WWTBAM Bored

The Houston Astros defeated the San Diego Padres 1-0 last night. Now, while 1-0 games have been anything but rare this year (Two of the five games I've attended this year have already been 1-0 finals), how the Astros did it is something that has been done only one time in at least the last 90+ years, as far back as box scores can be accurately researched....

They sent the bare minimum amount of batters a team can send to the plate in a complete 9 inning game.... 25. Their #8 hitter, Jordan Schafer, came to the plate just twice all night...

http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?gameId=320627118

Matt Downs homered, and Houston's only other baserunner came on a J.D. Martinez single, and he was quickly erased on a double play....

The reason this is so rare is that it requires all of the following things to happen:

1. Winning 1-0.
2. Being the home team.
3. Having every baserunner except your lone run be erased before there are two outs, or with two outs, before the batter can complete an at bat.

The only other known instance of this happening was on July 25, 1992, when the Braves pulled off a 1-0 win over the Pirates sending just 25 men to the plate. David Justice homered for Atlanta's only hit, and Jeff Blauser was their only other baserunner, but he got caught stealing. Mark Lemke was the odd #8 hitter who only got 2 PA's in that night.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes ... 7250.shtml

That game is better known for this famous play, though....




lb13

Holy cow, what a leap!

I'll ask SteelersFan later if he remembers Nixon and the Catch, and I bet I get something like, Yeah, that blankety-blank robbed Van Slyke and my Pirates...

I am wondering if outs attained because the manager made a mistake on the lineup card might reduce the number also. If #3 and #4 are supposed to bat in that order, #4 makes an out on the first pitch without anyone noticing, and #3 comes up, IIRC #3 on challenge is out without a plate appearance. There are probably 99 reasons why this analysis is wrong, and dangnabbit I KNOW BB;s will know all 99, if they exist.

I always always always always liked Otis Nixon; Expos acquired him from GNW IIRC, and brought him up the same day, or same week, as Rex the Wonder Dog Hudler. What a combination of speed and hustle. Almost as much fun as when the Chisox led off with Walt No-Neck Williams and Ed the Creeper Stroud.

etaoin22 wrote:I am wondering if outs attained because the manager made a mistake on the lineup card might reduce the number also. If #3 and #4 are supposed to bat in that order, #4 makes an out on the first pitch without anyone noticing, and #3 comes up, IIRC #3 on challenge is out without a plate appearance. There are probably 99 reasons why this analysis is wrong, and dangnabbit I KNOW BB;s will know all 99, if they exist.

I believe in the case of #3 batting after #4 (who himself batted out of turn, but since he wasn't challenged, the order just skips over #3 entirely), it is #5 who gets called out, and then #6 bats. And it would still count as a PA for #5, who never set foot in the batter's box....

I think, anyway.....

lb13

Now what's left is for this to happen via a walk-off homer leading off the bottom of the ninth. --Bob

littlebeast13 wrote:

etaoin22 wrote:I am wondering if outs attained because the manager made a mistake on the lineup card might reduce the number also. If #3 and #4 are supposed to bat in that order, #4 makes an out on the first pitch without anyone noticing, and #3 comes up, IIRC #3 on challenge is out without a plate appearance. There are probably 99 reasons why this analysis is wrong, and dangnabbit I KNOW BB;s will know all 99, if they exist.

I believe in the case of #3 batting after #4 (who himself batted out of turn, but since he wasn't challenged, the order just skips over #3 entirely), it is #5 who gets called out, and then #6 bats. And it would still count as a PA for #5, who never set foot in the batter's box....

I think, anyway.....

lb13

It's actually even weirder than that. If #4 bats before #3, makes an out, and a proper appeal is made (i.e., before a pitch is thrown or play is made) then #3 is out, and #4 gets to bat again, this time with one out. If #4 bats out of order and gets on base, and THEN the mistake is discovered and a proper appeal is made, then #4 is called out, removed from the base, and then gets to bat again. Here's the relevant rule from mlb.com, and it ain't pretty:

BATTING OUT OF TURN.
(a) A batter shall be called out, on appeal, when he fails to bat in his proper turn, and
another batter completes a time at bat in his place.
(1) The proper batter may take his place in the batter’s box at any time before the
improper batter becomes a runner or is put out, and any balls and strikes shall
be counted in the proper batter’s time at bat.
(b) When an improper batter becomes a runner or is put out, and the defensive team
appeals to the umpire before the first pitch to the next batter of either team, or
before any play or attempted play, the umpire shall (1) declare the proper batter out;
Rule 6.07
53
and (2) nullify any advance or score made because of a ball batted by the improper
batter or because of the improper batter’s advance to first base on a hit, an error, a
base on balls, a hit batter or otherwise.
NOTE: If a runner advances, while the improper batter is at bat, on a stolen base,
balk, wild pitch or passed ball, such advance is legal.
(c) When an improper batter becomes a runner or is put out, and a pitch is made to the
next batter of either team before an appeal is made, the improper batter thereby
becomes the proper batter, and the results of his time at bat become legal.
(d) (1) When the proper batter is called out because he has failed to bat in turn, the
next batter shall be the batter whose name follows that of the proper batter
thus called out;
(2) When an improper batter becomes a proper batter because no appeal is made
before the next pitch, the next batter shall be the batter whose name follows
that of such legalized improper batter. The instant an improper batter’s actions
are legalized, the batting order picks up with the name following that of the
legalized improper batter.
Rule 6.07 Comment: The umpire shall not direct the attention of any person to the presence in the
batter’s box of an improper batter. This rule is designed to require constant vigilance by the players and
managers of both teams.
There are two fundamentals to keep in mind: When a player bats out of turn, the proper batter is
the player called out. If an improper batter bats and reaches base or is out and no appeal is made before a
pitch to the next batter, or before any play or attempted play, that improper batter is considered to have
batted in proper turn and establishes the order that is to follow.
APPROVED RULING
To illustrate various situations arising from batting out of turn, assume a first-inning batting order
as follows:
Abel-Baker-Charles-Daniel-Edward-Frank-George-Hooker-Irwin.
PLAY (1). Baker bats. With the count 2 balls and 1 strike, (a) the offensive team discovers the
error or (b) the defensive team appeals. RULING: In either case, Abel replaces Baker, with the count on
him 2 balls and 1 strike.
PLAY (2). Baker bats and doubles. The defensive team appeals (a) immediately or (b) after a
pitch to Charles. RULING: (a) Abel is called out and Baker is the proper batter; (b) Baker stays on
second and Charles is the proper batter.
PLAY (3). Abel walks. Baker walks. Charles forces Baker. Edward bats in Daniel’s turn. While
Edward is at bat, Abel scores and Charles goes to second on a wild pitch. Edward grounds out, sending
Charles to third. The defensive team appeals (a) immediately or (b) after a pitch to Daniel. RULING:
(a) Abel’s run counts and Charles is entitled to second base since these advances were not made because
of the improper batter batting a ball or advancing to first base. Charles must return to second base
because his advance to third resulted from the improper batter batting a ball. Daniel is called out, and
Edward is the proper batter; (b) Abel’s run counts and Charles stays on third. The proper batter is Frank.
Rule 6.07 to 6.08
54
PLAY (4). With the bases full and two out. Hooker bats in Frank’s turn, and triples, scoring three
runs. The defensive team appeals (a) immediately, or (b) after a pitch to George. RULING: (a) Frank is
called out and no runs score. George is the proper batter to lead off the second inning; (b) Hooker stays
on third and three runs score. Irwin is the proper batter.
PLAY (5). After Play (4)(b) above, George continues at bat. (a) Hooker is picked off third base
for the third out, or (b) George flies out, and no appeal is made. Who is the proper leadoff batter in the
second inning? RULING: (a) Irwin. He became the proper batter as soon as the first pitch to George
legalized Hooker’s triple; (b) Hooker. When no appeal was made, the first pitch to the leadoff batter of
the opposing team legalized George’s time at bat.
PLAY (6). Daniel walks and Abel comes to bat. Daniel was an improper batter, and if an appeal
is made before the first pitch to Abel, Abel is out, Daniel is removed from base, and Baker is the proper
batter. There is no appeal, and a pitch is made to Abel. Daniel’s walk is now legalized, and Edward
thereby becomes the proper batter. Edward can replace Abel at any time before Abel is put out or
becomes a runner. He does not do so. Abel flies out, and Baker comes to bat. Abel was an improper
batter, and if an appeal is made before the first pitch to Baker, Edward is out, and the proper batter is
Frank. There is no appeal, and a pitch is made to Baker. Abel’s out is now legalized, and the proper
batter is Baker. Baker walks. Charles is the proper batter. Charles flies out. Now Daniel is the proper
batter, but he is on second base. Who is the proper batter? RULING: The proper batter is Edward.
When the proper batter is on base, he is passed over, and the following batter becomes the proper batter.

From the post title, I thought you were gonna tell me the Yankees got a hit with runners in scoring position...


The thing I remember most about Otis Nixon is that, even as a rook with the Yanks and then with the Indians, he had a face that looked liked an old man's. Mebbe he took over from Dorian Gray's pitcher (nyuk nyuk)...

I was wrong, SteelersFan did not remember it.

SportsFan68 wrote:I was wrong, SteelersFan did not remember it.

He's probably purged Sid Bream from his mind as well.....

lb13

littlebeast13 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:I was wrong, SteelersFan did not remember it.

He's probably purged Sid Bream from his mind as well.....

lb13

Grrrr...

Leyland's biggest mistake in that whole NLCS was letting Tom Wakefield pitch a complete game the night before when the Pirates blew out the Braves 13-4. He should have pulled Wakefield after six, so he could have had him in relief for Game 7. The Braves couldn't touch Wakefield that series.

Although...what they really needed was a halfway decent throw from Barry Bonds...at least the game would have only been tied then. Belinda's pitch to Cabrera actaully was not all that bad.

And don't get me started about Randy Marsh's balls and strikes calls that inning...Marsh, who was only in at the plate because of John McSherry's chest pains.

Or Jose Lind...

(No doubts about my memory...)

Jeemie wrote:

littlebeast13 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:I was wrong, SteelersFan did not remember it.

He's probably purged Sid Bream from his mind as well.....

lb13

Grrrr...

Leyland's biggest mistake in that whole NLCS was letting Tom Wakefield pitch a complete game the night before when the Pirates blew out the Braves 13-4. He should have pulled Wakefield after six, so he could have had him in relief for Game 7. The Braves couldn't touch Wakefield that series.

Although...what they really needed was a halfway decent throw from Barry Bonds...at least the game would have only been tied then. Belinda's pitch to Cabrera actaully was not all that bad.

And don't get me started about Randy Marsh's balls and strikes calls that inning...Marsh, who was only in at the plate because of John McSherry's chest pains.

Or Jose Lind...(No doubts about my memory...)

If Tom Wakefield pitched a complete game, Tim Wakefield ought to have been available
OTOH Leyland might well have been willing to use him on zero days rest, but only in the event of extra innings.

littlebeast13 wrote:The Houston Astros defeated the San Diego Padres 1-0 last night. Now, while 1-0 games have been anything but rare this year (Two of the five games I've attended this year have already been 1-0 finals), how the Astros did it is something that has been done only one time in at least the last 90+ years, as far back as box scores can be accurately researched....

They sent the bare minimum amount of batters a team can send to the plate in a complete 9 inning game.... 25. Their #8 hitter, Jordan Schafer, came to the plate just twice all night...

http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?gameId=320627118

Matt Downs homered, and Houston's only other baserunner came on a J.D. Martinez single, and he was quickly erased on a double play....

The reason this is so rare is that it requires all of the following things to happen:

1. Winning 1-0.
2. Being the home team.
3. Having every baserunner except your lone run be erased before there are two outs, or with two outs, before the batter can complete an at bat.

The only other known instance of this happening was on July 25, 1992, when the Braves pulled off a 1-0 win over the Pirates sending just 25 men to the plate. David Justice homered for Atlanta's only hit, and Jeff Blauser was their only other baserunner, but he got caught stealing. Mark Lemke was the odd #8 hitter who only got 2 PA's in that night.

The Diamondbacks matched this feat last night in a 1-0 win over the Reds. They only sent 25 men to the plate, yet still won a complete 9 inning game. Nick Ahmed tripled in the third for their only baserunner, and Jarrod Dyson brought him home on a sac fly. Dyson, who batted 8th, only came to the plate twice...

https://www.baseball-reference.com/boxe ... 9140.shtml

lb13