The baseball thread

India1989 · Post by **India1989** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 10:58 pm

BSharma wrote:
So basically you have to slide the reach the base before the ball gets to the baseman's hand.
I am sure many baseball enthusiasts in this forum know why players run to first base and often slide into second, third or home base.

I didn't understand the sense of humour which red_indian tried to say. I am sorry. Please forgive me.

Red_Indian · Post by **Red_Indian** » Wed Jan 18, 2006 6:38 am

jayakris wrote:The proof that it could not have been any more than a name is that the other American-invented sports like basketball and American football never used such a name ...

Don't mean to re-ignite this discussion, but this is a screen-shot taken from a broadcast showing a section of the New England Patriots' stadium. It's clear what they like to call themselves. (Click on the image to see the enlarged version)

India1989 · Post by **India1989** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 10:35 pm

Was basketball invented in Canada or in USA?

Red_Indian · Post by **Red_Indian** » Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:23 pm

It was invented by a Canadian named James Naismith at the International YMCA Training School in Springfield, Massachusetts (USA).

Sandeep · Post by **Sandeep** » Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:42 pm

THis is going off topic. This is for baseball. But I never played table tennis more then 5 times.

You being a Bengali, this is a crime!

puneets · Post by **puneets** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:51 pm

Have any of you guys been following the World Baseball Classic. Team USA (with an impressive array of MLB stars) lost to Mexico last night and could not make it to the semi-finals. They even had losses against Canada and South Korea in the the 1st and 2nd rounds. USA could have been ousted earlier..if not for the outrageous call by the field umpire aganst Japan.
It looks like US is not the best team when it comes to playing the "most american of all sports"!

India1989 · Post by **India1989** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 12:28 am

Yup i was following world baseball classic. US did lose to Canada but it was a pure fluke. Canada doesn't have a baseball team which is even close to US.

That was pure fluke.

South Korea maybe yes. They are a good team. But Canada will be beaten by US any other day.

Nope I rather support US.

But i was suprised to see China in there. Man China is in everywhere.

forpar · Post by **forpar** » Tue Mar 21, 2006 3:05 pm

see now.....it shud be clear......
if you win 'world championship', call yourself "world champions" (Japan)
And if you win 'world series championship', dont call that. Otherwise you look stupid in front of the world.

Post by **jayakris** » Tue Mar 21, 2006 5:37 pm

The world is often not very knowledgeable either .. So there!

Jay

puneets · Post by **puneets** » Tue Mar 21, 2006 8:54 pm

World Baseball Classic started with 179 Major League players on the rosters of 12 of the 16 teams. In the finals, there were just 2 MLB players remaining!

BSharma · Post by **BSharma** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 4:35 am

The baseball championship proves once again that team sports are won by teams where the players gel together and perform as a team better than the opponents. The Major League Baseball in USA has shown in the past that when some teams try to buy the best players (super stars), they often do not perform as well as some other teams with stars but not superstars.

suresh · Post by **suresh** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:17 pm

I second Bhushan's point. There is also another aspect to the two finalists. First, the Japanese league is not too bad -- their best players are of MLB calibre. Second, baseball in Cuba is like cricket in India -- they play baseball in every gully and gutter like we play cricket. The talent pool is quite deep and potentially, there are several players who are also MLB calibre but would not be permitted to play in the US for obvious reasons. I would have been truly surprised if Taiwan which has won a million little league championships would have won the title.

Suresh
PS: Something similar happened at the Turin Olympics in ice hockey. Powerhouses with many big money NHL players like Canada, Russia and to a lesser extent, USA did not make it to the final.

prasen9 · Post by **prasen9** » Fri May 02, 2008 4:37 pm

Some Indian guys are being recruited for baseball.

Link

prasen9 · Post by **prasen9** » Mon May 26, 2008 1:33 am

Some U.S. Collegiate Conference Baseball news that I am sure has caused much joy to BBS

Link

Post by **jayakris** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 12:13 am

I saw this interesting exchange in this article at the ESPN page for the Texas rangers .. This Dallas Morning News writer's article shows this exchasnge in the Q&A section.

-----
Q: Can you please explain the "range factor" that every columnist and blogger mentions in their articles to support/debunk a player's defense? I see Ian Kinsler's error total being justified by his superior range factor. And Michael Young debunked for his defense even though his range factor is second among AL shortstops. Isn't range factor dependent on the pitcher inducing more ground balls for an infielder? The Rangers' coaching staff preaches ground-ball pitching to its staff. Given that, is "range factor" an accurate way to judge a fielder's ability?

Vamsi M.,Hyderabad, India

GRANT: I will explain, Vamsi, if you will explain the "Hyderabadi" style of cooking. Our restaurant critic wrote about a new Indian restaurant in Dallas earlier this year and used the phrase, but I have no idea what ingredients and styles it incorporates. I've been curious ever since.

As a show of good faith that an answer is forthcoming from your way, I'll go ahead and explain. Range factor is simply the average number of plays a player makes during nine innings. It is figured by adding putouts and assists, multiplying by nine and then dividing by the number of defensive innings played. It does prejudicially favor fielders who play behind ground-ball staffs. And that's why it is not considered the most accurate of fielding gauges.

Zone Rating is considered a better estimation of a fielder's efficiency as it tries to determine how many plays a fielder makes on balls hit into his typical "zone." But it, too, is subjective because it is based on projections of plays that should be made. This is the difficult part of coming up with accurate fielding gauges. Basing things strictly on plays made doesn't take into account the kind of staff a fielder plays behind or his range. Basing things on projected range is still mostly a guess.
------

I am not sure if I should be impressed more by somebody from Hyderabad asking a fairly obscure baseball question, or about the Dallas writer's being curious about Hyderabadi food!

Jay

The Sports-India Community