any other ideas why?
I wasn’t aware that the Bartman game isn’t considered a classic.
[quote name=mb21]This was a classic because of an error: http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/NYN/NYN198610250.shtml
Another 10-9 classic: http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/PIT/PIT196010130.shtml
The 8-running inning by the Marlins (yeah, you know the game): http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN200310140.shtml
Speaking of that game, it’s interesting to me that game has never been considered a postseason classic. You had the team coming back from defeat to win the game and later the series. You had the awesome young pitcher on the mound who gave them up. You had a team who hadn’t won in a million years giving the series away. Is it because we only remember a fan? Is it because there aren’t that many Marlins fans and that’s definitely not a game Cubs fans want to remember? Any other ideas why?[/quote]I remember that game vividly, but I try to block it out because it’s very painful to think about. I think most non-Cub fans would consider it a classic though because of how recent it was as well as how much impact it had on the series.
[quote name=GBTS]I wasn’t aware that the Bartman game isn’t considered a classic.[/quote]
Agree. That game is pretty infamous. Who knows what to call a classic. This is turning into one of those HOF circle-jerks where everyone is arguing with one another because no one has the same definition (dying laughing)
Maybe I’ve just ignored all the Game 6 is a classic talk. I tend to ignore anything that has anything to do with that game. Just don’t care.
That was a recent world series I enjoyed.
Last night’s game is a classic because the Rangers were 1 out from winning the WS twice and blew it. It was a poorly played shit show that both teams seemed to be trying to lose but it is indeed a classic. It was a dramatic come from behind win but it wasn’t a “great” game in my opinion because it was a lot of bad baseball by both teams. It was exciting but it was bad baseball.
Does anyone know where David Freese grew up or what team he rooted for as a kid? I sure hope Fox tells us at some point.
[quote name=melissa]Does anyone know where David Freese grew up or what team he rooted for as a kid? I sure hope Fox tells us at some point.[/quote]I heard he was from Weehawken and rooted for the Gashouse Gorillas. I wonder if FOX will give us the correct information though.
[quote name=Rice Cube]I heard he was from Weehawken and rooted for the Gashouse Gorillas. I wonder if FOX will give us the correct information though.[/quote]
They’ve hacked his phone and will update as info becomes available.
http://twitter.com/#!/ScottMCBSSports/status/130069652217925632
Who do you think it will be, GW? Cherington said it would be significant.
[quote name=mb21]Who do you think it will be, GW? Cherington said it would be significant.[/quote]By “significant” he might mean “taller than Tony Campana”…
TOOTBLAN!
[quote name=Rice Cube]TOOTBLAN![/quote]
Looks like we have another classic in the making. (dying laughing)
[quote name=mb21]Who do you think it will be, GW? Cherington said it would be significant.[/quote]
maybe something like a flaherty/carpenter type along with a non bonus-baby lower level guy?
Rangers score!
game thread up: http://www.obstructedview.net/articles/major-league-baseball/rangerscardinals-game-7.html