Jump to content

Joe Girardi: In favor of replay, for calls that go against Yankees


skanar

Recommended Posts

ESPN New York juxtaposes Girardi's comments on the blown Mauer double call in 2009 and the blown Infante at second call last night:

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/yankees/post/_/id/46491/girardis-evoloution-on-replay

2009: "...it would break the rhythm of the game...where would you stop?"

2012: "...in this day and age, there's just too much at stake. And the technology is available."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if they trained the Umps properly, like they used to, these calls against the Yankees wouldn't happen in the first place.

The insolence of these umps. Don't they know their place? Don't they know these are the New York Yankees? Don't 27 World Series titles mean anything anymore? Don't they realize how many YES subscribers aren't getting the content they paid for?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, now, that juxtaposition would work better if in 2009 he was for replay and in 2012 he was against it after benefiting from some bad calls, or perhaps if those statements had been made in the same year. But really, three years is plenty of time for someone's opinion on a subject to change. Far be it from me to defend the Yankees on an Orioles board, but this isn't really any egregious flip-flopping.

Smoltz was on Mike & Mike today, and I think he has the right idea. You're not going to go from what MLB has right now to the NFL's replay system overnight. He was advocating making any play which directly results in a run to be reviewable, which I can agree with as the next step. Have an umpire or two in a video booth during the entire game, assisting the on-field personnel. As Smoltz said, the arguments when a manager comes onto the field after a close call take longer than a review would anyway. I think it can be implemented without significantly lengthening the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it can be implemented without significantly lengthening the game.

I don't.

And I think Nate hit the pole. It really is pandora's box. Just make the umpires accountable by reviewing missed plays and putting an umpire scoring system in place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't.

And I think Nate hit the pole. It really is pandora's box. Just make the umpires accountable by reviewing missed plays and putting an umpire scoring system in place.

If they already have an ump or two in the booth watching video, relaying down missed calls shouldn't take longer than when a manager comes out to argue. If the umps on the field have to go to the booth every time, then I agree it would take too long.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair to Girardi, a lot of people's views on this subject are evolving, including mine. I'm much more in favor or replay than I used to be, and I'd also support electronic calling of balls and strikes at this point, based on all the terrible umpiring I'm seeing on a daily basis.

However, I should point out that I thought the umps did a good job in the Yankees-Orioles series. They actually rung up Jeter on strikes several times, and were generally fair to both sides and pretty accurate on the ball-strike calls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair to Girardi, a lot of people's views on this subject are evolving, including mine. I'm much more in favor or replay than I used to be, and I'd also support electronic calling of balls and strikes at this point, based on all the terrible umpiring I'm seeing on a daily basis.

However, I should point out that I thought the umps did a good job in the Yankees-Orioles series. They actually rung up Jeter on strikes several times, and were generally fair to both sides and pretty accurate on the ball-strike calls.

MLB claims they haven't set stuff up like this because it's not in every ball park. Frankly, I'm split on the issue of replay, but I think there could be one extra camera ump who can make decisions on egregious miscalls. Let the close calls stay to the umpires decision so it won't take 5 mins of reviewing, but things like what happened to Cano wouldn't take more than a 10 second review to know the call was wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Posts

    • It's fine, but I would personally prefer having Cowser and Adley taking tons of pitches back-to-back before Gunnar further punishes the opposing starting pitcher with high exit velo barrels. 
    • I was going to say pretty much the same thing about Cowser in my post, but left out my thoughts to keep the post more Gunnar-centric. But I totally agree that Cowser fits the best as this team's leadoff hitter, especially since Holliday doesn't look like he's going to make an impact offensively as early as most of us thought heading into the season.  Going back to last season, I've said Cowser has the best mix of patience, hit tool, power, and speed to be a great leadoff hitter. The strikeouts are most likely always going to be high with him, but he has .380-.400+ OBP makeup, and having someone like that hitting leadoff with Adley and Gunnar hitting directly behind Cowser is going to set things up for an elite offense which is much more dynamic and less one-dimensional than the what we've seen up until this point. Cowser Adley Gunnar Westburg O'Hearn Santander Mountcastle Is an ideal top 7 against RHP for right now, with Kjerstad (replacing Hays) and Mayo (essentially replacing Mateo and bumping Westburg to 2B) making the lineup legitimately scary within the next couple months. Mullins and Hays need to be phased out, with Santander and Mountcastle not far behind if those two continue struggling and not reaching base enough to justify hitting in the middle of the order.
    • A lot of teams (likely driven by analytics) are putting their best overall hitter at 2 (like the Yankees batting Soto 2, and the Dodgers batting Shohei 2) to maximize ABs while guaranteeing that a high-OBP guy is batting in front of him to give him opportunities with men on base.  That's probably what we want.  It seems logical considering how thoroughly debunked small-ball in the first inning has been.  Rutschman at 3 is fine.
    • Realistically I think Adley as the leadoff guy is the best lineup for us but if he has trouble batting leadoff in half the games because he can't get his catcher's gear off fast enough then I get it.   Cowser has continued to be incredibly patient, and if Adley can't be our leadoff guy then Cowser is probably our next best option.  Of course Cowser also hits a lot of bombs, so it'd be interesting if he goes on another heater.   If Cowser gets off the schneid then Cowser leadoff and Gunnar at 2 could be incredibly potent.  I don't think Cowser is actually playing that badly, he's just been running into some bad luck.  And he's starting to wake up a little bit anyway.
    • Agreed, appreciate the stats. Gunnar isn't a leadoff hitter - he's a prototypical #3 hitter or cleanup hitter. Hyde writes poor lineups, and Gunnar hitting leadoff has been one of the consistent problems with the offense this season. Gunnar hitting mostly solo shots is both a consequence and reflection of this offense's flaws - the O's have too many low-OBP hitters in the lineup (hitting in less-than-optimal spots for the most part) and are too reliant on solo homers to generate runs. At least Hyde has started hitting Westburg leadoff against LHP, which is progress, but Hyde is way too stubborn and too slow to make the correct adjustments. He's very similar to Buck Showalter in that respect.  Anyway, I look forward to Hyde waking up and moving Gunnar down to #3/#4 against RHP.  
    • While the return on the Tettleton trade wasn't ideal, 1: I don't think you can really expect a 30 year old catcher to put up a career year and then follow it up with another one, and 2: we had Chris Hoiles who played quite well for us following Tettleton's departure.  If we had forward thinking GMs we probably would split them at C and give them DH/1B/OF games on their non catching days, which is what Detroit did with Tettleton to prolong his career after 1992.  (He was basically the same hitter from 1993-1995 but he stopped catching with regularity so his WAR was much lower.)   The Davis trade was so completely undefensible on every level, not the least of which because we already had a player who was at least as good as Davis was on the team, but he didn't fit the stereotypical batting profile of a 1B.  At least today teams wouldn't be so quick to dismiss a 10 HR first baseman if he's got an OBP of .400.
    • The Glenn Davis trade was so bad it overshadowed another really bad trade in team history. The Orioles traded Mickey Tettleton that same offseason for Jeff Robinson in part because Tettleton had an off year in 1990 with a .223 batting average and a .381 slugging percentage. Except Tettleton drew 116 walks making his OBP .376 and his OPS+ was 116. Jeff Robinson was coming off a 5.96 ERA in 145 innings pitched. I have no idea what the team was thinking with this trade. Robinson did manage to lower his ERA in 1991 to 5.18 his only Orioles season. There's no way this trade is made today in the age of analytics. Tettleton meanwhile put up 171 home runs and an .859 OPS for the remainder of his career. 😬 Just a bad trade that doesn't get talked about enough thanks to Glenn Davis.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...