Nieuwendyk

Are you sure about that?

I recall a game against the Yanks years ago when he was having back trouble. The announcers said he was in the original lineup and had a discussion about this very thing. They said, after some "research" that if he had not make an appearance, the streak would ghave ended.

The screwy situation would be a game that gets rained out after 5 innings with the score tied. The game is official, so the stats count. But the Score is tied, so the game doesn't. Probably this would interrupt a hitting streak, even though the game would never go in the team's record. Then again, there used to be tie games from time to time in the old days, which must've been handled the same way.

My favorite hitting streak story involves Don Mattingly. Back in '83 when he was a rookie, Mattingly had two hitting streaks of around 20 games apiece, separated by one one hitless game. That game happened to be the pine tar game, which he had entered in the 8th inning as a defensive replacement for Steve Balboni. When they ended up replaying the ninth inning of that game, Mattingly got a plate appearance in the bottom of the ninth. Since this was the continuation of a game from a month before, the stats would have been attributed to the original date. Had he gotten a hit (he didn't) he would have retroactively had a 40 or so game hitting streak, which would have set the record for the longest hitting streak by a rookie.

The (practically) verbatim wording of the consecutive games played rule is ... the player must have at least one plate appearance, or play at least one half inning in the field.

Anybody here play the "beat the streak" game on MLB.com? It's fun; check it out.

[q]the player must have at least one plate appearance, or play at least one half inning in the field.[/q]

That doesn't make sense. What of the situation where a PH is lifted for another PH without ever actually facing a pitch (which happens a few times a season due to a L/R pitching switch)? This cannot be a plate appearance, right? Yet it is counted as a GP, right?

So, is the "consecutive GP" rule distinct from the "ordinary" GP rule?



Post Edited (05-22-03 18:14)

Once the hitter is announced, it counts as a plate appearance. Whether he actually sees a pitch is not relevant.

I'm interested to know if the rule that Adam described applies for a DH. In other words, until he actually gets announced as the hitter, has the DH "appeared" in the game? Based on Adam's wording, the answer seems to be "no" but you can make the argument that since the DH is the designated hitter for the pitcher's spot, once the pitcher appears on the field, the DH is considered to have "appeared" in the game.

The double pinch-hit situation can't be a plate appearance in the sense of on-base-percentage calculations, since I'm pretty sure that's defined in terms of results. It just makes no sense that being pinch hit for should lower your OBP. But it must be a different rule for purposes of games played.

Can you pinch hit for a batter in the middle of an at bat if the opposing team changes pitchers?

I don't think the DH counts as having appeared until he gets a plate appearance. I think it is true that a player is not considered in the game until he is announced. Although going to the plate umpire and telling him probably counts.

Keith K '93 wrote:
Can you pinch hit for a batter in the middle of an at bat if the opposing team changes pitchers?

Yes, but the reverse isn't necessarily true. A pitcher has to face a single batter or pitch 1/3 of an inning (i.e., if a runner is caught stealing on the first pitch, the pitcher can be replaced).

Keep in mind plate appearence != (that's 'doesn't equal' for you non-geeks) at-bar. Only at-bats (not walks, etc) are used as the denominator for batting average.

DeltaOne81 '03 wrote:

Keep in mind plate appearence != (that's 'doesn't equal' for you non-geeks) at-bar. Only at-bats (not walks, etc) are used as the denominator for batting average.

KeithK said "OBP." OBP != BA -- and is measured by PA, not AB. I suspect the answer to Keith's question is that it is possible to have a GP without a PA.



Post Edited (05-22-03 18:15)

I have heard broadcasters faithfully repeat that a pitcher must face at least one hitter to conclusion before being pulled, short of injury. I've also heard broadcasters repeat complete nonsense, but there seems to be unanimity on this.



Post Edited (05-22-03 18:33)

Actually, the DH announced in the lineup is required to bat at least once, unless he gets injured. This rule was allegedly adopted to counter Earl Weaver's practice of listing the previous day's starting pitcher as the DH and then pinch-hitting for him in his first at-bat, thus concealing the identity of he DH.

Would Weaver's strategy be all that more effective than a visiting team announcing the previous SP in a platoon position in the first three slots in the lineup, to be pinch hit for by the preferred player when that slot was reached?

I think I'd rather have the SP available for emergency PR (or even OF) duty in case of an extra inning game,

Greg wrote:

I have heard broadcasters faithfully repeat that a pitcher must face at least one hitter to conclusion before being pulled, short of injury. I've also heard broadcasters repeat complete nonsense, but there seems to be unanimity on this.

Well, it ain't exactly true. If a pitcher comes in with 2 outs and picks off a runner, he doesn't have to start the next inning. But here is the rule:

8.06
A professional league shall adopt the following rule pertaining to the visit of the manager or coach to the pitcher: (a) This rule limits the number of trips a manager or coach may make to any one pitcher in any one inning; (b) A second trip to the same pitcher in the same inning will cause this pitcher's automatic removal; (c) The manager or coach is prohibited from making a second visit to the mound while the same batter is at bat, but (d) if a pinch hitter is substituted for this batter, the manager or coach may make a second visit to the mound, but must remove the pitcher. . . . In a case where a manager has made his first trip to the mound and then returns the second time to the mound in the same inning with the same pitcher in the game and the same batter at bat, after being warned by the umpire that he cannot return to the mound, the manager shall be removed from the game and the pitcher required to pitch to the batter until he is retired or gets on base. After the batter is retired, or becomes a base runner, then this pitcher must be removed from the game. . . .

So I was wrong also - there doesn't appear to be an exception for a CS for the 1st or 2d out (and it isn't in the ellipses), so the pitcher would have to face a full batter - unless the other team sends up a pinch hitter (so now I don't know who was right).

I'm not so sure that that's 100% conclusive... it only says the manager may not make two trips... he is free however to remove the pitcher on his first trip (right???). Having read the whole of rule 8 ("The pitcher" on MLB's site, I see nothing mentioning anything about having to pitch to a batter. Of course, I can't seem to find a section of the rulebook about player substitutions in general, which may have the answer.

Edit: Now it's conclusive
3.05
(a) The pitcher named in the batting order handed the umpire in chief, as provided in Rules 4.01 (a) and 4.01 (b), shall pitch to the first batter or any substitute batter until such batter is put out or reaches first base, unless the pitcher sustains injury or illness which, in the judgment of the umpire in chief, incapacitates him from pitching. (b) If the pitcher is replaced, the substitute pitcher shall pitch to the batter then at bat, or any substitute batter, until such batter is put out or reaches first base, or until the offensive team is put out, unless the substitute pitcher sustains injury or illness which, in the umpire in chief's judgment, incapacitates him for further play as a pitcher. (c) If an improper substitution is made for the pitcher, the umpire shall direct the proper pitcher to return to the game until the provisions of this rule are fulfilled. If the improper pitcher is permitted to pitch, any play that results is legal. The improper pitcher becomes the proper pitcher as soon as he makes his first pitch to the batter, or as soon as any runner is put out. If a manager attempts to remove a pitcher in violation of Rule 3.05 (c) the umpire shall notify the manager of the offending club that it cannot be done. If, by chance, the umpire in chief has, through oversight, announced the incoming improper pitcher, he should still correct the situation before the improper pitcher pitches. Once the improper pitcher delivers a pitch he becomes the proper pitcher.



Post Edited (05-22-03 23:20)

Regarding the rule for keeping a streak alive ... Whether anyone believes it makes sense or not, it's the rule. But, if you insist, don't take my word for it:

GUIDELINES FOR CUMULATIVE PERFORMANCE RECORDS
10.24

[www.mlb.com]

It's the last item of the entire rule book (except, I suppose, the index).

It may not make sense semantically -- the pinch hitter being pinch hit for being credited with a game played, but not extending the games played streak -- but it does make sense logically.

Rule books are a wonderful thing.

BRA ... you were correct. A pitcher must pitch to a full batter, or retire the side (caught stealing, pickoff, etc...)

Anyone care to take a crack at the scoring rules for who gets credited with strikeout/walk when a batter/pitcher is replaced in mid at-bat? Consider it a quiz.

If a batter or pitcher is replaced in the middle of the at bat, the replacement gets credited for a walk if the change occurred prior to the second ball. Otherwise, the original batter or pitcher gets credited with the walk. If the change occurred before the second strike, then the replacement gets credited for the strikeout. Otherwise, the departing batter or pitcher gets credited with the strikeout.

big red apple wrote:

Well, it ain't exactly true. If a pitcher comes in with 2 outs and picks off a runner, he doesn't have to start the next inning.

This actually happened a few weeks ago - a Baltimore pitcher (I forget who, but I think it was BJ Ryan) came in in a late inning with two outs and a man on first, and picked the guy off without throwing a pitch. The Orioles then took the lead for good in the bottom of the inning before he was replaced in the following inning, so he actually was credited with a win without throwing a single pitch.

Now back to the eHoy Forum...

BTW I wasn't challenging your rule above, I was accepting it and then opining that MLB is being inconsistent. You, OTOH, are being thorough -- a Good thing.

[q]Anyone care to take a crack at the scoring rules for who gets credited with strikeout/walk when a batter/pitcher is replaced in mid at-bat? Consider it a quiz.[/q]

I'll take a crack at it based on about 1500 Met games listened to. Consider it the "Ralph Kiner and for that who really knows?" guess.

If pitcher 1 has thrown at least one ball to the batter, then pitcher 1 gets credit if the batter walks. Else, pitcher 2 gets credit for the result.

If batter 1 has had at least 1 strike against him, then batter 1 gets credit if batter 2 strikes out. Else batter 2 gets credit for the result.

Urban (er, diamond) legend, but a guess.

[q]he actually was credited with a win without throwing a single pitch[/q]

I wonder if we can do even better. Let's say bottom of the ninth, Visitor leads 3-2, Home has bases loaded with one out. Home hits sac fly to CF scoring the tying run, then scores the winning run when the throw gets away from the catcher.

However, Visitor maintains that the runner on third tagged too soon. Just to be remembered forever, Visitor's manager replaces his pitcher. New Pitcher throws to 3b where the runner is called out, ending the game.

Does New Pitcher get credit for an appearance and a save?

Greg wrote:

[q]he actually was credited with a win without throwing a single pitch[/q]

Does New Pitcher get credit for an appearance and a save?

Depends on whether the change of pitchers, like throwing a pitch, waives the appeal.

Greg is half right on the answer. For some reason, what he says is correct for batters ... but for pitchers, it's determined by whether it's a "hitter's count" or "pitcher's count" at the time of entry.

For example, a 2-1 count to the batter - the new batter takes over and strikes out. Strike out goes to the first batter. 2-1, 1-1, 3-1, 2-2, 1-2, 3-2 -- doesn't matter. So long as there's already one strike to the batter, the new batter can't be charged with a strikeout.

But the reverse is not true. If a pitcher enters with the count 1-2, and walks the batter ... the original pitcher is not charged with the walk just because one ball has been issued. It goes to the new pitcher because the count was in his favor when he entered.

Nieuwy update: wity 3 mins to go in regulation and game 7 tied 2-2, Joe is still out. He started tonight but left after 2 mins with back spasms and is not expected back.

Friesen scores with 2:14 remaining, 3-2 NJ.

Adam, this part of rule 10.17 seems to argue against your interpretation:
[Q](b) When the batter leaves the game with two strikes against him, and the substitute batter completes a strikeout, charge the strikeout and the time at bat to the first batter. If the substitute batter completes the turn at bat in any other manner, including a base on balls, score the action as having been that of the substitute batter. [/Q]
I interpret this to mean that the first batter only is given the strikeout (rather than the pinch hitter) if he leaves after two strikes.

Keith, I think you're right. Just 2 strikes - not 1 or 2. Still strange that the batters are handled in a different manner than the pitchers - but that's the rule.

his return doubtfull for tonights game

Details...

[www.bergen.com]

As of June 4, what is the extent of Joe's injury? Has he been scratched from the whole final, is he a long shot, is hye day-to-day, are the Devils not talking at all?



Post Edited (06-04-03 16:25)

Greg wrote:

As of June 4, what is the extent of Joe's injury? Has he been scratched from the whole final, is he a long shot, is hye day-to-day, are the Devils not talking at all?
Post Edited (06-04-03 16:25)

In today's NY Times it was said Joe might practice today (Wednesday) and play tomorrow night. Pat Burns was quoted saying Joe was the Devils' best player in the Ottawa series. He sure would help with faceoffs.

[www.nytimes.com]

Thanks, Al.

Here's the Record's report:

[www.bergen.com]

That's the most optimistic comment since he went down. He skated yesterday....Tuesday. Not surprisingly for the Finals, the Devils perhaps concealed the nature of his injury....groin rather than hip.

Not lookin' so good yesterday:

[www.nytimes.com]

[www.nhl.com]

and the Record's version:

[www.bergen.com]

I listened briefly to the Devils' radio broadcast last night. He doesn't seem too likely for game 6 either.

JH

Jeff,

I feel for you. Hennessey and Velischek, in particular, are unlistenable!!!

Jeff Hopkins '82 wrote:

I listened briefly to the Devils' radio broadcast last night. He doesn't seem too likely for game 6 either.
JH

I'd be surprised if the Devils fly him to the west coast and back on the slim chance he could play tomorrow night. Ten hours on an airplane--even in a first class seat--isn't gonna help whatever his problem is.

Pandolfo's goal last night looked like a distant replay of the J.D. Forrest goal in Providence. Overturned though it was, at least the ref made a call last night.

Actually, I found them tolerable.

You want intolerable? I'm a Flyers fan, and I can't stand their TV line-up. The play-by-play guy is OK (I forget his name), but the color is done by Garry Dornhoefer and Steve Coates. They can't go 30 seconds without bitching about a call and all they want are to see fights. I'd turn down the sound and put the radio crew on, but they're just boring.

JH

He did make the trip west. Burns said that if he CAN play, he WILL play.

Sure he made the trip west...you don't think he'd miss the Stanley Cup celebration if they win Game 6 do you? I know I sure as hell wouldn't.

True but Burns clearly said that he made the trip with the intention/hope of playing.

Sherry Skalko, ice-level commentator in Providence and ESPN hockey writer, says Joe will dress for warm-ups and possible post-game celebration but will not play tonight.

Nice link on top playoff goalies for Ken Dryden fans:

[sports.espn.go.com]

Joe apparently has made it known that he would love to finish his career as a Toronto Maple Leaf. (Along with most other veteran Canadians.) He's a free agent this summer. Unfortunately, there are a number of mentions around the web of Joe wanting to go to Toronto but no hint that Toronto is at all interested. Even though I'm a Bruins fan, it would be tons easier to cheer for Nieuwendyk if he were a Leaf. Anything but Jersey.

Hmm - I know Dryden doesn't keep in touch with Cornell hockey all that much (at all?), but just maybe the Big Red connection would give Joe a glimmer of hope? Who knows...

Robb Newman wrote:

Hmm - I know Dryden doesn't keep in touch with Cornell hockey all that much (at all?)...

Dryden did attend the July 2000 summer golf outing and hockey alumni reunion that honored Ned and the 1967 and 1970 championship teams.

When was the last time that either Dryden or Nieuwendyk attended a game at Lynah?

The father of friend from my floor this year is a Cornell faculty member and really into Cornell sports (follow that?) - he goes to hockey, lacrosse, football, baseball, wrestling, and I'm sure more... As such, I believe he has gathered some kind of informal ties with the athletic department, and has become an acquaintance with Ken Dryden, who he also happened to sit with at a Cornell hockey game this season... and implied that Dryden should have a talk with Lenny about staying in school .
( mmmmmm, run on )

So unless she and her father are compulsive liars, Dryden isn't a stranger to our friendly confines. Nieuwy I cannot speak for though.

Nieuwy is often around for the alumni game, but making it up during the hockey season is probably pretty hard, especially when he was in Dallas.

Nieuwendyk went to the game at Princeton this year and I believe an article about the game mentioned that it was the first Cornell hockey game he had been to since he left school, for the obvious reason that the two seasons overlap and until the trade last season, he had been based far from Cornell's stomping grounds.

Also he lives part of the offseason at his place on Cayuga Lake. The year Ithaca hosted the Empire State Games, he dropped the puck at center ice in the opening game, IIRC.

If I had to guess, I would think NHL rules would prohibit Dryden, as president of the Leafs, from talking to LeNeveu about professional-related matters.

My local ESPN radio affiliate is reporting that Joe will be a scratch for game 7.

From the website:

[sports.espn.go.com]

Local coverage.

[www.bergen.com]

Now that they can't fool anybody, the Devils reveal it's a torn oblique muscle. Thats pretty serious for a hockey player. He gave it his best shot!

I think it's time for Oates to get a ring!