Game Thread: Twins vs. Cleveland, 6/23/22 @ 12:10PM CT

[LVTwinsfan]

3 minutes ago, RpR said:

I am.

If anything replay has quieted the Billy Martins of the game, and he’s not the only one, literally hundreds of managers have gone crazy over bad calls. So your argument is losing steam. The only thing you have is nostalgia, that’s not gonna be enough to keep the changes you hate from happening.

[PopRiveter]

2 minutes ago, SkyBlueWaters said:

I think it was last year the Twins were cruising with a big lead at Yankee Stadium, that exorbitant shopping mall of a ballpark. Duffey throws what is on replay clearly a strike (admitted by the Yankees announcers) and the ump calls it a ball. Forced to pitch even more over the plate, Duffy coughs up a long ball, and the $%@!# Yankees come back.

Duffy is red-faced, screaming at the ump as he is taken out of the game.  The Twins lose again.

This is good entertainment for you? 

Wish I could click "Like" 100 times

[Brock Beauchamp]

22 minutes ago, LVTwinsfan said:

That’s the best explanation I’ve ever heard 

A compromise I like is that humans call balls and strikes but computers are on hand. Each manager is given three challenges to use in a game and the computer makes the final call. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

4 minutes ago, PopRiveter said:

I appreciate the point even if it doesn't sway me to switch sides. It is insightful and needs to be weighed. 

I expect I'd be all for human umps influencing the game for drama and excitement if I were a fan of one of mlb's elite big market teams.

I’m not sure it should change anyone’s mind but it’s an interesting aspect to consider. 

[cHawk]

17 minutes ago, RpR said:

No they are lost by teams that cannot overcome supposed bad calls, just like they cannot over come the other team without supposed bad calls.

[LVTwinsfan]

1 minute ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

A compromise I like is that humans call balls and strikes but computers are on hand. Each manager is given three challenges to use in a game. 

Not bad, learning when to use them would be a managers task….it could literally be resolved in seconds

[Jerr]

Just got home from a Twins Win!.

I told my Son I'd break the losing streak! Good game and survived that lead off double in the 9th. Phew!!!

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

Just now, LVTwinsfan said:

Not bad, learning when to use them would be a managers task….it could literally be resolved in seconds

Yep, and the manager might not get the response they like so the challenges will be used judiciously. 

[cHawk]

3 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

A compromise I like is that humans call balls and strikes but computers are on hand. Each manager is given three challenges to use in a game. 

I feel like allowing managers to challenge individual pitches would slow the game down, which is already a problem in the modern MLB.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Just now, cHawk said:

I feel like allowing managers to challenge individual pitches would slow the game down, which is already a problem in the modern MLB.

It would require a couple of seconds because a computer already has the answer. 

[cHawk]

I would be in favor of robo-umps

[cHawk]

1 minute ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

It would require a couple of seconds because a computer already has the answer. 

True. But if a computer can come up with an answer that quickly, why not just have the computer doing the work?

Edited June 23 by cHawk
typo

[weitz41]

I'm not a fan of computer umpires. I may be wrong but the teams that can overcome bad calls are probably the better teams and win in October. Who wants to watch a football game where every holding is called? Not this guy. Imperfection is part of the game.

[Brock Beauchamp]

1 minute ago, cHawk said:

True. But if a computer can come up with an answer that quickly, why not just have the computer doing the work?

Because of the human tendency to increase intrigue, as I mentioned. 

[cHawk]

1 minute ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Because of the human tendency to increase intrigue, as I mentioned. 

Ah, I see.

[cHawk]

2 minutes ago, weitz41 said:

I'm not a fan of computer umpires. I may be wrong but the teams that can overcome bad calls are probably the better teams and win in October. Who wants to watch a football game where every holding is called? Not this guy. Imperfection is part of the game.

But blatantly incorrect calls determining the result of a game should not be part of the game.

[Jerr]

Sat with a bunch of school aged girls behind us. Boy, do they love Kepler and my ears are still ringing from their screams for him. Great day to see the Twins win!!!!

 

[ashbury]

1 hour ago, Vanimal46 said:

Intentional jinx?

Auto-correct failure.

[weitz41]

7 minutes ago, cHawk said:

But blatantly incorrect calls determining the result of a game should not be part of the game.

So you have a problem with Buxton, Correa or whoever getting a 4th strike? I want to believe the law of averages kicks in. So sure I hate it when a ball is a strike against the Tigers. But if in October one of them gets a 4th strike to work with I'm pretty good with it.

[h2oface]

52 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

By the way, there IS a "correct" answer why electronic strike zones can be bad. Ignoring bad, game-altering calls on a strike three or ball four, human umpires have been statistically shown to lengthen at-bats and heighten intensity. If a pitcher goes up 0-2 and throws a borderline strike, the human ump is more likely to call a ball and keep the intrigue going. The inverse is true with a 3-0 count.

So there ARE reasons to keep human umpires but nobody really talks about it, people on one side simply tend to holler at "computers" and miss the actual upside of human umpiring.

Wrong calls NEVER have an upside in my book. Totally disagree with fake intrigue.

[h2oface]

58 minutes ago, RpR said:

Umpires are a player in the game.

Umpires were only used because there was no other option. "Umpires" used to call who touched the wall first in a swimming race or crossed the line in a horse race, etc. Swimmers still have soul now that the machines call the winner of the race. If you have a better option to reward the proper human soulful winner, that is all we ever really want. If a human could do it best, use the human. But we all know they are just guessing, and are not capable to perform as well as the best option now available.

Even though more and more converts are crossing over to the inovation..... you are still late to the game....... but very welcome.

[PopRiveter]

31 minutes ago, Jerr said:

Just got home from a Twins Win!.

I told my Son I'd break the losing streak! Good game and survived that lead off double in the 9th. Phew!!!

 

Thanks Jerr. We needed you in the stands, but we probably could have used you in the bullpen too. 

[PopRiveter]

45 minutes ago, weitz41 said:

I'm not a fan of computer umpires. I may be wrong but the teams that can overcome bad calls are probably the better teams and win in October. Who wants to watch a football game where every holding is called? Not this guy. Imperfection is part of the game.

The teams winning in October are often the teams benefitting from the bad calls going in their favor, not teams overcoming bad calls going against them.

Should we also allow Astro's to steal signs and teams to field a roster full of PED guys because "The best teams can overcome" unfair competition? Of course not.  

It's why I stopped watching the NBA years ago. The star players and big market teams were constantly the beneficiaries of phantom calls. You knew in advance who would win each series just by looking at the names on the paper. The refs steered the games accordingly. I hear it is supposedly better lately, but I haven't returned to find out if that is true.

The more we can remove that unfairness from the game, the more even the playing field becomes, therefore, the better the sport becomes.

 

One man's opinion.

[Brock Beauchamp]

16 minutes ago, h2oface said:

Wrong calls NEVER have an upside in my book. Totally disagree with fake intrigue.

I consider this a perfectly fine rebuttal. I want to see computers involved in some capacity at the very least. 

[PopRiveter]

20 minutes ago, h2oface said:

Wrong calls NEVER have an upside in my book. Totally disagree with fake intrigue.

You won't miss Angel Hernandez turning an MLB game into a joke even a little?

 

[wsnydes]

58 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Yep, and the manager might not get the response they like so the challenges will be used judiciously. 

This is somewhat similar to how I think replay should be done.  Make the manager call for a replay instantly like an umpire has to.  

[Jerr]

39 minutes ago, PopRiveter said:

Thanks Jerr. We needed you in the stands, but we probably could have used you in the bullpen too. 

Well, I doubt if we would've  chalked up a win with my old arm LOL

 

[weitz41]

25 minutes ago, PopRiveter said:

The teams winning in October are often the teams benefitting from the bad calls going in their favor, not teams overcoming bad calls going against them.

Should we also allow Astro's to steal signs and teams to field a roster full of PED guys because "The best teams can overcome" unfair competition? Of course not.  

It's why I stopped watching the NBA years ago. The star players and big market teams were constantly the beneficiaries of phantom calls. You knew in advance who would win each series just by looking at the names on the paper. The refs steered the games accordingly. I hear it is supposedly better lately, but I haven't returned to find out if that is true.

The more we can remove that unfairness from the game, the more even the playing field becomes, therefore, the better the sport becomes.

 

One man's opinion.

A lot to cover here but I've got a beer in my hand, so I've got the time.  

Poor umpiring and cheating are two totally different things.

No the best team will probably not overcome blatant cheating

I stopped watching the NBA years ago because of the things you mentioned.

The last one I agree with totally. But if your giving up human error for complete fairness what about salary caps? How will our twins compete with 200-300 million payrolls? Would the Miricale Mets pulled it off with Rodo umps? What about the worst to 1st 91 Twins? My point is they overcame whatever diversity they faced and won and I'm certain their was plenty of bad calls and 4th Stikes their along they way. Imperfection is part of the game. That's why any team can win every year.

[cheeseheadgophfan]

5 hours ago, RpR said:

Willie Mays Hays knock-off in center field; sad day in Mudsville again.

Well that didn't age well.......

[cheeseheadgophfan]

4 hours ago, wsnydes said:

Still the same knee injury that they've been managing for most of the season.  Appears that he's had a setback with it.

Must've been the 3 K's and a walk from the other night........he may have aggravated it spitting seeds last night.  The man is absolutely fragile.