Baseball Pet Peeve Thread

[David]

I'll start...

 

I guess I'm going to take away a lot of the obvious ones, but here goes...

 

 

- the pitcher W-L statistic - period

- complaining about hitters striking out

- complaining about hitting with RISP and other "clutch" nonsense

- "chemistry" - that one is more of a sports thing in general

- talking about how certain players do against certain teams - I call this one the Big Unit... Randy Johnson is 10000 - 0 against the Cubs - OK, well W-L doesn't matter, Randy Johnson isn't the same pitcher he was 5 years ago, much less 10 years ago, and the Cubs have a completely different team than they did 5 years ago, much less 10 years ago... this stat means nothing

- "Cub killers" - Carlos Lee and Adam Dunn kill everybody...they're very good hitters... they've just happened to do a little better against us (or have they, I'm sure they're above their career averages, but I don't feel like looking)... we also happen to face them more often than most teams because they've been on teams in our division

- complaining about first pitch swings on a team that leads the league in OBP - you can't take every single first pitch (this one is obviously a more recent phenomenon, as I used to get insanely upset when our hitters would swing early in past years) - this one was honestly a reach, I'm running out of steam :blush:

 

I'm sure I could come up with more, but I'll stop and let you guys add...

Edited August 13, 2008 by David

[imb]

stealing third

[David]

I don't want this to be limited to NSBB-related themes...

 

- calling underrated or under-appreciated players "MVP's" - the other day Mike Murphy was talking some nonsense about DeRosa or Theriot being the Cubs' MVP, even though neither of those guys would be candidates for league MVP like, say, Soriano might (actually nobody on the Cubs would, but that's a separate argument)... the fact that they fly under the radar doesn't make them more valuable to the team. Nor does their versatility. valuable = valuable... overlooked = overlooked

 

- referring to guys as "winners"... these players have happened to be on winning teams more often than not.. there is inevitably going to be a subset of role players who have just happened to be on a lot of good teams... craig counsell, steve kerr, whatever.... the real "winners" are the good players, period.

[Derwood]

balks

[otis89]

- complaining about first pitch swings on a team that leads the league in OBP - you can't take every single first pitch (this one is obviously a more recent phenomenon, as I used to get insanely upset when our hitters would swing early in past years) - this one was honestly a reach, I'm running out of steam :blush:

 

I'm fine with people swinging at the first pitch when it's a pitch they can hammer, but so often they swing at the first pitch and look completely foolish doing so. I sometimes think certain players swing at the first pitch just to be swinging at the first pitch.

[David]

It drives me nuts when people ask me if I think the Cubs will "get it done." Deep down I know they're wondering if our hitters will be clutch or not or if our pitchers will be gutless choking dogs.

 

Instead of going off about how the playoffs are a luck-based crapshoot, I just shrug and say, "We'll see."

[Little Slide Rooter]

When a pitcher who coughs up a lead turns around and gets the win. Thats just wrong.

 

Defensive indifference. A steals a steal. By the same rule, if a ball is hit into the outfield, and the outfielder doesnt bother going after it, should it not be considered a base hit?

[OleMissCub]

The DH Rule. I hate hate hate hate hate hate hate hate hate hate it.

[David]

Does anybody find it hard to talk baseball with casual fans because of a lot of this stuff?

 

Seriously, I get frustrated as all hell...if it weren't for the internet, I wouldn't be able to have ANY baseball discussion of any substance.

[Mark_R]

The save statistic has cost teams a lot of money, and earned many a players unwarranted money.

[OleMissCub]

I don't like guys getting "Wins" after they've blown a save.

[David]

I don't like guys getting "Wins" after they've blown a save.

 

 

Which is one of many reasons why that stat is a load of crap.

Edited August 13, 2008 by David

[UMFan83]

- complaining about first pitch swings on a team that leads the league in OBP - you can't take every single first pitch (this one is obviously a more recent phenomenon, as I used to get insanely upset when our hitters would swing early in past years) - this one was honestly a reach, I'm running out of steam :blush:

 

I'm fine with people swinging at the first pitch when it's a pitch they can hammer, but so often they swing at the first pitch and look completely foolish doing so. I sometimes think certain players swing at the first pitch just to be swinging at the first pitch.

 

When you have a very good pitcher on an 80 pitch count, I get pissed when the Cubs aren't patient regardless of their season OBP rankings.

[Little Slide Rooter]

This isnt really a peave, but I always thought that a batter should be able to steal 1st on a wild pitch even if it werent strike 3.

[David]

- complaining about first pitch swings on a team that leads the league in OBP - you can't take every single first pitch (this one is obviously a more recent phenomenon, as I used to get insanely upset when our hitters would swing early in past years) - this one was honestly a reach, I'm running out of steam :blush:

 

I'm fine with people swinging at the first pitch when it's a pitch they can hammer, but so often they swing at the first pitch and look completely foolish doing so. I sometimes think certain players swing at the first pitch just to be swinging at the first pitch.

 

When you have a very good pitcher on an 80 pitch count, I get pissed when the Cubs aren't patient regardless of their season OBP rankings.

 

But you have to think bigger picture than that. Theoretically, if a team took every first pitch, they'd pretty much never see a first pitch ball. I have no problem with guys going up there thinking of attacking the first pitch, as long as they're just changing it up from their general approach.

 

Obviously, when they repeatedly swing at the first pitch in the situation you described, it's frustrating, especially when that first swing results in a ball in play and a quick out.

[OleMissCub]

This isnt really a peave, but I always thought that a batter should be able to steal 1st on a wild pitch even if it werent strike 3.

 

I literally just "LOL'd"

[kujay]

It drives me nuts when people ask me if I think the Cubs will "get it done." Deep down I know they're wondering if our hitters will be clutch or not or if our pitchers will be gutless choking dogs.

 

Instead of going off about how the playoffs are a luck-based crapshoot, I just shrug and say, "We'll see."

 

Man, I don't mean to attack you, but this is the second thread where I've seen comments reflecting this attitude. It seems like you think everything is predetermined and the players are just out there going through the motions because whatever is going to happen is going to happen. Doesn't seem like a very fun thing to be a fan of.

 

Specifically, I don't think "clutch" is nonsense. There are situations in baseball that I think we can describe as more important or more stressful than others. Players that excel in those situations are more valuable than those who don't.

 

Otherwise, I agree with your peeves. Especially W-L for pitchers. There is no more ridiculous stat, and I can't believe broadcasters, writers, and even agents, scouts and GMs put so much stock in it.

[David]

Thinking of the reasons why that wouldn't work is just making my head hurt.

 

EDIT - this was supposed to follow OMC's post...

Edited August 13, 2008 by David

[Irrelevant Dude]

Players who don't bend the bill on their cap...

[kujay]

Players who don't bend the bill on their cap...

 

And the Juan Cruz "high hat."

[salukifudd]

Does everything that Hawk Harrelson says count?

[OleMissCub]

http://bp2.blogger.com/_yNXJMgeEZ-w/RzzSkr_Gi-I/AAAAAAAAAOo/U_i4wvIu160/s400/barry-bonds1.jpg

[kujay]

Does everything that Hawk Harrelson says count?

 

Yes, and his several straight minutes of silence when the Sox are losing counts too.

[David]

It drives me nuts when people ask me if I think the Cubs will "get it done." Deep down I know they're wondering if our hitters will be clutch or not or if our pitchers will be gutless choking dogs.

 

Instead of going off about how the playoffs are a luck-based crapshoot, I just shrug and say, "We'll see."

 

Man, I don't mean to attack you, but this is the second thread where I've seen comments reflecting this attitude. It seems like you think everything is predetermined and the players are just out there going through the motions because whatever is going to happen is going to happen. Doesn't seem like a very fun thing to be a fan of.

 

Specifically, I don't think "clutch" is nonsense. There are situations in baseball that I think we can describe as more important or more stressful than others. Players that excel in those situations are more valuable than those who don't.

 

Otherwise, I agree with your peeves. Especially W-L for pitchers. There is no more ridiculous stat, and I can't believe broadcasters, writers, and even agents, scouts and GMs put so much stock in it.

 

Quite the opposite. Things can go any way. It doesn't matter if we have the best team in baseball or not. We can run into a hot pitching staff, or some fluke plays that wouldn't happen 9 times out of 10 (i.e. Gonzalez botching the DP ball), and not "get it done."

 

When people ask me if they can win the world series... it's like, um.. of course they can... they're arguably the best team in baseball. but that doesn't mean that they will... in fact, they *probably* won't. When fans of other teams are like "Oh, the Cubs will just choke like they always do," the reality is... hey, they're probably right. But the Cubs have as good a chance as anyone to get it done.

 

If given one team vs. the field, you take the field every time (unless you're talking Tiger Woods)...

[Andy]

I don't like guys getting "Wins" after they've blown a save.

 

 

Which is one of among many reasons why that stat is a load of crap.

Would it really be so hard to create a rule by which relievers who give up game-tying or go-ahead runs would be ineligible to win the game? The scorer can decide who wins like he does in games where starters can't make it 5 innings and their team wins.

 

It'd be so easy to do that it seems a waste not to.