The $210 Million Man - Scherzer Appreciation and Doubts

[varoadking]

This.

So, your saying things can change?

[spidernat]

  Did that happen or did I dream it up?

It didn't happen quite the way you embellished it.

Last year that was true.

This.

coming from two of Espinosa's biggest cum swallowers.

[slhubic]

it's like he's worth 211 million.

[bluestreak]

My two favorite pitchers, Max and Justin Verlander, both had no-hitters going late-ish that were broken up in rinky-dink fashion. And they both ended up falling apart and losing the game. I can't decide if losing the no-no is demoralizing, or if they were gassed and willing it because of the no-no.
I also can't decide if a bunt single to break up a perfect game is a clown move or not.

[HalfSmokes]

I also can't decide if a bunt single to break up a perfect game is a clown move or not.

not if the bunter's team ends up winning. Expecting a team to prioritize preserving an opponent's no-hitter over winning may be the most ridiculous aspect of the unwritten rules

[bluestreak]

not if the bunter's team ends up winning. Expecting a team to prioritize preserving an opponent's no-hitter over winning may be the most ridiculous aspect of the unwritten rules

The fact that the Mariner's won makes this academic, but I imagine there is some point where it is bad. I mean would it be ok with 2 outs in 9th?

[HalfSmokes]

The fact that the Mariner's won makes this academic, but I imagine there is some point where it is bad. I mean would it be ok with 2 outs in 9th?

Maybe, but after 9 innings most pitchers are gassed, so even down by a decent amount there's a chance for a rally

[dcpatti]

My two favorite pitchers, Max and Justin Verlander, both had no-hitters going late-ish that were broken up in rinky-dink fashion. And they both ended up falling apart and losing the game. I can't decide if losing the no-no is demoralizing, or if they were gassed and willing it because of the no-no.
I also can't decide if a bunt single to break up a perfect game is a clown move or not.

A bunt single to break up a perfect game is perfectly legit in my book. The opponent is not supposed to roll over for you just because you're working a no-hitter or perfect game. They're supposed to get on base however they can.  Leaning into a pitch to draw a HBP is a clown move on any day,  and outside the limits of "get on base however you can" though.

Let's not forget--- Max was working a perfect game into the 8th inning against the Brewers last year and it was broken up by a crappy little bloop single that plopped just over Rendon's glove and a lot of people hated on Rendon for a bunch of days after that.  Max and Tony don't seem to have lost any  respect for each other, Max still had a phenomenal year, and nobody tried to kill Carlos Gomez over it.

[bluestreak]

Didn't Max lose his perfect game on a ridiculous HBP a couple of years ago.

[varoadking]

Didn't Max lose his perfect game on a ridiculous HBP a couple of years ago.

And another one on an error...

[Slateman]

As a national, Scherzer has taken a no hitter into the 6th inning in over 13% of his starts

[bluestreak]

fun fact:  Max Scherzer has taken a no-hitter into the 6th in 13.4 percent of his starts as a National. Which is insane.

Edit: I must have posted this as Slate was posting his. I'll defer to his number.

[Ray D]

Didn't Max lose his perfect game on a ridiculous HBP a couple of years ago.

Yeah, against the Pirates.  Two outs in the ninth and two strikes on the batter, who leaned in to get hit.  And I think the people who criticized the batter are idiots.  It was a 2-0 game.  They're playing the game to win, not to make sure everyone plays fair. The batter's  job was to get on base.  Next guy up could have hit a homerun and tied it.  (He didn't, and Max still came away with a no-hitter.)

[Optics]

Somehow he's underpaid.

[spidernat]

I also can't decide if a bunt single to break up a perfect game is a clown move or not.

but I imagine there is some point where it is bad. I mean would it be ok with 2 outs in 9th?

A bunt single to break up a perfect game is perfectly legit in my book. The opponent is not supposed to roll over for you just because you're working a no-hitter or perfect game. They're supposed to get on base however they can.

[tomterp]

not if the bunter's team ends up winning. Expecting a team to prioritize preserving an opponent's no-hitter over winning may be the most ridiculous aspect of the unwritten rules

 

[bluestreak]

I agree that it's absolutely right to try to get on base. But I remember people howling about the HBP, so there clearly is some line.
I think "unwritten rules" are generally stupid. That being said, sports are not completely "win at all costs to the exclusion of all else."

I thought the discussion would be interesting. Trying to be provocative.

[dcpatti]

For me, there's definitely a line.
If you're a guy like Granderson who *always* stands real close to the plate and you just don't shy away from a pitch that's headed at you, fair play.
The intentional leaning-in, though, seems like a bush league move to me. Danny was getting really bad with that towards the end of last season.  The free base is supposed to be the pitcher's penalty for not pitching better, but a free base after intentionally leaning in is just punishing the pitcher without the pitcher actually doing anything wrong.  It's like you're stealing first, but instead of stealing it on talent or penalizing someone for their mistake (dropped third strike), you're just cheating.

 

[skippy1999]

I agree that it's absolutely right to try to get on base. But I remember people howling about the HBP, so there clearly is some line.
I think "unwritten rules" are generally stupid. That being said, sports are not completely "win at all costs to the exclusion of all else."

I thought the discussion would be interesting. Trying to be provocative.

It is interesting.  I think leaning into a pitch to break up a perfect game is a total punk move; I also think that if you're in the 9th and down by a bunch, I mean get a freaking hit to break it up but to bunt at that point is lame IMO

[Ray D]

The intentional leaning-in, though, seems like a bush league move to me.

This is supposed to be enforced by the umpire.  In fact, the batter doesn't even have to lean in; if the umpire thinks that he had a reasonable chance to avoid being hit, the rule says he is not to be awarded first base. If the umpires would simply enforce rules on the book, this wouldn't be an issue. 

When a player (any sport) takes advantage of knowledge that a rule typically isn't enforced and so violates the rule to his advantage, I don't think that's bush, I think it's smart. The officials should simply enforce the rules.

[Ray D]

I think leaning into a pitch to break up a perfect game is a total punk move;

In the case at hand he didn't lean into the pitch to break up a perfect game, he leaned into the pitch in the interest of winning the game.

[Ray D]

And let me ask you this: suppose you're down 2-0 9th inning, 2 outs, facing a pitcher that has dominated the whole game.  Suppose you  think your best chance to get on base is to bunt (and your best chance for your team to win is for you to get on base).  But you don't bunt, because the guy has a perfect game going.  Doesn't that devalue the perfect game?

[bluestreak]

And let me ask you this: suppose you're down 2-0 9th inning, 2 outs, facing a pitcher that has dominated the whole game.  Suppose you  think your best chance to get on base is to bunt (and your best chance for your team to win is for you to get on base).  But you don't bunt, because the guy has a perfect game going.  Doesn't that devalue the perfect game?

I think the score matters to some degree. 2-0? sure, bunt. But 8-0, then it seems bush league. And no, I don't know where the line is. 

[skippy1999]

I think the score matters to some degree. 2-0? sure, bunt. But 8-0, then it seems bush league. And no, I don't know where the line is. 

Me either but that sounds about right

[skippy1999]

And let me ask you this: suppose you're down 2-0 9th inning, 2 outs, facing a pitcher that has dominated the whole game.  Suppose you  think your best chance to get on base is to bunt (and your best chance for your team to win is for you to get on base).  But you don't bunt, because the guy has a perfect game going.  Doesn't that devalue the perfect game?

I said if you were down by a bunch bunting just for the sake of breaking up a perfecto would be a punk move in my eyes, not down just by 2.