Josh Hamilton Game 163+playoffs

[Royals]

i better not see anyone bring up Luis Gonzalez (except for me).

*breaks his chair against the floor, slammingit down several times and smashing it to splinters*

[Tigers]

Or, at least go with Aaron's compromise and allow him to pinch hit.


The problem with that is, you open up a whole different can of worms. If Hamilton was on an AL team in the IBC playoffs, would we allow him to DH full time or still only pitch hit?

Would we only allow Brett Myers to pitch in the bullpen in the IBC if the A's had made the playoffs?

Do we only allow Baldelli to DH in the IBC playoffs if his hip prevents him from playing the field in the MLB playoffs?


I don't think that is a can of worms we want to open up, personally.

[Padres]

Or, at least go with Aaron's compromise and allow him to pinch hit.

The problem with that is, you open up a whole different can of worms. If Hamilton was on an AL team in the IBC playoffs, would we allow him to DH full time or still only pitch hit?

Would we only allow Brett Myers to pitch in the bullpen in the IBC if the A's had made the playoffs?

Do we only allow Baldelli to DH in the IBC playoffs if his hip prevents him from playing the field in the MLB playoffs?

I don't think that is a can of worms we want to open up, personally.

I agree!

[Pirates]

I got all the arguments down and you know how I feel, but im still very confused as to why he was allowed to play 29th-5th and then all of a sudden he has to sit out for the playoffs. I understand that im the only one who got fucked over, but I knew Hamilton came back and after that I didn't even know he got shut down. Its not my responsibility to go and say he cant play. It seems like everyone else knew but me yet nobody said one thing.

[Tigers]

This comes up every year as an issue, but it's not always as bad as this. Last season went rather smoothly, because most of the player statuses were fairly obvious. Then every couple of seasons there comes a debate like this because there's one or two guys that could go either way and things get a little heated. However, this is the way we've chosen to handle this situation, and personally, I think its the best way. It gets annoying sometimes, but its better than just eliminating every guy who decides to take the last two weeks off because his team is 20 games out.

In the past though, it seems to me, we've always given players the benefit of the doubt. If it's a 50/50 case like it is with Hamilton right now, we should let him play. Or, at least go with Aaron's compromise and allow him to pinch hit. There's no reason for us to want our postseason to feature less stars, or make it less competitive. It's October, and we've got the IBC's 8 best about to go at it for the Championship...don't we want it to as fairly competitive as possible?

No doubt, Hamilton is debatable. It could go either way. But a tie should go to the runner, or the player in this case. In the end, I don't care, I have nothing invested in this. It just seems like there's a legit argument to be made for Josh playing, so he should get to play.

I agree with Gabe's sentiments, except for the one I noted in the prior post (just not a can of worms I think we want to open up).

That is how I thought we've viewed this issue in the past and while it is a complicated issue I believe we've always errored on the side of letting the player play unless there is clear evidence that the player is unable to contribute or continue to contribute if they were shut down early by their team.

[Pirates]

according to the exco they said hamilton wont be playing.

[Tigers]

I got all the arguments down and you know how I feel, but im still very confused as to why he was allowed to play 29th-5th and then all of a sudden he has to sit out for the playoffs. I understand that im the only one who got fucked over, but I knew Hamilton came back and after that I didn't even know he got shut down. Its not my responsibility to go and say he cant play. It seems like everyone else knew but me yet nobody said one thing.

My guess would be the ExCo figured Hamiton wasn't playing in the MLB and so they made the decision that he wouldn't be eligible in the IBC to play, even though he hadn't been put on the MLB DL (essentially applying the September exception rule to the DL). Then Hamilton came back and played in back to back games on the 25th and 26th.

The 26th being Saturday, so he was active and playing in the MLB on Saturday night at mid-night (the IBC DL cut off time). That would make him eligible to play the week of September 28th.

Then the Rangers were eliminated, Hamilton was shut down and the ExCo decided he wasn't eligible to play anymore because the Rangers shut him down.

I think that probably sums up the chain of events, though I'm guessing on quite a bit there so take it with a grain of salt.

[Orioles]

I guess I'd qualify my earlier argument that he should be eligible by saying that I'm one of the people basing my opinion on "reading a blip" or two about his condition, looking at the dates he last played, and keeping my eye out for anything indicating he's aggravated or worsened his condition. If someone who follows the team closely (and doesn't have a dog in the fight, as Brett P. doesn't here being in the AL) feels that he definitively would not be able to play - meaning an extra week, two weeks, whatever wouldn't allow him to at least pinch hit in the postseason - then I'd generally defer to that person's view.

However, we won't always have someone who has followed every player's or team's injury history, and will have to work with what we can gather from rotoworld, BP, local papers, etc. For that reason, it's hard for me to agree that we should be looking so closely at a player as to consider how hard he struck the ball, or whether he legged out a double on September 26th. Personally, I think we need to have less gray area in this situation w/ the reg season over.

We should be looking for evidence that a guy definitively would NOT be able to play in order to hold him out. Otherwise it goes from being an adjustment to our reg season DL rules to compensate for roster expansion and teams falling out of the MLB race to a new (more stringent) injury standard for the playoffs, which isn't something I think we want. The standard should be loose enough that if a decision requires watching the guy play late in the season before being shut down w/ less than a week to go, he's someone who should remain active.

Guess I'm talking more about how accurate we need to be, and how far from our reg. season system we want to stray. So if the idea here is to be as accurate as possible even if it's a "higher" standard than in the regular season, and someone who watches Texas very closely can confidently say "there's little chance he would play" despite how recently it seemed he could play, then he should sit.

If we want to mirror our reg. season system but adjust for roster exp and playoff races, I don't think there's enough readily available evidence to show that something changed between his attempts to play late in the year and his being shut down with a week to go to change his status to "injured."

[Astros]

Nobody in this league would know better than Brett P, and I think in this case we should just go with what he says

[Tigers]

Nobody in this league would know better than Brett P, and I think in this case we should just go with what he says

I guess the question that Brett needs to answer then is:

1) Does he think Hamilton would have stuck around and been able to, at the minimum, pitch hit for the Rangers at some point the last 6 games IF the Rangers were still in the playoff race or did Hamilton's injury get so much worse after playing in back to back games on Friday and Saturday that the Rangers would have shut him down even if they were still in the playoff race?


If Brett truly thinks the Rangers would have still shut Hamilton down on Tuesday even if they were still in the playoff race then I guess that's his call to make.

I just went and looked up the video of Hamilton's bases clearing double in the 5th inning of the game on the 26th. It definately wasn't a "bloop" double. Actually, that is a bit of a mis-quote of Brett....he said he recalled them being "looped", so maybe I mis-interpreted his definition of "looped" but Hamilton's shot in the 5th inning was hit pretty hard down the RF line and made it all the way to the wall. In addition, Hamilton didn't look to be in any pain in the close up of him standing on 2nd base.


Everyone else if free to look at it if they like.

http://mlb.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=6868249

[Rangers]

Nobody in this league would know better than Brett P, and I think in this case we should just go with what he says

I guess the question that Brett needs to answer then is:

1) Does he think Hamilton would have stuck around and been able to, at the minimum, pitch hit for the Rangers at some point the last 6 games IF the Rangers were still in the playoff race or did Hamilton's injury get so much worse after playing in back to back games on Friday and Saturday that the Rangers would have shut him down even if they were still in the playoff race?


If Brett truly thinks the Rangers would have still shut Hamilton down on Tuesday even if they were still in the playoff race then I guess that's his call to make.

I just went and looked up the video of Hamilton's bases clearing double in the 5th inning of the game on the 26th. It definately wasn't a "bloop" double. Actually, that is a bit of a mis-quote of Brett....he said he recalled them being "looped", so maybe I mis-interpreted his definition of "looped" but Hamilton's shot in the 5th inning was hit pretty hard down the RF line and made it all the way to the wall. In addition, Hamilton didn't look to be in any pain in the close up of him standing on 2nd base.


Everyone else if free to look at it if they like.

http://mlb.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=6868249

I watched him try to walk around a couple of days later when he wasn't on TV, but feel free to go by his blank stare for three seconds while he's standing on second base.

At any rate, I'm going to suggest to the exco that we create an injury panel so that there is a little more separation of influence, and I hope that if we do that, you guys who seem to be able to see these as simple and clear black and white cases will be willing to serve. Your clarity would be appreciated.

[Tigers]

Nobody in this league would know better than Brett P, and I think in this case we should just go with what he says

I guess the question that Brett needs to answer then is:

1) Does he think Hamilton would have stuck around and been able to, at the minimum, pitch hit for the Rangers at some point the last 6 games IF the Rangers were still in the playoff race or did Hamilton's injury get so much worse after playing in back to back games on Friday and Saturday that the Rangers would have shut him down even if they were still in the playoff race?


If Brett truly thinks the Rangers would have still shut Hamilton down on Tuesday even if they were still in the playoff race then I guess that's his call to make.

I just went and looked up the video of Hamilton's bases clearing double in the 5th inning of the game on the 26th. It definately wasn't a "bloop" double. Actually, that is a bit of a mis-quote of Brett....he said he recalled them being "looped", so maybe I mis-interpreted his definition of "looped" but Hamilton's shot in the 5th inning was hit pretty hard down the RF line and made it all the way to the wall. In addition, Hamilton didn't look to be in any pain in the close up of him standing on 2nd base.


Everyone else if free to look at it if they like.

http://mlb.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=6868249

I watched him try to walk around a couple of days later when he wasn't on TV, but feel free to go by his blank stare for three seconds while he's standing on second base.

At any rate, I'm going to suggest to the exco that we create an injury panel so that there is a little more separation of influence, and I hope that if we do that, you guys who seem to be able to see these as simple and clear black and white cases will be willing to serve. Your clarity would be appreciated.

Brett, there is no need for you to go get all defensive now. I hoped you looked at the video, his swing looked pretty solid and he didn't appear to be falling over in pain after a hard swing and legging out the double.

I just wanted to verify your statement that Hamilton's two doubles were "looped" down the line. You made it sound like he could barely swing the bat and had a couple of mis-hits that were lucky to fall in for fluke doubles. The video clearly showed that his double in the 5th inning was a solid shot on a low inside pitch that he was still able to turn on, despite his back troubles. So maybe "looped" was the wrong word to accurately describe the hits. Anyways......

So you saw him a couple days later.....I don't doubt his back was bothering him....I'm sure it probably hurt a ton after playing back to back games. They probably gave him some pretty good pain killers before the games in order to get him out there in the first place.

In the end, I think its pretty clear, Hamilton played a couple games.....was actually pretty effective in the last one with the two doubles, but in the end the Rangers were out of the race and it wasn't worth him risking further injury to keep trying to play so they shut him down. I think that part is all pretty clear.

The part that is tough to make a definitive statement about is whether or not the Rangers would have shut Hamilton down if they had still been in the playoff race. Its hugely subjective and unfortunately we'll never know the real answer. I just don't see any definitive evidence that would suggest the Rangers would have shut him down if they had still been in the playoff race.


I'll be more than happy to volunteer to be on an "injury committee" if the ExCo decides they want to form one for next season.

[Rangers]

I guess the question that Brett needs to answer then is:

1) Does he think Hamilton would have stuck around and been able to, at the minimum, pitch hit for the Rangers at some point the last 6 games IF the Rangers were still in the playoff race or did Hamilton's injury get so much worse after playing in back to back games on Friday and Saturday that the Rangers would have shut him down even if they were still in the playoff race?


If Brett truly thinks the Rangers would have still shut Hamilton down on Tuesday even if they were still in the playoff race then I guess that's his call to make.

I just went and looked up the video of Hamilton's bases clearing double in the 5th inning of the game on the 26th. It definately wasn't a "bloop" double. Actually, that is a bit of a mis-quote of Brett....he said he recalled them being "looped", so maybe I mis-interpreted his definition of "looped" but Hamilton's shot in the 5th inning was hit pretty hard down the RF line and made it all the way to the wall. In addition, Hamilton didn't look to be in any pain in the close up of him standing on 2nd base.


Everyone else if free to look at it if they like.

http://mlb.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=6868249

I watched him try to walk around a couple of days later when he wasn't on TV, but feel free to go by his blank stare for three seconds while he's standing on second base.

At any rate, I'm going to suggest to the exco that we create an injury panel so that there is a little more separation of influence, and I hope that if we do that, you guys who seem to be able to see these as simple and clear black and white cases will be willing to serve. Your clarity would be appreciated.

Brett, there is no need for you to go get all defensive now. I hoped you looked at the video, his swing looked pretty solid and he didn't appear to be falling over in pain after a hard swing and legging out the double.

I just wanted to verify your statement that Hamilton's two doubles were "looped" down the line. You made it sound like he could barely swing the bat and had a couple of mis-hits that were lucky to fall in for fluke doubles. The video clearly showed that his double in the 5th inning was a solid shot on a low inside pitch that he was still able to turn on, despite his back troubles. So maybe "looped" was the wrong word to accurately describe the hits. Anyways......

So you saw him a couple days later.....I don't doubt his back was bothering him....I'm sure it probably hurt a ton after playing back to back games. They probably gave him some pretty good pain killers before the games in order to get him out there in the first place.

In the end, I think its pretty clear, Hamilton played a couple games.....was actually pretty effective in the last one with the two doubles, but in the end the Rangers were out of the race and it wasn't worth him risking further injury to keep trying to play so they shut him down. I think that part is all pretty clear.

The part that is tough to make a definitive statement about is whether or not the Rangers would have shut Hamilton down if they had still been in the playoff race. Its hugely subjective and unfortunately we'll never know the real answer. I just don't see any definitive evidence that would suggest the Rangers would have shut him down if they had still been in the playoff race.


I'll be more than happy to volunteer to be on an "injury committee" if the ExCo decides they want to form one for next season.

I don't feel defensive about it. If you don't think that I have any insight in this specific case, you just don't. I'm not going to change your mind, because I can't cite an internet report for you.

The one thing that I AM defensive about is you calling the exco's integrity into question. But I think that an improved process that doesn't involve only the exco as an entity would resolve that. At some point, when like half the league is involved on some level with a decision, it will be hard to throw out the conspiracy card whenever you disagree with a decision.

[Astros]

I agree with BP 100% here, calling the integrity of the exco into question on this issue really pissed me off and it's only the fact that I have to be reelected again that has made me keep my mouth shut this long. Every exco member that voted on it voted for Hamilton to sit. The only reason this is even an issue right now is because Jake was looking for an excuse as to why he blew the division and waved the bloody shirt with Hamilton

[Tigers]

I don't feel defensive about it. If you don't think that I have any insight in this specific case, you just don't. I'm not going to change your mind, because I can't cite an internet report for you.


Where did I say you didn't have any insight into this specific case, Brett? Matter of fact, I even said if they were going to leave the decision up to you, because of your insight, then I asked that one simple question be answered.

When you made your statement earlier that you voted the way you did in the ExCo was because you thought he came back, "tried to play and then couldn't play anymore". All I asked for was some clarity regarding the "couldn't play anymore", because I think that is a very important part of this particular case. Especially since the player in question even said he could still hit.

As far as "calling into question the integrity of the ExCo". Yes, my comment that lead you to that train of thought was probably uncalled for on my part. My apologies.

I will however say that the two ExCo members who did chime in appeared to be making a flawed case and changing how we determine injury status. Using the players own statement that he could still hit but not play the field or run, as their basis for him being ineligible which is a flawed arguement, IMO. We have always gone by the policy in the IBC that if a player can play in any capacity he is eligible in the IBC. We haven't never placed players on the DL in the IBC because they were only healthy enough to pinch hit in the MLB.

I'll leave it at that. You guys have made your decision and it doesn't effect me in the least. I've spoken my peace as to why I think it is a bad decision, so I'll leave it at that.

[Tigers]

I agree with BP 100% here, calling the integrity of the exco into question on this issue really pissed me off and it's only the fact that I have to be reelected again that has made me keep my mouth shut this long. Every exco member that voted on it voted for Hamilton to sit. The only reason this is even an issue right now is because Jake was looking for an excuse as to why he blew the division and waved the bloody shirt with Hamilton

Aaron, you made it very clear that you feel slighted by having to sit Sizemore and it is very clear the impact having to do that is having on your decision here.

My apology for calling your integrity into question, but your decision here has been very clearly influenced by what happened to you ealier with Sizemore.

[Cardinals]

I agree with BP 100% here, calling the integrity of the exco into question on this issue really pissed me off and it's only the fact that I have to be reelected again that has made me keep my mouth shut this long. Every exco member that voted on it voted for Hamilton to sit. The only reason this is even an issue right now is because Jake was looking for an excuse as to why he blew the division and waved the bloody shirt with Hamilton

Aaron, you made it very clear that you feel slighted by having to sit Sizemore and it is very clear the impact having to do that is having on your decision here.

My apology for calling your integrity into question, but your decision here has been very clearly influenced by what happened to you ealier with Sizemore.

The decision to sit Sizemore should affect the decision to sit Hamilton. Why? Because it should be the goal to be as consistent as possible, but consistency is something that most of the league doesn't comprehend.

For what it's worth, I offered to Nils that he could use Hamilton in the series despite ExCo's decision. He declined.

[Astros]

He went on the DL, I benched him accordingly. I was trying to be consistent. Sizemore got benched because he wasn't playing. I felt Hamilton should be benched for the same reason. But oh well, I guess that following standard procedure is me having some sort of vendetta

[Cardinals]

Additionally it should be pointed out that Aaron had to sit Sizemore prior to him even hitting the DL. The decision and discussion had been ongoing.

[Tigers]

Additionally it should be pointed out that Aaron had to sit Sizemore prior to him even hitting the DL. The decision and discussion had been ongoing.

I'd be curious as to the logic the ExCo used in regards to benching Sizemore prior to his official DL announcement.

Sizemore would appear to me to be a classic case of a player playing all season with an injury, only to be shut down early because his team was way out of playoff contention and they wanted him to get a head start on recovery from inevitable surgery. Did the ExCo decide that they didn't think Sizemore was capable of playing with his current injury anymore if the Indians were still in a playoff race? This would appear to me to be a departure from how we've interpreted these cases in the past.

With Sizemore actually being placed on the DL, makes it a bit more of a classic DL case, but prior to that point I'm curious as to the ExCo's logic.

[Cardinals]

I won't speak for the others, but I voted for Sizemore not to play given that he is/was HURT. That is why he didn't play. He was injured. His play was clearly affected by this. Look at his numbers this season. They suck. He spent some time on the DL as a result of it. This whole "they'd play if their team was in it" is merely speculation. The only thing you know for certain is that the guy is hurt. If it's a minor injury, yeah, sure, whatever, a player would be more likely to play through it. Sizemore was scheduled for not one but two surgeries.

Also, why should timing matter? If the Mets were in it do you REALLY think Johan would have been placed on the DL the last week of August - prior to rosters expanding? Give me a break. Reyes would likely also have been back. Minaya's ass is/was on the line and if the Mets could have sniffed the Phils jockstrap there's no way you'll convince me that Johan wouldn't be pitching - but thats just it - ME SPECULATING. The fact is Johan is hurt, was placed on the DL, and that's that.

Then it comes to Alfonso Soriano- same type of situation minus the DL. Is it fair to make us bench Sizemore but not Soriano? Not really. Same deal. Soriano had been affected by his injury and shut down due to his injury. The Cubs were mathematically alive at the time. He was hurt and his knee or whatever had been bothering him all season. He stopped playing because he couldn't play effectively - while the Cubs were still alive. Again, his play had been hampered by his injury and again- the player is hurt and not with minor injuries. Soriano was headed under the knife - like Sizemore, like Santana, like Reyes (who is a bit more extreme, but again this is to prove that it's all speculation.)

In my opinion speculation should be removed from the process in order to ensure the highest level of fairness and consistency. But again, that doesn't seem to matter to anybody here. All we do is cheat in ExCo and try to figure out ways to get me to win and make sure that Nils loses and that the league gets fucked over in the long run. We really have sucked ass these past two years.

[Tigers]

I won't speak for the others, but I voted for Sizemore not to play given that he is/was HURT. That is why he didn't play. He was injured. His play was clearly affected by this. Look at his numbers this season. They suck. He spent some time on the DL as a result of it. This whole "they'd play if their team was in it" is merely speculation. The only thing you know for certain is that the guy is hurt. If it's a minor injury, yeah, sure, whatever, a player would be more likely to play through it. Sizemore was scheduled for not one but two surgeries.

Also, why should timing matter? If the Mets were in it do you REALLY think Johan would have been placed on the DL the last week of August - prior to rosters expanding? Give me a break. Reyes would likely also have been back. Minaya's ass is/was on the line and if the Mets could have sniffed the Phils jockstrap there's no way you'll convince me that Johan wouldn't be pitching - but thats just it - ME SPECULATING. The fact is Johan is hurt, was placed on the DL, and that's that.

Then it comes to Alfonso Soriano- same type of situation minus the DL. Is it fair to make us bench Sizemore but not Soriano? Not really. Same deal. Soriano had been affected by his injury and shut down due to his injury. The Cubs were mathematically alive at the time. He was hurt and his knee or whatever had been bothering him all season. He stopped playing because he couldn't play effectively - while the Cubs were still alive. Again, his play had been hampered by his injury and again- the player is hurt and not with minor injuries. Soriano was headed under the knife - like Sizemore, like Santana, like Reyes (who is a bit more extreme, but again this is to prove that it's all speculation.)

In my opinion speculation should be removed from the process in order to ensure the highest level of fairness and consistency. But again, that doesn't seem to matter to anybody here. All we do is cheat in ExCo and try to figure out ways to get me to win and make sure that Nils loses and that the league gets fucked over in the long run. We really have sucked ass these past two years.

So what you are saying is that you and the ExCo has actually changed how the league is interpreting September injuries this season in comparison to how we've done it in the past.

That's fine, it would just have been nice for you to let the rest of the league know you and/or the ExCo decided to make this change. Would have saved us all a lot of time and I wouldn't have had to be an asshole in order to find out what is going on.

By the way JP, Sizemore...the guy who was playing hurt all season....actually had his best month of the season in August, just before he was shut down. So I have to believe Sizemore was actually shut down at the time he was, specifically because, the Indians weren't in any playoff race. But now that I know that you and the ExCo decided to change the way the September injury rule is applied, it clearly explains to me both the Sizemore decision and now the Hamilton decision.

So based on this change in rules, I would expect that any player shut down by his team early is now not eligible to play in the IBC.

[Pirates]

So based on this change in rules, I would expect that any player shut down by his team early is now not eligible to play in the IBC.

Minus players like Rich Harden

Before the game, the Cubs announced Rich Harden has been shut down for the rest of the season.

"He's done a real nice job here," manager Lou Piniella said. "... He doesn't want to pitch, and we respect his wishes."

Harden said it was "kind of a mutual decision."

"It'd be a lot different if we were in it and they needed me to pitch," he said. "I'd be out there in a second and I'd be fine. I'm still healthy, feeling good and took that as a positive for this season."

[Giants]

JP and I have already spent a lot more time than is worth privately discussing Rich Harden. Suffice it to say, there is always going to be some shit that fucks everything up, and we just need to accept that going in.

[Yankees]

Using the players own statement that he could still hit but not play the field or run, as their basis for him being ineligible which is a flawed arguement, IMO. We have always gone by the policy in the IBC that if a player can play in any capacity he is eligible in the IBC.

I have total respect for the access Brett P. gets that most of us never will. Unfortunately, we don't have that for 30 teams.

Our effort should be making this as black and white as possible - we seem to continue to want to take this into a very grey area.

We should always err on the side of playing the players, unless they go on the DL. Sizemore should have been allowed to play until he went on the DL.

The DL is a black and white opportunity for us to allow players to play, or not to play. Especially at the end of August, beginning of September, if a player goes on the DL, there's a damn good reason he did.

If a Manager, GM, or player says, "Brett Zalaski is being shut down for the rest of the season due to chronic syphilis," then we shut them down.

If it's hazy in any way, shape, or form, and the player does NOT go on the DL, I say they play. If the player says, "I'd be in there if we were in it," he's in. If he says, "I just need a couple days rest to heal up," he's in. If he says, "I can't really play full-time, but I can pinch-hit," he's in.

Without inside access to all 30 teams, I'm not sure you can make it more black and white then that. As a league, we need to err on the side of inclusion, not exclusion - the last thing we are is anything similar to the MLB - and I love us for that.

I'd be thrilled to be on the injury committee...