Arbitrary And Capricious Traditions

The eighty-fifth All-Star Game is now in the books, and Major League Baseball is taking a two-day break until tomorrow.  How to fill the void?  Easy peasy; you write about it.

It strikes me as ironic that the sport which has been statistics-driven for the longest time is baseball, and yet some of the rules which govern how those statistics are compiled and calculated don't always make the most sense.  What follows below are five examples of typical situations where you have to question the logic of the rules makers.  I believe what is often the case is that the only reason for keeping a rule, versus modifying it, is that "we've always done it this way!"  As Tevye from Fiddler On The Roof exclaimed, "Tradition!"

Consider this Scenario # 1.  The Twins are batting in the bottom of the fourth inning in a scoreless game versus Detroit.  Brian Dozier leads off by hitting a gapper and ends up on second base with a double.  The next batter, Joe Mauer, lofts a deep fly to right field, caught by Tigers' right fielder Torii Hunter.  Even though Hunter still (at age 38) has a cannon for an arm, Mauer's fly ball out is deep enough to allow Dozier to tag up at second and move to third after the catch.  The third batter of the inning, Trevor Plouffe, sends a medium deep fly ball to left field.  Dozier tags, and beats the throw home by Tigers' left fielder Rajai Davis for the first run of the game.  The next man to bat, Josh Willingham, gets called out on strikes to end the inning.
 

The Rule: Even though Dozier would not have scored had Mauer not hit the ball deep enough to move him from second to third, and even though Plouffe's fly ball out was not hit as well as Mauer's fly, Mauer is charged with a time at bat whereas Plouffe is credited with a sacrifice fly and accordingly is not charged with a time at bat.  Thus, Mauer's batting average sinks but the Plouffer's stays the same.  What is the reason for this (arguably silly) dichotomy?  Tradition reigns!  It has always been thus.  See Baseball Rule # 10.08(d). The only fly ball which can potentially be scored as a sacrifice fly is one which directly enables a base runner to score.

Another scenario (Scenario # 2) involving sacrifices results in more puzzlement brought on by tradition.  Let's say the Twins' Sam Fuld is on second base with nobody out in the third inning of a scoreless game against the White Sox. Chris Parmelee, a left handed batter, steps up to the plate.  Bert Blyleven, the Twins' TV analyst, announces to the viewing audience that "Parmelee's job is to get Fuld over to third base." (Heaven forbid Parmelee should accidentally drive in Fuld with a single!)  Sure enough, Parmelee manages to pull the ball on the ground to Sox second sacker Gordon Beckham, who throws out Parmelee at first while Fuld glides easily into third.  Parmelee, even though he "did his job" and gets attaboys from his mates upon returning to the dugout, is charged with a time at bat.  However, if Parmelee would have bunted the ball to Beckham with the same outcome (Parmelee out at first, Fuld moves to third), he would not have been charged with a time at bat.  Instead, he would have been credited with a sacrifice and therefore not charged with a time at bat.

The Rule:  See baseball Rule # 10.08(a).  Once again, tradition dictates. 

Scenario # 3.  The Twins are playing the Royals, who have runners at the corners and one out.  Phil Hughes is pitching to the Royals' designated hitter, Billy Butler, a fine ball player but probably the slowest guy in Kansas City's lineup.  The Twins need a double play to get out of the inning.  Butler proceeds to hit a tailor-made double play ball to shortstop Danny Santana.  Santana gives second baseman Dozier a perfect feed for the force out at second.  But Dozier, momentarily forgetting that the batter, Butler, runs like he's carrying an anvil on his back, rushes his throw, pulling first baseman Chris Colabello off the bag.  Butler is safe.  Had Dozier delivered a strike to Colabello, Butler would have been out by three steps.  The Twins' failure to complete the double play does not end the inning, thereby allowing the runner from third to score. Surely the run is unearned, right?  Wrong!
 

The Rule:  See Baseball Rule # 10.12(d)(3).  Successful completion of a double play cannot be assumed. Since the out was recorded at second, Dozier's errant toss at the tail end of the potential double play does not constitute an error.  Therefore, the run scored is earned.  If you were Phil Hughes, what would you think about your earned run average going up following a play like that?  (Note: If Dozier's throw was so wild that it enabled Butler to reach second base on the play, that would be an error.) 
 

Scenario # 4.  The Brewers are playing the Cubs in Miller Park.  Right before the first pitch, Wisconsin weather radar shows a storm front heading south toward Eau Claire, so the Milwaukee honchos decide to close the roof.  (That last sentence was a joke, although based on personal experience.  You're supposed to smile, if not laugh.)  In the second inning, Jonathan Lucroy leads off with a double, and speedy Carlos Gomez beats out an infield single as Lucroy takes third.  The next man up, Mark Reynolds, hits a deep drive to left center field.  The ball bounces over the outfield fence for a ground rule double.  Lucroy easily jaunts in from third, but what about Gomez, the fastest guy on the team?  If Reynolds' ball had merely hit the fence but did not bounce over it, Gomez would have easily scored from first on the double, but because the ball bounced over the fence, he is allowed to advance only to third base.  See Baseball Rule # 6.09(e).
 

I find this rule to be ludicrous, especially when there are two outs and thus the runner at first does not have to wait to see if the outfielder is going to catch the fly ball.  All but the slowest runners should be able to score from first on a two-out double. 
 

Scenario # 5.  As someone who enjoys keeping score and as someone who likes to peruse box scores, I have always been annoyed by the manner in which the "Left On Base" ("LOB") statistic is calculated.  In my humble view, LOB should reflect how many runners were on base immediately before the last batter of the inning came to the plate. Unfortunately, that reflection is rendered incorrect when the inning ends with a double play.  As the rule currently reads, LOB is calculated after the third out of the inning is recorded.  The following example illustrates my point.
 

Let's say the Yankees' Derek Jeter comes up with one out and the bases loaded with Pinstripes.  If Jeter bounces into a 6-4-3 double play, the official scorer will rule that two men were left on base, on the theory that the runner on first got wiped out/forced out at second before the throw to get Jeter at first was made. Therefore the only two runners stranded were the ones who were on second base and third base when Jeter began his at bat.  In my little mind, the official scoring should state that three (not two) men were left on base, because that's how many runners occupied the bags when Jeter stepped to the plate.  I know some of the wonks will point me to the difference between an individual's LOBs and a team's LOBs, but I'm not buying it.  The LOBs you see in a box score are team LOBs.  Team LOBs, as currently constructed, do not accurately reflect the clutch hitting of a team --the main purported purpose of keeping LOB stats in the first place -- as well as would my LOB algorithm.  Maybe Commissioner Bud Selig could get that changed before he retires this year.