World Series Game 7

Tonight, the Royals and Giants take the field for game 7, the 37th time the Fall Classic has had a winner-take-all final game. Home teams are riding a 9 game winning streak in game 7 that goes back to 1982. But, before that, it was a very different trend with the visitors posting a 13-3 game 7 record from 1952 to 1979. Overall, it’s a narrow 19-17 edge for home team in game 7.

More on game 7 after the jump.

The first World Series in 1903 was a best of 9 affair, as were the 1919-21 series, none of which went to a maximum 9 games. Of the first sixteen 7-games series, from 1905 to 1923, only two went the maximum 7 games, with the visitors prevailing both times: in 1909 when the Pirates bested the Tigers; and in 1912 when the Red Sox edged the Giants. Since then, game 7’s have come with more regularity, including three in a row in 1924-26, 1945-47, 1971-73 and 1985-87, four in a row in 1955-58, and four times in five years in 1964-68.

More than one third of game 7’s have been decided by a single run, and 75% (27 of 36) have had a winning margin of 3 runs or less. When the margin is 4 runs or less, home teams have a 18-11 record, but at 5 runs or more the tables turn with the visitors winning 6 of 7 times.

What influence does the game 6 result have on game 7? Not much. Home teams winning game 6 have a 13-11 edge in the following game 7. When the visitors take game 6, they draw 6-6 in game 7.

Almost one quarter of game 7’s have resulted in a shutout, with the home team being blanked 7 times, but the visitors only twice. The biggest whitewashes were 11-0 thrashings: by the home Royals over the Cardinals in 1985; and the visiting Cardinals over the Tigers in 1934. Similarly, there have been only two 1-0 game 7’s: in 1962 when Bobby Richardson snared Willie McCovey‘s line drive to preserve the last Yankee WS championship of their 1940s to 1960s dynasty; and in 1991 when Dan Gladden scored the winning run in extra innings for a walk-off championship by the Twins.

In addition to the 1991 series, there have been five other game 7 walk-off wins.

1912 – After Fred Merkle‘s RBI single put the Giants ahead in the top of the 10th, Christy Mathewson couldn’t hold onto the lead as two walks, a dropped fly ball in centerfield, a run-scoring single and sacrifice fly all added up to a walk-off win for the Red Sox in their first season in their new digs at Fenway Park. The 31 year-old Mathewson pitched 3 games in the series, losing two and getting an 11-inning complete game tie in the second game called on account of darkness. He would have one more outstanding year, leading the Giants back to the series (but losing again) in 1913, then a 24-13 season in 1914 (but only an 88 ERA+) before 4500 innings in 15 years finally took their toll.

1924 – 36 year-old Walter Johnson went the final four innings on one day of rest as the Senators took their first world title, plating the winning unearned run in the 12th when catcher Muddy Ruel doubled and later scored, after having his AB extended when Giant catcher Hank Gowdy muffed a foul popup.

1960 – In likely the wackiest game 7 to end probably the wackiest World Series, Bill Mazeroski famously led off the home 9th with a homer down the left field line for an improbable 10-9 win, the most combined runs in any game 7. After taking an early 4-0 lead, the Pirates found themselves in arrears by 3 runs entering the home 8th when the craziness started. After a leadoff single by pinch-hitter Gino Cimoli, Bill Virdon hit into what seemed to be a certain double play, until the ball took a bizarre hop and struck Yankee shortstop Tony Kubek in the throat, forcing him from the game. Singles by Dick Groat and Roberto Clemente, and a home run by catcher Hal Smith (who had just entered the game after starter Smoky Burgess was removed for a pinch-runner) suddenly put the Bucs ahead by two heading to the final stanza. But the Yankees, whose three victories had all been blowouts with the preposterous combined score of 38-3, were not dead yet. Three singles plated a run and put runners at first and third with one out. Yogi Berra followed with a blistering shot on a hop down the first base line that Pirate first sacker Rocky Nelson did well to snare. Two options seemed open to Nelson – either go to second to start a 3-6-3 twin killing or go home to cut down Dale Long at the plate. Instead, incredibly instinctive baserunning by Mickey Mantle at first base allowed the tying run to cross. When Nelson fielded Berra’s hot shot, Mantle somehow instantly deduced that there was nothing to be gained in advancing towards second, so instead just held his ground ten feet or so off the first base bag. With his prey tantalizingly close, Nelson was enticed into stepping on first and then attempting a tag of Mantle (that would have beaten Long crossing the plate). No longer a youngster but still nimble, Mantle evaded Nelson’s swipe and then dove headfirst back to the bag to prevent the out and allow the tying run to score.

1997 – A blown save by closer Jose Mesa allowed the Marlins to tie in the 9th, and then win it in the 11th. Bobby Bonilla led off the final frame with a single but Gregg Zaun botched the sacrifice, popping up his bunt attempt. The Indians looked to have things well in hand when Craig Counsell grounded weakly to second but Tony Fernandez booted the ball, eventually allowing Bonilla to score the unearned walk-off run on Edgar Renteria‘s two-out single. The Marlins’ first WS title, in only their 5th season of operation, eclipsed the Mets’ 8th season standard of precocity for expansion teams.

2001Danny Bautista‘s 6th inning double plated Steve Finley to open the scoring for the D-Backs, but the Yankees battled back with singletons in the 7th and 8th, the latter chasing starter Curt Schilling, making his 3rd start of the series on short rest. After Miguel Batista got the second out of the 8th inning, Randy Johnson, pitching on no days rest, came on to retire the next four Bronxmen in order. That set up the home 9th with Mr. Automatic, Mariano Rivera, coming on to seal the deal for New York’s fourth consecutive world title. Except it didn’t turn out that way as, for once, Rivera’s cutter wasn’t cutting. Three hits, an error and an HBP pushed across a pair of tallies, as the D-Backs eclipsed the Marlins mark to take the title in only the fourth season of desert baseball. In what would eventually stretch to a record 24 World Series appearances, this would be Rivera’s only loss and only blown save.

Enjoy the game!

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

83 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
John Autin
Editor
10 years ago

Tonight’s first run came from bases loaded in the 2nd. The last matching situation in a sudden-death Series game: 1909, a sac fly by Pittsburgh’s Ham Hyatt. The Giants are the second team with two sac flies at any point in a WS sudden-death game. The ’72 Reds got them in the 5th and 8th, en route to a 3-2 loss. Two sac flies in a WS inning: — 2011 Rangers, G2, top-9th, back to back, tying and go-ahead runs. — 1971 Orioles, G4, top-1st, back to back, knocking out Luke Walker after 3 runs. — 1930 Cardinals, G1, top-3rd,… Read more »

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

In that 1927 game Gehrig had a SF but no run scored, Ruth advanced from 1st to 2nd. The rule then was that any fly ball that advanced a runner to any base was a SF. It was one of five WS SF that did not score a run.

John Autin
Editor
10 years ago

Good point, Richard. Still, the 4 scoring sac flies in that game are a stand-alone WS record.

Daniel Longmire
Daniel Longmire
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

John, you and I have chatted about this in the past, but there is no valid reason in my mind why any fly ball that advances a runner shouldn’t be called a sacrifice fly. After all, a bunt that accomplishes the same thing is termed a sacrifice hit. And before anyone pounces on that point to say that the bunt is voluntary, while the fly ball is simply circumstantial, why then is the batter suddenly deemed to have utter control over his swing if the runner happens to be standing on third? The rule is clearly inconsistent. *steps down from… Read more »

John Autin
Editor
10 years ago

No saves longer than 4 IP in postseason history.

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

None longer than 3 2-3 by my count.

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
10 years ago
Reply to  oneblankspace

Ron Taylor, game 4,1964 WS, Jim Coates, game 4, 1961 WS and Joe Page, game 1, 1947 WS have been credited with 4.0 IP saves.

Jeff B
Jeff B
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

I didn’t think a save was statistically possible of longer than 4 IP, regardless of season or postseason or otherwise. Am I wrong?

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
10 years ago
Reply to  Jeff B

Reliever comes into a tie game or a game his team trails early, his team takes the lead, next reliever finishes the game

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/BAL/BAL200209030.shtml

other examples:

CAL @ TEX, 1972-04-23
CLE @ OAK, 1970-08-12
SD @ SF, 1969-10-01
LA @ CUB, 1970-08-14

John Autin
Editor
10 years ago

If it ends in the 9th, a WS record of no walks with 12 Ks by Royals pitchers.

ReliefMan
ReliefMan
10 years ago

Madison Bumgarner gets his first career save, and possibly the finest save in the history of baseball.

RJ
RJ
10 years ago
Reply to  ReliefMan

One of the greatest, if not the greatest, overall postseason performances of all time. I may just be high on the win, but I don’t think that’s hyperbole.

Luis Gomez
Luis Gomez
10 years ago
Reply to  RJ

Congratulations, RJ!! (You are getting used to that feeling, don´t ya?)

What a performance by Bumgarner, in my opinion, the easiest choice ever to be named World Series MVP.

RJ
RJ
10 years ago
Reply to  Luis Gomez

Gracias Luis! It’s all so surreal. I don’t know what to say. Gracias de nuevo.

Bumgarner’s performance felt like something from another era.

John Autin
Editor
10 years ago
Reply to  RJ

RJ, congrats. MadBum authored an epic. It’s hard to compare WS starters across eras. I think Christy Mathewson’s top honors are safe — three shutouts in a 5-game Series. And I can’t put Bumgarner over Burdette ’57, Gibson ’67, or a couple others who won three complete games in as many starts, some with a Game 7 win on two days’ rest. But for our era, Bumgarner was as good as it gets.

RJ
RJ
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

Yes, I thought I put a “modern times” qualifier in there, but clearly took it out in my delirium. Thank you for the congratulations. My commiserations to Brent and the rest of our Royals readership.

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

Wow, Lolich allowed 5 ER in his 3 CG-W in 1968, and did not have a single shutout.

Maris told the Cardinals he was more worried about Lolich than McLain.

brp
brp
10 years ago
Reply to  RJ

It is pretty remarkable that KC kept swinging at 91-MPH, chin-high fastballs that weren’t even over the plate. I’m not sure Bumgarner threw more than 10-15 pitches in the strike zone.

I’m beyond astonished KC kept swinging at the high cheese, inning after inning. By the 9th I was screaming “don’t swing” at the television.

Don’t get me wrong, what Bumgarner did is remarkable and he earned the MVP, but I’m mystified as to why they kept chasing what were, in my mind, terrible pitches.

John Autin
Editor
10 years ago
Reply to  brp

brp, I had the same thought about KC’s at-bats against Bumgarner. My brother and I were talking after his first inning, which ended with Cain’s strikeout, chasing two high fastballs. Judging from his first four batters, I wasn’t sure he was the best option for further innings. But Al said he was, regardless of command, just for his aura. I thought that was a good point, and played out well. Both the Royals and the umpire seemed somewhat affected by his presence. And perhaps the Cain at-bat represented a change in Bumgarner’s strategy — realizing he wasn’t locating the low… Read more »

brp
brp
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

Yeah, you can’t blame Bumgarner for throwing the high stuff over and over. It was clearly working. You can definitely blame the Royals hitters for not being patient, though. The final AB to Perez, I think he swung at 2 or 3 of them and only laid off once.

I’m a little bummed the Royals didn’t win it all, but it was a good game 7, which made up for a series with a bunch of blowouts.

Now if they could just get rid of Joe Buck…

brp
brp
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

Relevant:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/30/sports/baseball/madison-bumgarner-sf-giants-world-series-2014-rises-to-the-moment-and-jaws-drop.html

Specifically:
“You see how he pitched to him,” Righetti said. “He threw him all balls, didn’t he?”

That was the plan, Bumgarner said, and it worked.

“I knew Perez was going to want to do something big,” Bumgarner said. “I had a really good chance, too. We tried to use that aggressiveness and throw our pitches up in the zone. It’s a little bit higher than high, I guess.”

John Autin
Editor
10 years ago

Nobody cares, but it seems crystal clear that Bumgarner CANNOT get that win. Read rule 10.17.
http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/downloads/y2014/official_baseball_rules.pdf

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

Unless the scorer thought Affeldt was the starting pitcher.

Evan
Evan
10 years ago
Reply to  oneblankspace

Or brief and ineffective, which might be more of a stretch.

John Autin
Editor
10 years ago
Reply to  Evan

We’ll have to wait for the explanation. I don’t see any possible way to give Bumgarner the win. Obviously, he was the best pitcher in the game — but we all know that’s not how wins work. The 10.17(c) Comment even gives guidance on defining “brief and ineffective” — “pitches less than one inning and allows two or more earned runs to score.” That’s nine miles away from what Affeldt did. I assume MLB will reverse it, but I hope there’s at least some plausible explanation for the scorer’s initial decision. I’d hate to think there’s a scorer with so… Read more »

Evan
Evan
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

The ruling has been modified, win to Affeldt, save to Bumgarner.

John Autin
Editor
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

Evan, thanks for the good news. That initial ruling was really spoiling the moment for me. I loathe anything that smacks of manipulating the record to fit a story, like giving the 2013 All-Star MVP to Mariano (for retiring three lesser stars in the 8th inning of a 3-0 game). The real stories are good enough!

Luis Gomez
Luis Gomez
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

According to MLB.com, MadBum is the winning pitcher.

JasonZ
10 years ago

Rule 10-17C states the following. (c) The official scorer shall not credit as the winning pitcher a relief pitcher who is ineffective in a brief appearance, when at least one succeeding relief pitcher pitches effectively in helping his team maintain its lead. In such a case, the official scorer shall credit as the winning pitcher the succeeding relief pitcher who was most effective, in the judgment of the official scorer. Rule 10.17(c) Comment: The official scorer generally should, but is not required to, consider the appearance of a relief pitcher to be ineffective and brief if such relief pitcher pitches… Read more »

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
10 years ago
Reply to  JasonZ

Two and one-third innings, 0 R, 2 inherited runners – 0 scored. Yep, that sounds ineffective.

John Autin
Editor
10 years ago
Reply to  JasonZ

Jason Z, do you think Affeldt’s stint could in any way be described as “brief AND ineffective”? Seven outs, no runs scoring, stranded two inherited runners. There is no alternative. To deny Affeldt the win, he MUST be deemed “brief and ineffective.” That is the only exception. And whatever one’s standard of that description, there is no way to fit it to Affeldt. I’m going to stop talking about this now, as it detracts from the moment. But it seems like gross malfeasance by the scorer, and very disappointing. They don’t get to bend the rules to fit the story.… Read more »

RJ
RJ
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

It’s been changed. Affeldt gets the win, Mad Bum the save.

Evan
Evan
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

The ruling has been modified, it’s possible the official scorer was mistaken about the game state when Affeldt entered when the ruling was made.

The FOX broadcast said the ruling was made before the game ended, so it’s understandable (|though not necessarily excusable) how the official scorer might have been caught up in the moment and made the error.

David P
David P
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

“There is no alternative”: I don’t think that’s true John. Look at the comment on rule 10.17(b): If the first relief pitcher pitches effectively, the official scorer should not presumptively credit that pitcher with the win, because the rule requires that the win be credited to the pitcher who was the most effective, and a subsequent relief pitcher may have been most effective. The official scorer, in determining which relief pitcher was the most effective, should consider the number of runs, earned runs and base runners given up by each relief pitcher and the context of the game at the… Read more »

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
10 years ago
Reply to  David P

But 10.17(b) specifically relates to when the starter left with the lead before pitching enough innings. Affeldt pitched in a tie game here.

David P
David P
10 years ago
Reply to  oneblankspace

You could certainly be right OBS! I’ve read those rules several times and the only thing I can conclude is that they were written so that even Albert Einstein would have problems understanding them.

bells
bells
10 years ago
Reply to  JasonZ

I know you are quoting the rules for strict interpretive clarity, but honestly, I feel like standard statements of ‘I just knew he was a hall of famer’ and the like are given a little too much weight due to the fact that there is a significant statistical record over the course of a career to assess issues like ‘pitching to the score’, ‘clutch’, etc, and those samples aren’t small. But in terms of bending rules for something like a single game – Bumgarner won the game. Bumgarner won the series. We all know it. So I feel totally fine… Read more »

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
10 years ago
Reply to  bells

It’s not the worst missed call in a World Series game in Kansas City, wrote the Cardinal fan.

bells
bells
10 years ago
Reply to  bells

oops, missed the other comments while I was writing. Seems like I may be a bit more of a romantic narrative-lover than some around here, ha. Could be the drinks I had watching the game, or the overcompensation of disappointment that the Royals (for whom I was firmly on the bandwagon) lost.

RJ
RJ
10 years ago
Reply to  bells

Don’t change bells 🙂 I always appreciate your enthusiasm and romantic view of things.

John Autin
Editor
10 years ago
Reply to  bells

bells, my problem with the romantic narrative in this particular case is that a win for Bumgarner would leave Affeldt with nothing. I have no problem acknowledging that Bumgarner contributed more than Affeldt to the Game 7 win. But Affeldt did some heavy lifting himself, cutting off KC’s rally, and keeping them scoreless for two more innings. Should his merit badge be stripped away so that we can heap more gold stars on Bumgarner? Beyond that, I would object to the precedent, if the scorer were allowed to give MadBum the win. Sure, we can all agree that he was… Read more »

Brendan Bingham
Brendan Bingham
10 years ago
Reply to  JasonZ

Game 4 of the 2000 WS is an interesting case. NYY took the lead early and never relinquished it. Starter Denny Neagle pitched 4.2, so by rule he could not be credited with the win. David Cone came in with two outs and the bases empty in the 5th and retired Mike Piazza. Jeff Nelson then pitched a scoreless sixth inning and got one out in the seventh before being replaced by Mike Stanton. Cone was not credited with the win. While his appearance was brief (1/3 of an inning), it cannot be considered ineffective (retired the only batter he… Read more »

mosc
mosc
10 years ago

The morally correct answer is Neagle of course. Baseball’s rules for determining wins are stupid. I agree Bumgardner should get the save by the rules and not the win but the win rule is crazy. If Affeldt gives up 10 runs and Bumgardner pitches 5-9 anyway only to stick around for some offensive explosion in the end, you guys would say by rule he gets the win since Affeldt was “ineffective”. The entire rule is dumb. Give it to the most innings pitched in the game, regardless of innings or score. If two players tie, give the tie breaker to… Read more »

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
10 years ago

They have changed it…

MLB.com and ESPN are reporting Affeldt has been given the Win and Bumgarner has the save

comment image:large

JasonZ
10 years ago

The right decision was made John.

I was just trying to see where in the rule the justification for giving Bumgarner the win arose.

NL managers with 3 WS Titles in 5 years.

1. Bruce Bochy

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
10 years ago
Reply to  JasonZ

what some have thought: — what out is more crucial than the final out of the World Series ? — Bumgarner pitched the 5th inning — official scorer’s judgment when there is more than one relief pitcher — four innings of a game that lasts five innings on defense — C’mon, it’s Madison Bumgarner ! Where these fail: 1986: Jesse Orosco pitched 2 scoreless innings, stranding 1 inherited runner to finish game 7 after Roger McDowell pitched 1 inning (+3 batters) and gave up 2 runs. McDowell was given the win, Orosco the save. 1972: Catfish Hunter, in relief of… Read more »

birtelcom
birtelcom
10 years ago
Reply to  oneblankspace

The problem, obs, is that under the rules, the official scorer’s judgment only comes into effect if either a less-than-5 IP starter was the pitcher when his team took the lead for good, or if the relief pitcher who was the pitcher when his team took the lead for good appeared briefly and ineffectively. If neither of those conditions applies, there is no discretion for the official scorer, the win must go to the relief pitcher who was in when the team took the lead for good.

birtelcom
Editor
10 years ago

How many previou WS Game Sevens have ended with the losing team one run behind and the tying run on third base? There was the famous McCovey line drive to Bobby Richardson that ended the 1962 Series with Wille Mays at second and Matty Alou at third, Ralph Terry completing the 1-0 shutout victory and redeeming himself after the 1960 Mazeroski homer. The only other case before tonight that I see was the ending of the 1946 World Series, after Enos Slaughter had completed his mad dash to home to put the Cards ahead of the Red Sox by a… Read more »

birtelcom
Editor
10 years ago
Reply to  birtelcom

Speaking of Slaughter and the mad dash, did it occur to anybody else, in the heat of the moment, that maybe Alex Gordon might have just kept running toward home, Little League-style, in the hope of one more misplay on a throw home, rather than bet on one more hit off Bumgarner?

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
10 years ago
Reply to  birtelcom

Royals 3B coach Mike Jirschele on his decision not to send Alex Gordon: “Believe me, I wanted to send him. I couldn’t do it.”

— @JeffPassan
https://twitter.com/JeffPassan/status/527692828961689601

John Autin
Editor
10 years ago
Reply to  birtelcom

I’ll indulge in micro-parsing Gordon’s hit in the 9th:

— In the heat of the moment as the two outfielders misplayed it, I thought Gordon would be farther along by the time Crawford got the throw from Perez, and that they might send him.

— Watching again with a normal heart rate, the play didn’t take as long as it seemed at first.

— However, Gordon didn’t help his cause by looking backward at the play while running toward third. So many players do this, and it’s so stupid.

bstar
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

Yes, the looking backward thing drives me insane. Gordon also slowed a tad when he saw his hit drop safely in front on Blanco—why, oh why, would you ease up with 2 outs in the ninth and down a run? Yasiel Puig is an idiot on the paths, but I do enjoy the way he charges through first base after a single.

Excellent breakdown of the play at FG:

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/alex-gordon-barely-had-a-chance/

John Autin
Editor
10 years ago
Reply to  bstar

Yes, that was a good breakdown of the play. But the big unknown is how the pressure of the moment might have affected Crawford’s throw, or a potential Posey pick-up. Crawford would have had ample time to set himself and make a good throw — but would he have known that? Or would he have been so caught up in the moment that he just turned and chucked it? I’m not even sure which would have been more likely to produce a good throw. (You can’t judge Crawford’s approach from what actually happened, because Panik was clearly telling him “no… Read more »

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago
Reply to  bstar

What would have been truly awful is if the World Series ended after a five minute long shot of the umpires staring off into space while wearing those headphones.

bstar
10 years ago
Reply to  bstar

Who else would you want making that throw, though? Andrelton Simmons? It’s possible Simmons would try to brandish his strong arm when it wasn’t needed (not likely, but possible), increasing the chances of the ball getting away. There’s a surety to the way Crawford does things that I really trust.

There’s a part of me that wishes Gordon had been waved home, but if he’d ended up being out by 30 feet, that 3rd-base coach is the Goatiest Goat of All-Time.

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago
Reply to  bstar

Goatist Goat status would be brutally unfair to a guy who just logged 17 years as a minor league Manager.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=jirsch001mic#standard_managing::none

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
10 years ago
Reply to  birtelcom

SABR retweeted (James Smyth) that the 1992 series ended with the tying run at third, but that was in the 10th inning of Game 6. That, with tonight and the two you mentioned, are the only times he mentioned.

https://twitter.com/JamesSmyth621/status/527671043566354432

Doug
Doug
10 years ago

Tonight was the shortest game 7 by time since 1987, and the shortest with both teams batting nine times since 1979.

Four of the seven games (the third and five thru seven) in 1979 were under 3 hours but I recall much negative comment about how long the games were when 3 of the first 4 went past the 3 hour mark, including a whopping 3:48 for game 4. How times have changed.

JasonZ
10 years ago

Re. Johnny Pesky.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=t7IgTE593oA

“They decided to make me the goat afterwards, and I decided I could take it.”

After that season JP attended a game at his alma mater, Oregon.

It was a day where fumbles by the home team ruled the day.

At one point, the fans started chanting for Pesky to go in.

“He would hold the ball!”

Look at the video, the facts don’t comport with the legend.

birtelcom
birtelcom
10 years ago

# of Home Runs hit in World Series that lasted 7 games, in the expansion era:
2014: 5
2011: 17
2002: 21
2001: 12
1997: 15
1991: 16
1987: 9
1986: 12
1985: 4
1982: 9
1979: 7
1975: 13
1973: 6
1972: 8
1971: 10
1968: 15
1967: 13
1965: 11
1964: 15
1962: 8

Lesson: If you want the fewest possible homers in your seven-game World Series, bring the Royals along.

Doug
Doug
10 years ago

Here’s another good game 7 from 1952, in its entirety, with shared play-by-play by Red Barber and Mel Allen. Also very early use of split screen. Note how virtually every batter warms up swinging two bats and takes both of them to the batter’s box before tossing one to the bat boy who has escorted him to the plate. As with yesterday’s game, both starters got an early hook, with Allie Reynolds relieving Eddie Lopat and going 3 innings for the win. He had two previous starts in the series plus a 4-out save in game 6 the day before.… Read more »

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
10 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Some things I noticed while watching Game 6 of the 1952 WS. Starting pitchers warming up behind home plate. The old triangular catcher’s box. Pitchers taking a full windup on every pitch. Batters actually staying in the batter’s box after each pitch. The Hit Sign Win Suit sign at the base of the right field wall. Gil McDougald’s weird stance during the early part of his career. Almost all of the fans were adult males wearing suits and ties. Joe Black starting his third WS game after having only two starts during the regular seasons. Offhand I know of only… Read more »

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
10 years ago

I meant I was watching game 7.

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
10 years ago

I have a correction. The name of the Dodger PA announcer is Tex Rickards.

John Autin
Editor
10 years ago

Did anyone mention that there’s NEVER been a tying or go-ahead run when a team was behind and down to their last out in a WS sudden-death game? At least, that’s what the Play Index says.

Such an event has occurred three times in Game 6 (all tying), two of those by the 2011 Cards in the 9th and 10th (Freese triple, Berkman single). The other was Otis Nixon’s single off Tom Henke in 1992, the only such event in a deciding game (though Nixon’s Bravos lost).

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago

Yes! Run out those grounders!
That aspect of the modern game aggrieves me more than any other.
Players who are literally making $100,000 for each game that they play (15 million divided by 150), can’t be bothered to sprint for 90 fracking feet.

David P
David P
10 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

Sorry Voomo but I don’t understand that mentality.

Do you really want to risk a player getting hurt running out a play that he has little chance of being safe on? And don’t you want him conserving his energy for more important plays?

no statistician but
no statistician but
10 years ago
Reply to  David P

David P:

I hope you’re making these comments satirically, otherwise, we’ve got a big problem here.

bstar
10 years ago
Reply to  David P

Running hard to first is…an injury risk?

RJ
RJ
10 years ago
Reply to  David P

@72 bstar: it is if you’re a Giants reliever:

http://m.mlb.com/video/v32270615/sfcol-huff-exits-the-game-after-the-3rd-inning/

http://m.mlb.com/video/v33059679/sfcol-casilla-injures-leg-on-groundout-to-short/

Those happened within a month. You can hear the exasperation in Duane Kuiper’s voice.

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago
Reply to  David P

Interesting. Both on ground balls to Tulowitski. Huff ran the bases, scored, and then came out. And was followed by the first extended (4 inning) outing from Petit. So the Giants discovered a weapon out of that.

Casilla pitched the following night and then went on the DL. Not sure how that works with a hamstring injury. But it happened.

Here’s an article with discussing both injuries, and relief pitchers going for it:

http://blog.sfgate.com/giants/2014/05/22/santiago-casilla-out-four-weeks-with-hamstring-injury-sf-giants-call-up-george-kontos/

David P
David P
10 years ago
Reply to  David P

Really we have to have this discussion? In 2014? Here’s an article re: Robinson Cano that suggests that he MIGHT have cost the Yankees 2.5 wins over 9 seasons by not hustling to first. Though as the author points out, that estimate is based on a top running speed for Cano that might be too high. In which case the 2.5 win estimate is too high. http://regressing.deadspin.com/quantifying-robinson-canos-lack-of-hustle-does-it-act-1525478158 Here’s what the author says: “If busting it down the line had led to a muscle strain that cost Cano a week, any value added would’ve been wiped out. If it caused a… Read more »

bstar
10 years ago
Reply to  David P

David, obviously, no one is talking about pitchers running full bore, and I’d guess no one is suggesting running all out in a 15-0 game either. And, of course, you don’t want a guy with a balky hammy going balls out or a guy like Chipper Jones, who could strain a muscle adjusting his cup, busting it down the line every time. Some things about that article: I read it, or at least skimmed it, when it came out. I do think Ben Lindbergh is very thorough and quite talented, but we need to remember that his study ONLY estimated… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
10 years ago
Reply to  David P

Willie Mays Sixty Years After: Hmm. That’s some whopper of a drive off Vic Wertz’s bat. “Little chance of” snagging that baby. Besides, I’m a multimillion dollar equipment investment for the team, and I’ve got my future to think of. No use straining a tendon on this futile gesture. Guess I’ll track it down, hold Vic to a triple. He’s slow. Probably doing what I’m doing, too, not going all out, watching this sucker. Home run easy in any other park . . . Tommy Henrich Seventy-three Years After: Sh**. That curveball. Even got away from Owen. Oh, well, maybe… Read more »

David P
David P
10 years ago
Reply to  David P

Bstar: “obviously, no one is talking about pitchers running full bore” So why were those two SF relievers running full bore in situations that didn’t call for them doing so? Perhaps because they’ve bought into the same mentality that’s being perpetuated here? “and I’d guess no one is suggesting running all out in a 15-0 game either.” Well, there aren’t many 15-0 games so I’m not really sure the point. “And, of course, you don’t want a guy with a balky hammy going balls out or a guy like Chipper Jones, who could strain a muscle adjusting his cup, busting… Read more »

zafrom
zafrom
10 years ago
Reply to  David P

For #75 above by Voomo, “Casilla pitched the following night and then went on the DL. Not sure how that works with a hamstring injury. But it happened.” (I don’t see how to put my two cents right below #75): The May 22 game was suspended in the 6th inning and completed on September 1. Casilla pitched in the 9th on September 1. See http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/COL/COL201405220.shtml. After MLB decides how to allocate wins (or win-shares) to pitchers, then it can decide on recording one game as played on two or more days, with any associated record listed as the actual day… Read more »

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago
Reply to  David P

zafrom, nice figuring that one out.
Sure didn’t look like a hammy he was going to play through 24 hours later.

Three month time travel warp makes much more sense.

JasonZ
10 years ago

I really feel like Gordon should have been sent. I realize he may not have made it. But as John pointed out a few minutes ago, we don’t know how the moment affects Posey or Crawford. Most importantly, it was their best and only chance against Bum. It ties the game and then Bum has to come out. Right? I can’t imagine he stays out there if the score is tied, and if he does, he definitely doesn’t come out in the tenth sitting on 70 pitches. Bum in this postseason reminded me of Mike Scott in 86 and Hershiser… Read more »

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago

Here’s my armchair criticism:

Why the hell did the Giants not try to bunt after Salvador Perez got hit by that pitch?
Blanco and Panik lead off the next inning.
Sure, Moustakas has a cannon, and bunting with precision is not easy.
But lay one down short – a little nubber in front of the plate.
Force Salvador to make that play.

And Juan Perez?
Watching him at the plate all night it was obvious he was in there for his defense. Bunt Juan Bunt!

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

Perhaps they didn’t bunt because it would be seen as bad form.
If Perez strains a hammy running hard to first (see comment 69 above), well ok, fair game.

But maybe because the Giants caused the injury, it would be baseball-rude to exploit it.