MLB Thread

[cleo]

I kind of believe the Altuve thing. That thing with his shirt was beyond weird.

But I don't think anything will happen unless someone comes forward with evidence. 

 

[DoctorAtomic]

1 hour ago, Harry24 said:

I  think the juicing question is a lot more complex, having to do with individual people choosing to put stuff in their bodies.  This sign stealing with electronics question has to do with a true team conspiracy to cheat.

I take your point, but it's find it hard to believe that coaches didn't know players were juicing. 

My point is that 'cheating' is largely splitting hairs. It's not like the league is taking a stand against cheating; they're saying how much you can cheat. No one realized this was where it was going? Or was this just too blatant? 

[Bewitched]

2 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

My point is that 'cheating' is largely splitting hairs. It's not like the league is taking a stand against cheating; they're saying how much you can cheat. No one realized this was where it was going? Or was this just too blatant? 

This is my opinion: You can't regulate against a guy on 2nd reading the signs and taking that information back to the dugout.  He has a clear view of the plate.  It is also equal opportunity.  Both teams can do it as long as they can get a runner to 2nd base.  It's been there since the beginning of the game.  Anything beyond that is unacceptable because it gives one team an advantage the other doesn't have.  

[Fukui San]

Bobby Valentine was on WFAN yesterday and gave an interesting point of view about this scandal. It's very much known that people are trying to steal signs, and that catchers had to be cognizant and throw the coded signs even when there weren't people on base. In his managerial days he knew which places were doing this better than others. He cited the Chicago White Sox as a place that had the reputation of being good at stealing signs.

When asked by the hosts if he were managing today and he found out his players were putting together a sign stealing system, would he put a stop to it he couldn't say that he would. It depended on how widespread he felt sign stealing was around the league at that point in time.

https://wfan.radio.com/media/audio-channel/bobby-valentine-1

 

[Bewitched]

[catlover79]

I'm shocked that no one here has started calling this team the Houston Asterisks yet. I agree - they should have to forfeit the title and turn in the trophy, rings, etc. 

[Ms Blue Jay]

Lots of crazy stuff going on on Twitter.

While some people said this tweet was from Carlos Beltran's niece, someone else said that it's actually an MLB player ghostwriting?  LOL!

Edited January 17, 2020 by Ms Blue Jay

[Perfect Xero]

The braves gm was banned for life and the team is still under sanctions until the 2021=2022 ifa period because they gave extra money to poor teenagers in Latin America which everyone agrees all the teams were doing to some degree.

I think the Astros are getting off light by comparison for directly cheating to win games and a world series. 

[Ms Blue Jay]

I am in awe of how good this is

 

[Was-MArsenault]

My mom and I were both shocked to find out when Alex Cora was behind this.

I'm glad that the Red Sox fired him.

Edited January 17, 2020 by MikaelaArsenault

[DoctorAtomic]

15 hours ago, Bewitched said:

This is my opinion: You can't regulate against a guy on 2nd reading the signs and taking that information back to the dugout.  He has a clear view of the plate.  It is also equal opportunity.  Both teams can do it as long as they can get a runner to 2nd base.

Technically it's equal opportunity because both teams have access to cameras too. I take the point though. 

I don't have an issue with stealing signs, but the real context here is people are determining where the line is in terms of 'you can cheat to this point, then after that, no.' Who makes that decision? I just don't find the league in a credible position to make that determination. 

I don't know the impact of knowing the pitch translates to certain success either. I understand that if you know a fastball, change up, curveball is coming, then nominally, the likelihood of making contact goes up enormously. I don't necessarily think anyone can really know how often that translates to getting on base though. I don't think you can make a clear statistical connection to winning the world series and knowing the pitch coming. It's not like the team sucked ass and suddenly won it all. 

Why not just mic up the pitcher and catcher? They radio plays into the QB in football now, and they used to use signs. 

[JTMacc99]

1 hour ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I don't have an issue with stealing signs, but the real context here is people are determining where the line is in terms of 'you can cheat to this point, then after that, no.' Who makes that decision? I just don't find the league in a credible position to make that determination. 

The use of binoculars (or a telescope) or electronic devices is illegal in today’s rules. Everything else is fair game, however. So I guess that answers the question of who makes the decision of where the line is. Somebody already did, and it's in the written rules. 

Interestingly, almost a year ago in February 2019 the league sent out a communication to the teams reminding them of the actual league rules about using electronic devices, cameras, and whatever else due to all of the talk about teams doing exactly what punishments are being handed out for right now. 

1 hour ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I don't know the impact of knowing the pitch translates to certain success either.

I think it's substantial. At least one pitcher is already on record as saying that he'd much rather pitch to a guy juiced up on steroids than somebody who knows what pitch is coming. 

1 hour ago, DoctorAtomic said:

Why not just mic up the pitcher and catcher? They radio plays into the QB in football now, and they used to use signs. 

That's an interesting question! It would speed up the game if we could dispense with all of the signalling and coordinating signaling for each pitch. The problem would be that the catcher couldn't actually talk to the pitcher, as the batter is right there and would hear what he's saying. 

[theatremouse]

It would be hilarious if the buzzer devices currently used for transmitting the cheating-obtained signs got turned around and were used as the official method of communicating the pitch between the battery.

[xaxat]

I'm not an analytics expert, but I would bet money that teams have deep databases developed from pitching signs visible, not from "illegal" sources, but from regular TV broadcasts. 

Center field cam, you get to see the sign and then the resulting pitch. Throw that into a database. You know their tendency. Catcher changes signs, from first sign to second etc. Database catches that. Changing signs becomes totally ineffective and the ability to communicate that live to the hitter could be a big advantage.

 

 

[doodlebug]

3 minutes ago, xaxat said:

I'm not an analytics expert, but I would bet money that teams have deep databases developed from pitching signs visible, not from "illegal" sources, but from regular TV broadcasts. 

Center field cam, you get to see the sign and then the resulting pitch. Throw that into a database. You know their tendency. Catcher changes signs, from first sign to second etc. Database catches that. Changing signs becomes totally ineffective and the ability to communicate that live to the hitter could be a big advantage.

 

 

But isn't that basically what savvy players do anyway?  Some players are really good at picking up 'tells' from the pitcher and don't even need to see the signs to accurately predict the pitch.  Some guys are experts at figuring out the signs, even as they change. I don't think anyone wants to stop the players from using the 'computer' that is their brain to figure stuff out and use it to their advantage.  And, if a player figures something out that he thinks his teammates could use, he is free to share it with them in the dugout, the locker room or by shouting it out to the hitter.  Some players are brilliant students of the game and they deserve to be able to use that skill just like baserunning skills or a quick bat or a live arm can cause a player to rise to the top.  And every team can take advantage of having those kinds of players on their teams. MLB doesn't want to stifle this sort of quick thinking and creativity; it is the stuff that keeps the game fresh.

Yeah, I agree that all teams have databases and they all have tons of film that has been analyzed to death and that all of their players can use to prepare; but allowing them to secretly film their opponent and analyze the signals and notify the batter of the upcoming pitch while the game is in progress is well beyond that.  If the Astros wanted to videotape their opponents to steal signs in-game; that is an advantage that the other team cannot have because they don't have access to the cameras.  Same thing with the secret signals.  If what the Astros and Red Sox was doing was all so innocent; they'd have been shouting out the upcoming pitch rather than banging on trash cans.

[cleo]

I think that's one reason why they are always developing new signals or so I thought. I believe tbat have to mic them up or something if they want it to stop, or let the pitcher and catcher use watches to communicate, they remove them when batting. 

Something different has to be done. 

[xaxat]

MLB Network had a series of ads where their personalities played sympathetic "therapists" to actual players on baseball questions.

One of them was with Joe Girardi and a catcher I didn't recognize. The catcher asks therapist Joe why he can't just tell the pitcher the next pitch instead of showing signals. Girardi replies "Because the hitter can hear you."

[DoctorAtomic]

But you could talk in code just like the signals are. A WR out in football is called 55 tiger on one team and 67 poodle on another. 

Maybe one team uses colors and a certain color is the trigger - blue brown gold black. Brown means fastball only if it's after blue. I don't think it would be too hard to have effective code. You could have code in kanji. There's 3000 characters!

2 hours ago, JTMacc99 said:

4 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I don't know the impact of knowing the pitch translates to certain success either.

I think it's substantial.

That's still anecdotal and unquantifiable though. I agree that knowing the pitch is a substantial advantage but he still can miss or get an out. Especially nowadays where batters hack the shit out of everything. I would speculate there's only an handful of guys that are good enough hitters that could translate that knowledge into clear success. It's not like everyone on the team was batting 400+. Players have been stealing signs for over a century. It's not translating into instant success. 

[AimingforYoko]

7 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

But you could talk in code just like the signals are. A WR out in football is called 55 tiger on one team and 67 poodle on another. 

You thought Baseball got geeky with sabermetrics and analytics? Wait 'til Team Cryptographer is an official MLB job!

[cleo]

 

.

Edited January 18, 2020 by cleo

[Perfect Xero]

I think the comparison I saw a pitcher make is poker. If you have a tell or are holding your cards so I can see them that's your fault. If I hide a camera behind you so I can see your cards when I shouldn't be able to, that's cheating. 

[theatremouse]

The rules agree with that analogy.

[DoctorAtomic]

I'm definitely throwing in for crypto-caller. Honestly, kanji works.

2 hours ago, Perfect Xero said:

I think the comparison I saw a pitcher make is poker. If you have a tell or are holding your cards so I can see them that's your fault. If I hide a camera behind you so I can see your cards when I shouldn't be able to, that's cheating.

I don't think that's apt. In poker, the next card dealt is random. The pitcher isn't randomizing what they pitch. If you know what the cards are, sure, you change your bet, but you still don't know what that card is. In fact, in reflection, it's ridiculous because if you know I'm throwing a curveball, you still need the physical skill to actually hit the ball being thrown at you. That falls apart just based on the physical skill of the batter.

[theatremouse]

It's apt in the sense that the rules in both scenarios preclude using devices of any kind to obtain the knowledge. If you can look with your bare eyes from your normal position in the game and are able to tell, it's permitted. If you're using any type of equipment to determine the information, it is not. The question is not about whether the use of the equipment definitively causes one to win. It's the use itself which is the violation.

[Crs97]

It’s not just about putting the ball in play; it’s about extending the at bat.  If the hitter knows enough about the pitch to make contact and perhaps foul it off, the inning extends and the pitch count goes up.  How many times have we seen a foul ball that should have been caught and wasn’t; the announcers always talk about not giving the other team extra outs.  
 

I guess my analogy is Battleship:  if you catch me looking at your ship placement, can I argue that isn’t cheating because I still have to rely on my memory to sink your ship?

[DoctorAtomic]

1 hour ago, theatremouse said:

It's apt in the sense that the rules in both scenarios preclude using devices of any kind to obtain the knowledge. If you can look with your bare eyes from your normal position in the game and are able to tell, it's permitted. If you're using any type of equipment to determine the information, it is not. The question is not about whether the use of the equipment definitively causes one to win. It's the use itself which is the violation.

But again, you're drawing the line how much cheating is cheating. It's arbitrary. Throw people out of the game for stealing signs at second base. But that's ok because why? It's not enforceable? An umpire knows quite well if a runner is signaling to the batter. Code your signs better then. To take a ridiculous point of view, if you're not good enough so that your signs are so easy to decode, then that's your problem.

Like I said before, I don't really care. Cheat it out till your caught. The discussion itself is inherently flawed because it's about the degree to which cheating is allowed. I maintain MLB let that ship sail over 20 years ago, so to suddenly clutch their pearls now is laughable.

I don't see why in-game camera study is actually cheating. You look at football, they have print outs on the side line of plays during the game. It's not like baseball teams don't use video study, but all of a sudden in-game is out of bounds.

1 hour ago, Crs97 said:

It’s not just about putting the ball in play; it’s about extending the at bat.  If the hitter knows enough about the pitch to make contact and perhaps foul it off, the inning extends and the pitch count goes up.

I didn't think of that, and that's a salient point. But then I would say, have a stronger bullpen. I'm thinking along the lines of someone like Mariano Rivera. He literally had two pitches. Even if you knew what was coming, it was still hard to hit. Or even Clemens - You knew he was throwing his forkball. Go ahead and take your shot.

I'd also say that the % of players who can really extended the at bat is low.

[theatremouse]

I'm not drawing the line at how much cheating is cheating. The point I was trying to make, and is what I believe the rules say, is figuring out someone else's signs yourself is not inherently against the rules, but rather "using a device to steal signs, and to transmit them between players" is. This issue is not "how much" but "how".

I'm not saying I agree or disagree with the rules as they are, but that is what they are. I'd liken this more to: if you can throw a wicked curveball using skill with your arm and hand, that's fine; if you put a foreign substance on the ball to make it move that way, that's cheating. Perhaps a bad analogy since MLB has been atrocious at enforcing that particular rule, but the point is that the advantage in either case (knowing what pitch is coming/lots of movement on the pitch) is not what is disallowed. It's the method of getting there that's disallowed.

I'm also not suggesting the runner on second signaling the batter is OK. I'm suggesting if the pitcher is tipping his pitches such that the batter can tell by looking at him from the batters box (or if the batter when on second himself sees something he can later use in his own at bat) that's fine. That's what I meant by "from his own position". To go back to the Poker analogy: someone standing behind the opponent looking at the cards and telling you: not OK. Reading a tell from sitting in your own seat: OK.

[DoctorAtomic]

There though, doctoring the ball undermines the point because it's been a staple of the game. 

I don't really like baseball enough to care that much, but I find the intellectual dimension actually interesting. Just in terms of cheating in sports in general. 

Now they're saying other teams did it too. So if everyone does then what? 

[Lantern7]

On 8/9/2019 at 10:36 PM, Lantern7 said:

Okay. So.

Im trying to burn off DVR space, but I turn to SNY to see how the Mets are doing. Down by three in the bottom of the ninth. Hit, hit, Todd Frazier homer. Tie game. They get two outs, but manage to get two runners on base. And then Michael Conforto laces a hit for his first career walkoff.

The Devil has to be involved. Contracts had to have been signed. Souls had to have been used as currency. Holy shit, what is up with the Mets?!?

And that game was at the top of the 2019 edition of Amazin’ Finishes on SNY.

[Perfect Xero]

14 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

But again, you're drawing the line how much cheating is cheating. It's arbitrary. Throw people out of the game for stealing signs at second base. But that's ok because why? It's not enforceable? An umpire knows quite well if a runner is signaling to the batter. Code your signs better then. To take a ridiculous point of view, if you're not good enough so that your signs are so easy to decode, then that's your problem.

Like I said before, I don't really care. Cheat it out till your caught. The discussion itself is inherently flawed because it's about the degree to which cheating is allowed. I maintain MLB let that ship sail over 20 years ago, so to suddenly clutch their pearls now is laughable.

I don't see why in-game camera study is actually cheating. You look at football, they have print outs on the side line of plays during the game. It's not like baseball teams don't use video study, but all of a sudden in-game is out of bounds.

I didn't think of that, and that's a salient point. But then I would say, have a stronger bullpen. I'm thinking along the lines of someone like Mariano Rivera. He literally had two pitches. Even if you knew what was coming, it was still hard to hit. Or even Clemens - You knew he was throwing his forkball. Go ahead and take your shot.

I'd also say that the % of players who can really extended the at bat is low.

One might wonder why the Astros even bothered stealing signs at all ...

The NFL still punishes teams for filming other teams practices or filming their sidelines. Using agreed upon resources that everyone is allowed to use is different from using extra resources. 

MLB tried to ignore what the Astros did, it became impossible because the players who knew the huge advantage they were getting went to the press with it to force them to do something about it. 

[NUguy514]

The fact that two of the last three World Series champions (or "champions") have won while breaking this particular rule so blatantly is all the evidence anyone should need that they had unfair advantages in their championship runs and, at the very least, should have their championships vacated.

Edited January 19, 2020 by NUguy514

[DoctorAtomic]

I would be really surprised if that happened. 

I don't think MLB actually cared how much teams cheat. They care about teams getting caught. Everyone has access to the same resources. You just can't be overly much about it. Now it's this huge mess. If they really cared they would have been more proactive. 

[mojoween]

If Jeet gets into the HOF on first ballot that’s great.  He is a legit hall of famer, not borderline.

But I hope there is that one guy who doesn’t vote for him.  It just feels right if Mo were the only unanimous in history.

(I’ll repeat this argument when Trout has been retired for five years)

[wknt3]

18 minutes ago, mojoween said:

If Jeet gets into the HOF on first ballot that’s great.  He is a legit hall of famer, not borderline.

But I hope there is that one guy who doesn’t vote for him.  It just feels right if Mo were the only unanimous in history.

(I’ll repeat this argument when Trout has been retired for five years)

I'd honestly be surprised if Jeter gets 100 percent, even though he's a lock for first ballot. Unlike Rivera where it was clear that the was the best there ever was at his position no matter how you look at it, and whom was universally loved and/or respected throughout baseball, Jeter has enough detractors out there that one of them will leave him off their ballot. Probably not one of the public ballots, although I can see someone trying to get clicks by explaining why his advanced defensive stats, or not moving from SS, or what he's done in Miami means they can't vote for him. But somebody will if only because they are jealous that their wife wanted them to use their press connections to help them meet Derek 20 years ago...

[DoctorAtomic]

He wasn't great defensively though except for the one play against the A's. I'm a Jeter fan and would go so far as to say that he might be the best timely hitter, but 100% isn't a debate.

[xaxat]

Remember the jokes about how Jeter wan't the best shortstop on his own team after A Rod signed with the Yankees?

[DoctorAtomic]

He wasn't. He should have switched positions. He still should get in though. 

[Was-MArsenault]

Resolution urges MLB to strip Astros, Red Sox of World Series titles, award them to Dodgers

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/28531536/resolution-urges-mlb-strip-astros-red-sox-world-series-titles-award-dodgers?platform=amp

[mojoween]

Any non-Yankee fans watching the HOF announcement show have already put several feet through their televisions.

[Sew Sumi]

Who was Jeter's lone dissenter? I'm guessing a disgruntled writer from Oakland. I know after all these years that play still stings. I was in the stands that day. 

Edited January 21, 2020 by Sew Sumi

[catrox14]

THis Rockies fan is ecstatic that Larry Walker is a HOFer.  Hot damn!!!

[ebk57]

22 minutes ago, mojoween said:

Any non-Yankee fans watching the HOF announcement show have already put several feet through their televisions.

Fortunately, I wasn't watching... 

 

I just dropped in to say mazel tov to you!  (It's kinda weird that you were the first person I thought of... although I guess that means I don't have any friends who are Yankee fans.  Which is good 🙂 )

[Perfect Xero]

6 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

THis Rockies fan is ecstatic that Larry Walker is a HOFer.  Hot damn!!!

He deserves it, he was almost as productive as Jeter over his career, crazy that one is almost unanimous first ballot and the other barely scrapped in on year 10.

[Crs97]

My (possibly) UO is that I don’t want to know the percentages. People either get in or don’t.  Otherwise you just end up with arguments that cannot be won or lost, like an argument I have had more than once:  I personally think that if Babe Ruth wasn’t unanimous, then nobody should be; and you will never convince me Mariano was better just because he is the only unanimous HOF’er.

[Lantern7]

3 hours ago, MikaelaArsenault said:

Resolution urges MLB to strip Astros, Red Sox of World Series titles, award them to Dodgers

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/28531536/resolution-urges-mlb-strip-astros-red-sox-world-series-titles-award-dodgers?platform=amp

Sounds like a great way to find commentators. Imagine going into the woods, being on a manhunt. “I think the Dodgers should get the World Series titles from 2017-2018!” Then five dudes pop out from the bushes, screaming, “OH, FUCK THAT!”

[NUguy514]

While I'm on record as wanting the Astros and Red Sox stripped of their WS titles and while I'm a Dodgers fan, I do not want those titles awarded to the Dodgers.  Those years should be champion-less.

 

[AimingforYoko]

1 hour ago, Sew Sumi said:

Who was Jeter's lone dissenter?

Easy joke in 3...2...1... : One baseball writer who will not be getting a gift basket.

[DoctorAtomic]

4 hours ago, MikaelaArsenault said:

Resolution urges MLB to strip Astros, Red Sox of World Series titles, award them to Dodgers

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/28531536/resolution-urges-mlb-strip-astros-red-sox-world-series-titles-award-dodgers?platform=amp

You can't gift a title to anyone. Even when college teams get caught, they only strip the title or win.

 

Just because a joke is easy doesn't mean it's not good if you can land it.

[Fukui San]

I would only support stripping the Astros and Red Sox of their World Series wins if the named winner was determined by a seven game series of Strat-o-Matic baseball games between the Yankees and Dodgers' rosters.

[DoctorAtomic]

This is the correct solution to the problem.