Baseball Musings: They Said the Same Thing About Downing

August 08, 2007

They Said the Same Thing About Downing

Insan at ArmchairGM accuses Mike Bacsik of grooving a pitch to Bonds.

With time running out for Bacsik, in the 5 th inning, Bacsik made the most of the opportunity. On another 3-2 count allowing Bonds to chase the ball, Bascik threw an 84 mph pitch down the center of the plate for Bonds to smash it into the right field stands. Mission accomplished! An 84 mph pitch on a full count is a very weak pitch that is easy to hit, especially for guys like Bonds. What makes it worse is that during his post-game press conference, Bacsik says that he was trying to throw a fastball down and away for a strike. Really Bacsik? Are you really that bad that you ended up throwing an 84 mph pitch right down the strike zone? He stated "I wanted to go after him; I was trying to get him out. I threw a pitch that he really likes to hit and he did it." Well if Bonds really likes to hit those pitches, and you know that for a fact, then why are you trying to strike him out with that pitch? Wouldn't logic dictate that you throw a pitch he doesn't like?

First of all, 84 MPH is a Mike Bacsik fastball. BIS charted 520 Mike Bacsik fastballs, and the average speed is 84.4 MPH with a standard deviation of 1.75 MPH. He was trying to get the ball down and failed. Just like Al Downing:

Downing is offended by people who say, "You must have grooved the pitch."
"They're the people who don't know much about the sport," he said. "I say that's an insult to Hank Aaron. ... It's like saying somebody let Wilt Chamberlain score 100 points on him. He did it because he could; they didn't let him."

But Downing naturally thinks he have could executed better. "When you face great hitters, you wish you had a lot of pitches back," he said. "I didn't get it down as much as I would have liked to. I wanted him to hit a ground ball. Not all home runs are hit off of bad pitches, and not all home runs are mistakes."

I get the feeling Insan is looking for an excuse to discount home run 756.

Posted by David Pinto at 03:45 PM | Records | TrackBack (0)

Comments

Hey Dave, there'll be alot of coin signing photos at autograph shows down the road.

Posted by: ryan at August 8, 2007 04:31 PM

That's ludicrous. That pitch was inside and Bonds pulled his hands in so that he got the sweet spot of the bat to the ball. The previous homers in the game all flew out to leftfield, not right-center. If Bacsik really wanted to groove one, he could have replicated that fat one he threw on 3-1, which Bonds fouled off but should have hammered.

Ultimately, no matter how much you want to downplay Bonds' achievement, he was a first-ballot HoF man in 1998 -- before anyone thought he was on the juice.

Posted by: The Monk at August 8, 2007 04:33 PM

Insan must be a bit insane.:) Or at the very least, not very bright.

Posted by: Al at August 8, 2007 04:54 PM

That's absurd. Even good pitchers throw a lot of mistakes, and Bacsik isn't a good pitcher.

And the man had, at that point, hit 755 home runs in his career. If it were that easy to not give up home runs to him, someone would have thought of trying it by then, you think?

Posted by: NBarnes at August 8, 2007 04:54 PM

Bacsik was on The Ticket in Dallas just this afternoon commenting on how idiotic that claim is.

Besides, Insan doesn't need any help discounting 756*. Bonds has done that on his own.

Posted by: Andy at August 8, 2007 05:19 PM

"Ultimately, no matter how much you want to downplay Bonds' achievement, he was a first-ballot HoF man in 1998 -- before anyone thought he was on the juice."

Pete Rose was a first ballot HOF-er, too, before HE cheated on the game. Now look at him. Bonds' cheating should keep him from the Hall, if there's any justice in the Game, just as it did Rose.

Posted by: Andy at August 8, 2007 05:49 PM

Gambling is worse than steroids. I would explain why, but you have heard it a hundred times before and you obviously don't understand it, so I will instead simply request that you stop commenting on baseball websites as if you have a clue. Perhaps follow a sport without so many nuances, like coin flipping, for example. Actually, never mind. You probably don't understand probability either. Just give up.

Posted by: Matt Davis at August 8, 2007 06:33 PM

Gambling is worse than steroids. Sure, and murder is worse than armed robbery, so we should probably just look the other way when guys pull bank jobs, as long as no one gets hurt.

There are a lot of things that are worse for baseball than steroids (Bud Selig makes my personal short list) but that doesn't magically transform PEDs into some sort of benign influence. Now, being a cheater may not be enough to keep Barry out of the Hall. Lord knows he'd have some company. But let's please not pretend that both Rose and Bonds didn't break baseball's rules.

And if you're inclined to get started on how Rose's gambling compromised the "integrity of the game" let's ask Mr. Aaron or Frank Robinson how they really feel about the integrity of baseball's home run records.

Posted by: Nate at August 8, 2007 07:56 PM

Pete Rose was a first ballot HOF-er, too, before HE cheated on the game.

Baseball rules specifically ban players for life for gambling on the game. There are no such bannings regarding PHDs. Whether there should be or not is another question. But as it is right now, no baseball rule stipulates any such thing.

While you're at it, why don't you ask them about all the greenies they were popping?

Posted by: calig23 at August 8, 2007 09:07 PM

But as it is right now, no baseball rule stipulates any such thing.

Scratch that comment. Until recently, there wasn't any such rule, and that is only for positive tests, not speculation and hearsay.

Posted by: calig23 at August 8, 2007 09:09 PM

When you ask Mr. Robinson and Mr. Aaron their opinions about the integrity of baseball's HR records understand you are asking someone with a pretty significant bias.

Ask a politician what he thinks of term limits and you will get a significantly different point of view then that of a contituent.

Posted by: Charles Slavik at August 9, 2007 08:01 AM