My five-year old son knows very little about baseball apart from the fact that Daddy likes it and writes about it. He doesn’t watch games with me yet because, hell, you can’t get him to sit still for anything. He was getting ready to take a bath as the Phillies-Reds game was winding to a close yesterday, and since I’m usually his bath-giver, he was wondering where I was. From down the hall I heard my wife tell him that “Daddy’s watching baseball. Something important is happening, I guess.”
My son came down the hall — naked as a jaybird — stood next to where I was sitting and asked me what was going on. He knows the general point of baseball — the pitcher is trying to get the batter out, the batter is trying to hit the ball — so he basically grokked that what has going on was special. When I saw that he was getting it, I said “you know Buddy, no one has done what the man with the beard is doing for 54 years.” I’m not sure he understands the significance of the playoffs, let alone how long 54 years is, but this seemed to impress him. My wife came in the room and put his bathrobe on him and we watched together in silence.
When it was over — I had to tell him it was over — he ran back down the hallway to where my wife was and he yelled “Mommy! The man with the beard didn’t let anyone hit the ball! No one has done that in . . . um . . . a lot of years!”
There were others besides my son who were impressed by Halladay’s feat. This is a sampling of what they had to say:
- Roy Halladay: “It was pretty neat.”
- Charlie Manuel: “It was great managin’.”
- Dash Treyhorn at The Fightins: “When Roy delivered that 0-2 pitch to Brandon Phillips and Chooch made
that definitely-more-difficult-than-it-looked throw to put the game in
the record books, I was elated, just not like the first time. I cheered,
I put a hand in the air. But more than anything, I just laughed.
Literally, I laughed, because what I had just witnessed was one of the
most absurdly awesome moments in sports, and I wasn’t even surprised,
because that’s what watching Roy Halladay for a season will do to you.”
- The 700 Level: “My, was it pretty.”
- The 701 Level: “hahaha YO GIL member wen DOC threw taaht NOHITER that was prety nSWETT SON haha YES” [sorry -- personal weakness of mine; whoever writes that stuff is someone with whom I'd like to have a cocktail];
- Rob Neyer: “Letting Roy Halladay loose against the National League this year was like locking a hungry wolf inside a garage full of kittens.
We couldn’t have seen this coming, quite.
But we should have seen something like it.”
- Red Reporter: “OK, this is not how we wanted this to go.”
- Eno Sarris: “He produced a game of which everyone who watched felt unworthy.”
- Jimmy Rollins: “He was filthy. Filthy. Like just completely filthy.”
Oh, and Reds’ shortstop Orlando Cabrera had something to say too. But I’m saving that one for its own post — look back in about 25 minutes — because I don’t want to sully the awesome currently afoot with the lame noise he brought.
-
- Jonny5 - Oct 7, 2010 at 11:08 AM
-
And he has the highest Phillies BA. I also see him having that record for the post season as well. Chooch has historically gotten better in the post season. Yes He’s very much one of those mystical and elusive “Clutch” players. :>P
-
- Chris Fiorentino - Oct 7, 2010 at 11:10 AM
-
Shhh…don’t say the “C” word too loud around here. You will get smacked down by the Sabremetric police
-
- roboninja - Oct 7, 2010 at 11:24 AM
-
Now everyone is seeing what us Jays fans saw for years: the best pitcher in baseball, bar none. Go Doc, go Philadelphia!
-
- Jonny5 - Oct 7, 2010 at 11:28 AM
-
That’s ok. I still believe that “clutch” exists. Some things can’t be quantified in statistics properly. That’s really tough for the whole scientific sabermathmatician crowd to wrap their neurons around. I can deal with their ignorance that some players do indeed perform better under pressure than others do. So they can deal with my ignorance when they try to prove “clutch” doesn’t exist. I’d have to say Roy might even make a case for that with his ERA in the post season of negative 2. A no-no + RBI+ a run from second on a single= ERA -2
-
- Chris Fiorentino - Oct 7, 2010 at 11:43 AM
-
I like the -2 ERA. He’s also given up -1 hits and therefore has a WHIP of 0.000.
-
- John_Michael - Oct 7, 2010 at 12:04 PM
-
‘He couldn’t have done it without me not being there. Just like for his perfect game.’ – Placido Polanco
-
- Michael - Oct 7, 2010 at 12:17 PM
-
Hey, anyone who DOESN’T cry watching Steel Magnolias…well, they’re just heartless!
-
- Michael - Oct 7, 2010 at 12:20 PM
-
The only way to believe “clutch” exists in baseball is to ignore most of the evidence and choose the much smaller amount of evidence that supports “clutchness.” But whatever, I hear ignorance is bliss.
-
- Utley's hair - Oct 7, 2010 at 12:22 PM
-
Did something happen last night?
-
- Jonny5 - Oct 7, 2010 at 1:18 PM
-
When the evidence is based on bs, it’s worthless. But let me show you something I read this morning. “David Eckstein can be a World Series MVP. Where Craig Counsell can be the guy at the bottom of the dogpile after scoring the title-clinching run. Where Don Larsen, a journeyman pitcher with a career record of 81-91, can become the only pitcher in baseball history to throw a perfect game in the World Series.”
All clutch, all the way.
Look at it this way. Physicists scientifically proved that cars would never be able to drive the 1/4 mile in less than 10 seconds. It was physically impossible. Today some can do it in 4.5 seconds and 330 mph. You are the equivilant of those agreeing with those misinformed Physicists, because this number divided by that number equals “no way”. Ahhh, i miss the days when the earth was flat……. So said the greatest minds of their time anyway. Get it?
-
- Michael - Oct 7, 2010 at 3:27 PM
-
You’ve got it backwards, my friend. Of course clutch performances exist, but “clutchness” as a repeatable skill possessed by some major league players and not others is a fallacy. All major league players have experience and success performing in high pressure situations. Baseball observers have long believed that the conception of “clutch” as a skill exists. Now that we have more access to information and more people willing to actually study whether or not it exists, it’s been shown to simply be a concept that helps people create a narrative about players or games. I would argue that this makes you the “equivilant” of those who agreed with those misinformed physicists. Get it?
-
- Michael - Oct 7, 2010 at 3:34 PM
-
And here’s an easy to understand explanation of what clutch actually is:
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2656
I’ve got plenty of other examples that are more numbers-heavy, if you prefer.
-
- Chris Fiorentino - Oct 7, 2010 at 3:54 PM
-
Baseball Prospectus says it…it MUST BE TRUE!!!!! Lolz.
-
- Michael - Oct 7, 2010 at 4:57 PM
-
No, dude. Baseball Prospectus says it, along with lots of other sources. You’re really just underlining my point. It’s cool, I get it: you want to maintain the narrative and when presented with evidence to the contrary, you turn into a bit of a bully. That’s cool.
