Baseball Toaster was unplugged on February 4, 2009.
Jon's other site:
Screen Jam
TV and more ...
1) using profanity or any euphemisms for profanity
2) personally attacking other commenters
3) baiting other commenters
4) arguing for the sake of arguing
5) discussing politics
6) using hyperbole when something less will suffice
7) using sarcasm in a way that can be misinterpreted negatively
8) making the same point over and over again
9) typing "no-hitter" or "perfect game" to describe either in progress
10) being annoyed by the existence of this list
11) commenting under the obvious influence
12) claiming your opinion isn't allowed when it's just being disagreed with
| Hiroki Kuroda pitched the Dodgers' first complete game of the season and first single-pitcher shutout since 2005, blanking the Cubs, 3-0, on four hits, no walks and 11 strikeouts. He threw 112 scintillating pitches. |
- Vin Scully
Wonder how much discussion there will be on 9/11/2065.
HIRO!!!
That, ladies and gents, was a masterpiece.
Almost makes me like baseball again. :-)
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/bestgames
...Derek Lowe at Wrigley. 8/31/05
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN200508310.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/LAN/LAN200509120.shtml
Weaver's game score was only 89. Kuroda's -- and Lowe's -- was 90.
I hope Vin feels better.
I still remember that game a couple years ago where we were leading the Padres something like 5-1 in the 9th, and Broxton came in and gave up 5 runs and we lost the game.
Any time you take out a dominating pitcher and bring in someone from the bullpen you're tempting fate.
Both interpretations were of interest. Thanks.
http://www.bb-ref.com/pi/shareit/ExSW
To be fair, Broxton induced at least four outs in the 9th, but Kent and especially Nomar decided to take the inning off defensively.
Also, in the game you mention, Kuo came out after 6 innings and 104 pitches. Hardly dominating, although he pitched well. Two relievers preceded Broxton, so it's not like Grady Little took out a dominant starter, as you surmised.
I used D-Day to plug Cornelius Ryan's books, including The Longest Day.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/5v3a7c
Nevermind, I found it.
--
A friend of mine just sent me this comment that was posted on one of the most popular Cubs blogs, bleedcubbieblue (Don't they know we're the real blue?)... Probably trying to stir me up in some way.
>>"It really makes you think"
as you watch the Dodgers fans (after their team executed a very good squeeze play) do the wave, barely noticing there is a baseball game going on and we sit here on the edge of our seats (would die for a smell of a ballpark). Do they really deserve a lead over us at all? Plz Cubs pull this win out.<<
"Jeff Kent, ejected Friday, will sit today [Saturday]"
Options I'd Like to See
1) LaRoche called up and starts at 2B, Sweeney DFA
2) Delwyn starts at 2B
Options That Will Happen Instead
Maza will start at 2B
Looking back at Maury Wills, his stats are rather similar to JP. But in that era, a run meant a great deal more than today.
Also, there seemed to be purpose. If it got to the seventh 0-0, then Wills always seemed to get on base and steal second and third. Then score! Stats seemed a poor mirror. If a pitcher needed a run, he got one.
Good points, I stand corrected. Also, I do remember now how Nomar made some key error that inning.
On another note, I'm pleased Delwyn Young is getting his chance to show Torre that he's a good hitter. I wish our everyday outfield was Kemp, Ethier and Young.
Maybe after Furcal comes back, Torre will play Young over Pierre, at least against southpaws.
Actually that makes this a bit more understandable.
Pee Wee hits better against RHP, at least in his limited MLB time thus far (no idea about his minor league numbers).
Pierre strikes me as a guy who isn't much different against RHP or LHP. He has slightly better career numbers against RHP as one would expect, but this year he's been good against LHP and putrid against RHP. Kind of weird.
But I agree, Delwyn should cut into Pierre's (and only Pierre's) playing time.
More importantly, I had a Ruby's chocolate shake tonight at the stadium (OK really daughter ordred it but I drank half) and it was really good. As the self-appointed S. Irene Virbila of Dodger Stadium, I approve of the addition of Ruby's.
And for the record, I recognize the importance of D-Day, love that "God Bless America" is sang in the 7th inning, and listen to Rush everyday at work.
But, Vin's got no place to get political at a sporting event IMO.
Great game by Kuroda.
He was perfect.
We'll agree to disagree and move on.
I think the Commissioner found out the same time everybody else did. The operation started in the morning and there was a five-hour time difference.
And since most games didn't start then until 2 at the earliest, there was ample to call off the schedule.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1963_NFL_season
Rozelle did later say it was the biggest mistake of his career.
*He's playing 1B for Vegas on Saturday. Still working on some things defensively, but close to a call-up.
*Torre was told that LaRoche learning the new positions may have impacted his offense somewhat.
*Joe wouldn't commit to playing Andy at 2B for anything but a cameo appearance. He sounds more confortable with him as a 1B/3B guy.
That war was also not about saving the Jews of Europe from extermination, since if it had been, we'd have bombed at least one rail line leading to at least one extermination camp. We didn't.
We fought that war for the same reason we fought in Korea and Vietnam. Again, property [re the war in the Pacific, the Japanese wanted a closed door in China while we wanted an open door for everyone but the Chinese].
Also, I wonder whether Vin will be so upset if no one remembers the significance of June 15. Operation Forager and the invasion of Saipan. Our first invasion of territory held by the Japanese prior to the outbreak of war.
Lastly, not that I want to slight those who served, as that is not my intention, but it was the Russians who won the war in Europe, while it was our forebears who won the war against Japan, with a valuable assist from our Aussie friends, who achieved the first victory over Japanese land forces in that war, near Gili Gili, Milne Bay, New Guinea, in some rather savage combat from mid-August through early September, 1942. I credit the Aussies with the assist not only because it's obvious but also because there was that entry found in the signal log of a dead Japanese soldier later in the war, providing that: Americans are generally weaker than Chinese, but Australians are the strongest.
Sorry, almost forgot, but Mr. Complete Game gets his 1st in America.
After Matt Kemp singled on the first pitch in his second at-bat, as Kemp rounded first, Derrick Lee gave him a little pat at the rear.
I think in ballplayer lingo it was a message of nice going kid.
Not that there's anything wrong with it.
Also, someone in the last thread wrote about how we wouldn't give out the money to Kyle Blair but instead wasted money on Berroa. Just wanted to say I know him, and he wanted to go to college, he didn't want to play pro, so the two aren't really related.
And last, I gotta agree with Jon about the D-Day thing. While I hate it when announcers give their political views, I don't really see this as a political issue.
Great win today! Awesome performance by Hiro!!!
http://tinyurl.com/69xsur
None of the Allies, not even Russia, would have made it without US assistance in direct military operations, manufacturing and materiel, and other economic aid. This is not to denigrate the contributions of any of the countries involved in the fight against the Axis, but it was a collective effort. To attempt to retroactively minimize the USA's role in the war is to make the same mistake as the propagandists who make it out to be a solely American victory.
Kuroda goes all the way with a shutout.
Ardoin has very good actions behind the plate and he called a great game. In the third inning it was easy to see that he and Kuroda had a connection working.
Re: D-Day. Vin was a witness to this part of history. How many of us commenting here today share that perspective?
Just a thought.
This wasn't any special anniversary of D-Day. This wasn't one of the many holidays we set aside for remembering veterans. To remember and recognize an event like the 64th anniversary of D-Day is well and good, but to harangue someone for not doing it is unnecessary.
Regardless of the reasons we fought World War II, a lost life in battle is certainly something worth reflecting on. But why do we have to be chastised for not doing it on this particular day, during the particular hour that Vin happened to be listening to the news? There are many things in life worth reflecting on, many people worth honoring. Of all the battles, of all the dead soldiers, why is this the only one that counts? Or is it just the only one that's lecture-worthy?
How are we going to enforce which military actions must be remembered by every well-meaning citizen on their 64th (or 164th or 264th) anniversary? How about the Battles of Monmouth or Yorktown or Brooklyn? What about the Battle of New Orleans, or Antietam, or Vicksburg, or San Juan Hill? What about the Argonne Forest, or Khe Sanh, or Fallujah? Are we to commemmorate only those battles in which we suffered, or also those in which we caused the suffering (My Lai, Hiroshima, etc.)? Where do we start and where does it end?
And while the soliders who died on the beaches of France certainly deserve our respect for their sacrifices, a number of people are equally deserving of being remembered for sacrifices on behalf of their country. Abraham Lincoln. Denmark Vesey. Andrew Goodman. Rubén Salazar. I could go on and on. The point is that I don't chastise Vin Scully for failing to note the anniversary of their deaths, and I don't expect him to chastise me for failing to make a hullaballoo on the anniversary of the death of his preferred sacrificial heroes.
Everybody bitches when something they think is important gets what they think is short shrift. If it becomes a recurring segment, then it'll be something, but it happened once. Saying he sounded like Rush Limbaugh is perverse.
Very late to this party but glad the Dodgers won. Your point about the Dodger teams of the 60's is correct and would add two other points.
1) the second place hitter often Gilliam was exceptionally disciplined at the plate and could foul off many pitches so Wills could run and try and steal.
2.) Speaking of Vin he would always remark how Willie Davis was faster than Maury, but Wills was a better base stealer and could read pitchers better. JP who probably is as fast if not faster than Wills doesn't strike me yet as someone who can steal at will like Wills.
3.) One other note in my mind about the 60's Dodgers because the offense was so poor, the situational hitting was excellent. Driving men in from 3rd with less than 2 outs seemed automatic, (don't know where you can research that) but the 2008 version does not seem strong in that catagory. Sadly at the end of the year when Jeff Kent ends up leading this club in homers with under 25 but more than 20, everyone has got to contribute, since power is not going to carry this ballclub
AL East:
6th place
AL Central:
3rd place
AL West:
4th place
NL East:
5th place
NL Central:
6th place
NL West:
2nd place, thank you very much
I choose to disbelieve that Ned tried to trade Pierre. For one thing, I see no reason to believe that either he or Torre is displeased with Pierre's performance or style of play.
The comments in 110 made me ill, but fortunately 116 showed some perspective.
BH, that was a good article.
My one contention was this: Peter Meehan mentioned Ruby's Diner and Canter's Deli "are only available to holders of expensive field-level tickets"
He could and should have went to those spots during batting practice! In fact, I'm kicking myself for not doing so last month. I'll be at the game two weeks from today, and I plan to enjoy Canter's Deli -- for the first time ever, btw -- for that one.
first, here's a story that was on the front page of the oc register. it's about d-day.
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/beach-says-day-2060937-tuley-stanley
so, while i love vin, it's a bit frustrating to run this story (i edited it) and have the world's favorite announcer suggest all media ignored the day. sigh.
anyway, the other issue to note is the commentary of 110 and beyond. while i make no claim to intricate, detailed historical knowledge of the battles of ww II, and i definitely don't buy into the propogandist history we've all been bathed in since we were little kids, i'd argue the bigger reason so many americans gave their lives in japan and europe was so that ideas such as those expressed in 110 can be expressed, no matter how insulting and idiotic they may seem.
As for this WW2 discussion, my grandparents who raised me were of that generation. My grandfather fought in the Pacific, his brother in Italy. D-Day was never a day they particularly noted, other than it was my father's birthday. My sense is that Tom Hanks and Spielberg have helped 6/6 evolve into more of a commemorative moment today than it was for that generation. Certainly I've toured the "Band of Brothers" sites myself. But that said, I do think 110 goes too far in denying the sense both of my old boys felt, that they literally were trying to rescue their nation and others from something truly evil.
The agony of defeat."
New post up top.
Saipan in the Marianas was certainly not the first island invaded by the US that Japan held before the outbreak of the war. The campaign of the Northern Pacific involved a series of invasions in micronesia (some 2,200 islands in an area the size of the US) that had been held by the Japanese prior to the outbreak of the war. Micronesia, including Saipan, were a trusteeship of the League of Nation given to Japan after WWI. These islands had previously been held by Germany, which had purchased them after the Spanish-American War. The US had not bothered to claim them after the war.
Just a helpful word of advice, Jon, and I hope I don't sound too presumptuous--questions of wartime memorialization are always politicized. What wars we should memorialize, how we should memorialize them, whether or not we should even do such a thing--there's a reason why professional historians as of late have worked so much on questions of "memory." Vin's a patriotic guy in the usual sense of the term, and that in and of itself says something about his attitude toward the larger national polity--not everyone will agree with his attitudes. It may be wrong to classify his opinions as actually political--as a professional historian, I actually prefer a more narrow definition of "politics," but that's in effect irrelevant in this sort of context, because enough people (like 110 ) prefer a more capacious definition of politics to make this sort of post a potential lightening rod.
BTW, I do have some actual substantive thoughts about 110 , but I think it'd be best to leave them to myself in this sort of forum.
110. Is extremely offensive. If the U.S hadn't had entered into the war, Euorupe would have been lost to Germany the same way that if the U.S. hadn't had fought in the Pacific, Japan would have won. Do you really believe the U.S could have stood alone when surrounded by enemies?
Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.