Odds & Ends: Cordero, Murphy, Red Sox, Griffey

Links for Thursday, as Armando Galarraga receives a new Corvette (but no perfect game)…

  • Reliever Chad Cordero has been called up to the Mariners roster, according to a team news release.  Cordero hasn't pitched in the majors since undergoing labrum surgery in July 2008.  He signed a minor league deal with Seattle last winter and has a 4.12 ERA and 5.50 K-BB ratio in 17 appearances for Triple-A Tacoma this season.  In six seasons with the Expos/Nationals organization, Cordero posted a 2.78 ERA and racked up 128 saves, including a league-best 47 in 2005.
  • 2009 first rounder Jared Mitchell told reporters that he is recovering well from his ankle injury. The White Sox prospect, who will represent the team at this year's draft, does underwater drills and is progressing towards baseball activities.
  • Daniel Murphy will miss four to six months with an MCL tear, so the Mets have reduced infield depth, according to Newsday's David Lennon (via Twitter). Murphy, who has not played in the majors this year, has missed significant time because of his right knee.
  • MLB.com's Ian Browne wonders if the Red Sox will have to trade Boof Bonser.
  • The A's claimed Triple A infielder Adam Heether off of waivers from the Brewers, according to MLB.com's Adam McCalvy (via Twitter). Heether, 28, was hitting .245/.343/.440 in Nashville.
  • J.D. Drew and Jason Varitek told Rob Bradford of WEEI.com that agent Scott Boras does not pressure them to return from injuries any earlier or later than they want to. Boras says he does not draw medical conclusions for any of his clients, including Jacoby Ellsbury.
  • Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports wonders if Ken Griffey Jr. felt pressure from Mariners manager Don Wakamatsu to retire. Wakamatsu says it was "Ken's decision."
  • Stephen Strasburg, who debuts against the Pirates next week, pitched five shutout innings at Triple A and even got a hit, writes MASN.com's Ben Goessling.
  • Strasburg's a star now, but college coach Tony Gwynn says the phenom was "sweating like a hostage" before his San Diego State debut, according to Tom Krasovic of AOL FanHouse. The entire piece is worth reading.


Leave a Reply

52 Comments on "Odds & Ends: Cordero, Murphy, Red Sox, Griffey"


5 years 2 months ago

I still enjoy Mike Leake’s comments about Strasburg being an overweight whiney kid when they were on a traveling team together.

Bet all the kids who made fun of Strasburg when he was a kid are eating those words now.

aap212
5 years 2 months ago

Say what you want about Boras, but he’s smart. Why would he pressure clients to risk their health?

04Forever
5 years 2 months ago

Bud Selig solidifies himself as a complete animal for not overturning the call. Armando has handled this mess with the utmost professionalism, Joyce has thrown an excellent career sadly into question over one mistake, he was extremely emotional and doesnt deserved to be ridiculed forever for this. The only guilty party in my mind is Selig for being so closed minded to preserve what he thinks is baseball, I cant wait until he is gone and I pray this decision is overturned someday. As a Red Sox fan who respects baseball, unlike Selig, Armando Gallaraga threw a Perfect Game in my eyes, and showed what it takes to act professional in every sense. We must forgive Joyce as well

BornRed
5 years 2 months ago

I’ve got to disagree here. If he overturns the call, where does it stop? Every subsequent time an ump misses a call teams are going to want the same treatment. You just can’t retroactively change calls. It’s one thing when the game is stopped for a replay, but once the game has continued the call has to be final.

ReverendBlack
5 years 2 months ago

“New rule: every time an umpire clearly blows the call on the 27th out of a perfect game, it can be reviewed and overturned.”

WHERE DOES IT STOP

BornRed
5 years 2 months ago

Fine, but what about other perfect games that have been ruined by blown calls? This one gets to be special because it happened to be the last out. This can’t be the only time in history a would be perfect game included a bad call.

There are bad calls all the time and we say that it is the human element in the game. All of a sudden we change the rules when something special happens? That makes it a little less special to me.

ReverendBlack
5 years 2 months ago

“Fine, but what about other perfect games that have been ruined by blown calls?”

What about ’em?

“This one gets to be special because it happened to be the last out. This can’t be the only time in history a would be perfect game included a bad call.”

No, it is known not to be the only time. But it’s the only time it happened on the very last out. That makes all the difference and I know you know why.

“There are bad calls all the time and we say that it is the human element in the game. All of a sudden we change the rules when something special happens? That makes it a little less special to me. ”

Makes what less special? Baseball? Baseball is made more special for you by denying this perfect game to him? You’re a weird guy.

5 years 2 months ago

Go find those perfect games for me, then we’ll talk. This is the only one to be messed up like this, actually, as ESPN has done some research and found that the closest thing to this is a no hitter that was lost on a 3-2 pitch with two outs due to a very close ball 4 called.It gets to be special because it’s the last out, and that is pretty important, dude. You know the whole predetermined outcome fallacy that would prevent it from being ok to discuss an overturning if there were only 1 out? It doesn’t exist here. We know what the outcome would have been. 27th out. Ballgame over. Baseball Immortality for Armando Gallaraga.Here’s one for you, even. The pine tar game. I’ll skip going into detail, but that call was overturned and, hell, they had to redo the game from that point on. If that can happen, why can’t we have a call overturned on what is OBVIOUSLY the 27th out, after the umpire himself even said he messed up.

BornRed
5 years 2 months ago

“It gets to be special because it’s the last out is pretty important, dude. You know the whole predetermined outcome fallacy that would prevent it from being ok to discuss an overturning if there were only 1 out? It doesn’t exist here.”

But there are two things wrong with that.

1. Now how do we decide which situations are special enough to go back and change? If a perfect game is special enough, are no-hitters important enough to go back and change? What about other games? Standard game ends on a close play. But maybe that team could have come back if only the correct call was made! Maybe that loss means they don’t go to the playoffs. Or maybe we’ll just have a fourth out at the end of every game just to be sure that nothing else would have happened. Yeah, a little extreme, but point is this: If we decide it’s okay for a near perfect game, then what other situations is it okay for because there are many that are as important or more important.

2. We change the call and pretend that the base hit and the batter after never happened? Well it did. It happened, we don’t just go back and pretend something didn’t happen because we want a different outcome.

ReverendBlack
5 years 2 months ago

“Now how do we decide which situations are special enough to go back and change?”

I DONT KNOW MAN YOURE RIGHT ITS ALL UP IN THE AIR NOW THERE IS NO TRUTH WHAT DO WE DO AHHHHHH

“If a perfect game is special enough, are no-hitters important enough to go back and change? What about other games? Standard game ends on a close play. But maybe that team could have come back if only the correct call was made!”

I dunno, let’s talk about it! Do you think the best solution is “NO RULE CHANGE EVA. RULES IS RULES, SEE”? I don’t.

For my part, I think blown calls on the final out of ANY game should be reviewable. Why shouldn’t it be? But again, this doesn’t follow necessarily from reversing last night’s call.

“2. We change the call and pretend that the base hit and the batter after never happened? Well it did. It happened, we don’t just go back and pretend something didn’t happen because we want a different outcome.”

Why not? Who does it harm? Does that last 6-3 make the game of baseball more special for you?

Also, you’ve heard of rainouts right? Am I blowing your mind here.

jwredsox
5 years 2 months ago

I actually wanted to call into a radio station that thought Selig changing the ruling would create a bad precedent and propose that exact rule lol

04Forever
5 years 2 months ago

where does it stop? how about begin? this needed to be done to give justice to a fine effort that every single person whom isnt blind knows donald was out, even Joyce after the replay. its not like this is asked for all the time, but something is seriously wrong with Selig to not give it to him even after the ump that called it admitted its the wrong call, now Joyce will get death threats and be viewed as a bad umpire, which isnt even true. Not all teams would want the same treatment, this is the doomsday of ALL scenarios you could possibly come up with and yes you can change the call, Selig can do it, he just wont because he is so hung up on himself and how he thinks the game should be. he was out, the game was over, period. it was a perfect game

BornRed
5 years 2 months ago

What does overturning the call really accomplish? Gallaraga doesn’t really get to feel the celebratory joy… Joyce already robbed him of that. The Tigers won’t go back and through a party in the clubhouse. He already said he considers it a perfect game, the same as anyone else.

04Forever
5 years 2 months ago

We all consider Pete Rose a Hall of Famer to except for the sad fact, like this now, it doesnt matter what we think because hes not in there. Gallaraga deserves the recognition, people whom hang onto the “sanctity” of the game are so full of it

ReverendBlack
5 years 2 months ago

I don’t think you’re really unaware of what overturning the call would accomplish; it’s completely obvious to everyone.

What does overturning the call cost? You say there’s some kind of slippery slope. But, no – there isn’t one.

BornRed
5 years 2 months ago

There is one, you don’t seem to see it. You are talking about changing the rules of the game after the game is played. In what world is that okay?

The game was completed with the same rules as any other game, the umpire’s call is final and there is no reply at 1st base. Now after the game is completed, we decide we don’t like how those rules applied to this situation. It is simply not fair to change how the rules apply after the fact.

And yeah, it makes it less special, because we didn’t get to enjoy the perfect game when it happened. In future situations, we then sit an wonder if a call will subsequently overturned. I personally enjoy that a baseball game is final when the last out is called.

ReverendBlack
5 years 2 months ago

“You are talking about changing the rules of the game after the game is played. In what world is that okay? ”

…This one. “New rule: every time an umpire clearly blows the call on the 27th out of a perfect game, it can be reviewed and overturned.” No slope.

“It is simply not fair to change how the rules apply after the fact.”

To whom is it unfair? You keep saying this in different ways but you aren’t explaining it. No one loses anything in this situation.

“I personally enjoy that a baseball game is final when the last out is called. ”

In other words, “I personally prefer injustice. It’s not fair if injustices are remedied”

Cool story bro

BornRed
5 years 2 months ago

It is not fair because you change the way the rules apply after the fact. It is not fair to retroactively change the rules for one person and not the other. It is not fair to make a judgement about a specific situation, deciding it is so special that we get to change the rules. What if a guy gets close to 4,000 hits? That’s even more “special” than a perfect game! Do we go back and make sure we overturn all those times he should have been called safe at first just because he “should” have more hits. Then we can get him the recognition he deserves.

If it changes the rules going forward and the game is called better going forward, great. But you don’t go back and adjust the way the game is called just to get the outcome you want. Even if it is a justified outcome.

I feel bad for the kid, it sucks. But those are the breaks, everyone gets a bad call that doesn’t go their way. But go ahead and keep putting words in my mouth, I’ve made my point.

ReverendBlack
5 years 2 months ago

“It is not fair to retroactively change the rules for one person and not the other.”

I agree! So long as “the other person” here had the same thing happen to them — a blown call on the 27th out of a perfect game — it would be completely unfair to refuse to change the rules for them but do it here.

That’s unfair because it’s inconsistent; it’s arbitrary. Merely refusing to overturn EVERY blown call categorically while overturning this one isn’t inconsistent at all, though. So what’s unfair about it?

“It is not fair to make a judgement about a specific situation, deciding it is so special that we get to change the rules.”

I don’t think you’re totally clear on how rules work and by whom they’re made — or even THAT they’re made, maybe. You remember that, right? We’re not talking about laws of physics, but rules to a game played by a group of people. The people make the rules up and can choose to change them.

Who in this group of people is done wrong changing or revising this rule, by reversing this call? And if no one is done wrong by it, in what sense is it “unfair”?

New rule: every time an umpire clearly blows the call on the 27th out of a perfect game, it can be reviewed and overturned.

Maybe you’ll say “other people who had bad calls made” is done wrong here. I think you’re wrong that they’re done wrong, for one, but even if you’re right, so long as there is something that makes this situation distinguishable from those others, it’s not unfair in the sense that it’s inconsistent or arbitrary rule-change; it’s just a different application in a unique context. IOW, it’s not the league treating two of the same things different, they’re treating two different things differently. Do you see why?

5 years 2 months ago

Isn’t changing the rules how Home Run reviews came into play?

BornRed
5 years 2 months ago

Yes, they changed the rules of the game to include replay review of home runs. That would be a perfectly acceptable outcome of this situation. However, when they decided to review home runs, they did not go back to some defining moment and say “that home run should have counted, so we are going to count it, include it in the official box score and change the outcome of the game.”

ReverendBlack
5 years 2 months ago

…But they could have and, if it had made sense to, should have.

The new HR review rule “screws” all historical would-have-been HRs in exactly the same way, but you’re fine with that. Game is still “special”.

Just don’t go back and correct an obvious call the only consequence of which was to rob a guy of a perfect game, one of the most amazing accomplishments in all of sports. Because that wouldn’t be fair, guys.

Weirdo.

04Forever
5 years 2 months ago

besides, Selig throw out 50 no hitters that were deemed invalid. the problem with that bag of hot air is that he only likes take achievements away (ie. steriods, bad calls, no hitters, now perfect games) and not setting things straight. He is a bad man and needs to go, seriously

0bsessions
5 years 2 months ago

“besides, Selig throw out 50 no hitters that were deemed invalid”

That was Fay Vincent, not Bud Selig.

ReverendBlack
5 years 2 months ago

It is very literally in the interest of NO ONE to let the call stand. Everyone wants the call to made right, Cleveland included. It doesn’t cost anybody anything to overturn the call.

5 years 2 months ago

A retroactive call overturn is a bit much, but in the argument for expanding video replay to debate calls like they do with home runs, I think we’ve found a great arguing point. Call the other umps there and get things straightened out.

BornRed
5 years 2 months ago

I’m with you here. I hope it starts the discussion of expanding replay. If done right, it can enhance the game. But the last thing I want is to open the game to overturning calls retroactively.

04Forever
5 years 2 months ago

i also agree of course, and you start that discussion by showing how Joyce got it right using replay and Selig over turning it. The longer he drags his feet keeping the majors in the stone age when there are better ways of ensuring fair play, the longer this kind of unnecessary agony will continue for no good reason

BornRed
5 years 2 months ago

But the rules of the game say the umpire’s call is final and there is no replay at 1st base. You can’t retroactively change how the rules apply to a game that has already happened.

04Forever
5 years 2 months ago

Bud Selig can do whatever he wants, the rules dont matter when it comes to him, he gets the final say. If he can throw out no hitters and bar players from the hall, he can do as he pleases. He had his first opportunity to do whats right and fix it and he continues his streak of being out of touch with fans and the players

BornRed
5 years 2 months ago

This is baseball, this is not Nam. There are rules.

BornRed
5 years 2 months ago

Pete Rose broke the rules and was punished. The no hitters were thrown out because they did not comply with the definition of a no hitter. All of them were determined not to be no-hitters because the pitcher didn’t throw 9 innings.

The Rose situation (right or wrong) doesn’t apply. We’re talking about changing the game after the fact.

The no-hitters aren’t really the same thing either. They didn’t retroactively add hits to those games. They made a formal decision on the definition of a no-hitter and those games didn’t make the cut… much like how last night’s game did not meet the definition of a perfect game. Even if it should have, it was not.

5 years 2 months ago

What is the exact rule that says that? Also I want to know why he didn’t go for help

BornRed
5 years 2 months ago

You need to cite a rule book to tell you that the umpires make the calls and that there is no replay review at first base?

ReverendBlack
5 years 2 months ago

It’s a “bit much”? What does that mean? “It’s worth making sure every single such mistake is corrected in the future, but it’s not worth correcting one that was made yesterday.”

Bunch of nonsense. It doesn’t cost anybody anything to overturn the call.

gigantes2425
5 years 2 months ago

i agree with you 100%. i feel bad for galarraga, and jim joyce. galarraga showed more class than i thought anyone could have and joyce was very sincere and stood up and knew he was wrong. i’m glad he stayed to ump today and it was nice to see them shakes hands before the game. i hope they consider him as throwing a perfect game cause i do and i really hope that people don’t think of this when they think of jim joyce.

5 years 2 months ago

Wow, Rosenthal. Even when everyone else is trying to let Griffey retire on a high note, you still sound like a complete twat. Should I expect anything else by now?

04Forever
5 years 2 months ago

On top of that, history is going to forget arguably one of the best catches by Austin Jackson that eyes can see. I dont know how he caught it to save the Perfect game, but now it will be forgotten because its just another game, when we all know in our hearts that it isnt, and we should give the man what he earned and not punish him over a very stupid and controversial technicality

BornRed
5 years 2 months ago

That’s just asinine. The catch would be overshadowed by Gallaraga throwing a perfect game anyway.

04Forever
5 years 2 months ago

the only reason Gallaraga had a chance was because of that catch, that was the best catch since the 1954 World Series

BornRed
5 years 2 months ago

It was an outstanding catch… and it still gets shown on Sportscenter, and Baseball Tonight, etc. After they show the replay, they talk about the perfect game that wasn’t.

If the correct call was made on the field:
The catch gets shown on Sportscenter, Baseball Tonight, etc. After they show the replay, they talk about the 21st perfect game and the 3rd this season in a truly historic month.

5 years 2 months ago

The catch would not be overshadowed by the perfect game. The only reason I know Who Dwayne Wise is, is because of “the catch” for Mark Buehrle’s perfect game.

5 years 2 months ago

Which was way better then the Austin Jackson catch.

5 years 2 months ago

Yeah it was way better, but did you see how much ground Austin Jackson had to cover to be able to catch that ball?

jwredsox
5 years 2 months ago

It is only thought of so highly because it happened so recently. I’d argue Quentin’s catch from yesterday was better because the ball was directly over his head. Good catch, but not spectacular.

04Forever
5 years 2 months ago

Dont get me wrong, if it was a tie, tie goes to the runner. Thats fair, i could live with that, but it was no where near close at all. If it were any other living, breathing human being umping first it would have been a Perfect Game. This isnt an issue of rules as I see it, its an ethical issue

04Forever
5 years 2 months ago

I think I can also safely say that Gallaraga wants it to be recognized more then he wants that Corvette

ELPinchy
5 years 2 months ago

Wrong,there are no ties.

“That is exactly right. There are no ties and there is no rule that says the tie goes to the runner. But the rule book does say that the runner must beat the ball to first base, and so if he doesn’t beat the ball, then he is out. “-Major League crew chief Tim McClelland

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info/umpires/feature.jsp?feature=mcclellandqa

5 years 2 months ago

I for one am tired of the good old boy mentality of Major League Baseball. I would love to see instant replay used for missed calls. Maybe have a select group of personnel in a press box watching over every play, if one is missed buzz down to an umpire and he can overrule it right away, no delay, play ball. I think it is sad time when you have the video evidence right in front of you and you don’t overturn the call. To me it’s like watching somebody rob a store on tape and the judge throws the case out for no reason. This was an injustice and Gallaraga got screwed over, but hey at least Lincecum and smoke weed and get no suspension and all the roid heads get to break records! Got to love Selig!!! If you ask me Selig is on a “Slippery Slope” look at what he did to the Expos when they were contending for the Wild Card, he wouldn’t even let them have September call ups, because how would that look? A soon to be contracted team winning the Wild Card? MLB fans deserve better, Gallaraga deserved better! Heck even Joyce deserved better!!!

jwredsox
5 years 2 months ago

Your argument makes no sense at all. Galarraga should feel cheated that Selig didn’t overturn his call because he let players on steroids get records and Lincecum smoke weed? uhhhhhhmmmmmmmmYou alright?

East Coast Bias
5 years 2 months ago

Daniel Murphy can’t get a break! Poor kid…

mrsjohnmiltonrocks
5 years 2 months ago

I Wish Chad Cordero well. Coming back from shoulder surgery is a long, hard, slog. Congratulations to him for doing the hard work in the wilderness for over two years. Hope he pitches well enough to continue his career.