Baseball Thread Number 8: Cal Ripken says the playoff hunt is fun

I feel like joining him. I'm thinking it might take more than one after that mess.

 

Javier Vazquez takes the hill tonight for the Braves, all but ensuring a 2-1 Marlins victory.

Seriously, Braves hitters should be donating half their checks to Vazquez and Jurrjens. Vazquez is 11-9 despite a 3.02 ERA; Jurrjens is 10-9 with a 2.89 ERA.

Ridiculous.

 

This stat seems mind-boggling: The Reds completed their first 4-game home sweep ... in 30 years?!

 

Just to show how odd Joe Nathan's meltdown today was, he hadn't given up four earned runs in any entire month this season. The most he had given up in a month was three, which he did in May and August.

 

Just caught another line in the Pirates-Reds gamer: 3 more losses by the Pirates means a 17th straight losing record, which would be a record for American franchises in any sport.

 

That's just shittily written. It must be their first four-game home sweep of Pittsburgh. Just picking random years on Retrosheet, I found a four-game sweep of SF from April 18-21, 1985. I'm sure there are others.

 

Hell, the Reds also swept the Giants in four games in Cincy from April 27-29, 1984.

 

Doing a fine impression of their brethren from Philadelphia from the 1st half of last century. Those Phillies had 14 losing seasons, finished the next two games above .500, then strung together 16 more consecutive losing records.

Pirates have a way to go to make 30 of 31 losing seasons, but let's just say they are on pace.

 

Interesting little tidbit on the Nats'.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/09/offseason-outlook-washington-nationals.html

 

Not sure where he gets the idea that a call to Tom Glavine could make sense. If nobody's called him yet this season, calling him in December makes even less sense.

 

That's the one bit that struck me as insane, too. For what they have left on payroll heading into 2010, they could easily pick up someone else other than Glavine.

 

But if it's a "low-cost option," he wouldn't be doing the union's work. (Sorry, BYH, it's fun to play with that term.)