Game One Hundred Fifty-Three: Indians 6, Tigers 5

by Ryan on Sep 20, 2008 10:59 AM EDT in Game Recaps Comment 63 comments

Highest WPA		Lowest WPA
Shin-Soo Choo	.525	Fausto Carmona	-.215
Ryan Garko	.186	Travis Hafner	-.119
Grady Sizemore	.161	Jhonny Peralta	-.096

So here you had two teams playing out the string on a disappointing season, and lo, two-thirds of the way through the game a memorable contest broke out.

Gary Sheffield bears all the credit for starting the excitement. After he was hit by a Carmona pitch in the seventh, he stared at Carmona all the way to first, his bat still in hand. Carmona ratcheted things up by throwing to first, and Sheffield charged the mound. Fausto didn't back down, put Sheffield in a headlock, and got several blows in before being separated.

The Tigers pulled ahead 5-2 in the eighth, but the Detroit bullpen let the Indians back into it in the bottom of the inning. The critical mistake was walking Ben Francisco with two outs to bring the tying run to the plate in Shin-Soo Choo. Choo may have been the matchup on paper for left-hander Casey Fossum, but not if you take into account how well Choo is playing. He's hitting .344/.423/.639 since the All-Star Break, and a very good .853 OPS against left-handers. So when Fossum hung a breaking ball inside to Choo, he didn't miss it, tying the game with a three-run homer to right-center.

One inning later, the Indians finished off the Tigers. Kelly Shoppach was hit by a pitch to open the inning. After Travis Hafner struck out swinging at high fastballs, Ryan Garko singled to right field, chasing pinch-runner Josh Barfield to third. Jamey Carroll then "singled" over the head of a drawn-in Magglio Ordonez to drive in the winning run and cap a game that had no business taking place between two also-rans in the last two weeks of the season.

Of course. Sheffield was his typical self after the game:

"This is the third time," Sheffield said, though it wasn't immediately apparent what the third might be. "Like I said, three strikes, you're out. And if there's a fourth, it gets more violent, trust me."

For the record, Carmona has hit Sheffield twice this season. And I doubt either was intentional.

"He called me out," Sheffield said. "If you call me out, I answer the call."

Sure, Gary. You may not have placed the call, but you picked up the phone on the first ring.

Sheffield was particularly upset at Martinez, whose act, Sheffield said, "is tired."

"All this macho stuff -- throwing the equipment off," Sheffield said. "Trust me, you don't want any of me."

Given what actually happened on the mound last night, he probably doesn't want any more of Carmona. And it's pretty humorous that Sheffield would critcize anyone in baseball for "macho stuff," for he was the one who stared at Carmona, carried his bat to first, and charged the mound.

Sheffield didn't direct his anger just at Martinez.

"I saw the tape," he said. "I know who they are and I guarantee you they'll have to deal with me."

The sooner the better, because given the way his career is going, he probably won't have a lot of chances left to get even.

0 recs | Comment 63 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

“I know who they are and I guarantee you they’ll have to deal with me.”

How in the hell does he plan to back that up?

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Sep 20, 2008 11:36 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Shef astutely identified “the skinny guy in the bullpen” (i.e., Perez) as one of his tormenters. He neglected to accuse Jamey Carroll or Josh Barfield, Jeremy Sowers or Scott Lewis. I guess he figures one skinny guy is as much as he can handle?

by peter m on Sep 20, 2008 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

He should have just said, “I’m going to kick Jeremy Sowers’ ass,” and left it at that.

by odradek on Sep 20, 2008 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Shef is right about one thing, I want nothing to do with a .700 OPS and a $10M+ contract.

by APV on Sep 20, 2008 11:37 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs

I trust Sheff feels “hungover” after dealing with Fausto’s head-lock and right handed jabs.

by cheech99 on Sep 20, 2008 12:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

#$%^ Sheffield.

You know Selig? Ombudsman.

by rolub on Sep 20, 2008 12:09 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I think Sheff did just fine considering he held up for a few seconds against the entire Indians infield before our entire bench could get out there. It’s easy to pick a fight with a guy when you have eight others with you. If it was the real Cabrera, Marcus Thames, Sheff, Inge or Dusty Ryan with even footing, I think Fausto would be the one complaining. Besides, I didn’t see Grady in there while our superstar Miguel was right in the mix. Better for his teammates, better on the stat sheet…

Eat 'em up!

by Tony K on Sep 20, 2008 12:23 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I have to give you credit for trying to defend Sheffield. Well, actually you didn’t, but still…

It’s easy to pick a fight with a guy when you have eight others with you.

You must have watching a different game than I was. Sheffield instigated the whole thing.

If it was the real Cabrera, Marcus Thames, Sheff, Inge or Dusty Ryan with even footing, I think Fausto would be the one complaining.

So Sheffield having a running start at the mound is even footing? I’m supposed to feel sympathy for a bully because he got his comeupance?

by Ryan on Sep 20, 2008 12:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

if by “in the mix” you mean that miggy was trying to restrain martinez from beating on old racist sheffield, then sure, he was right there. props to him for doing so, but it’s not like he jumped in and started swinging. watch the tape.

also, re: miggy vs grady. this is a stupid comparison, because they’re both very different, but very great players. . .

cabrera has a .907 OPS while playing mostly 1B. grady has put up a .900 OPS as a center fielder, along with a ton of stolen bases and great defense. there’s no argument to be made that cabrera is “better on the stat sheet” or a better teammate. moron.

by Cap'n Snegiryov on Sep 20, 2008 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I’ve watched these replay too. Sheffield botched his tackle and basically lifted him body into the headlock and buried himself in that vulnerable position. He showed that he’s all temper, not really a good fighter. He’s fortunate that the mass of bodies that converged around them prevented Fausto from leveraging his punches

It’s pretty astonishing that Sheff wasn’t able to take Fausto down from his running start (see Mark Sweeney vs. Jeff Weaver ). I think he got scarred at the last moment. It was only then that he realized how tall Fausto is, and that he wasn’t about to back down. Too late, Sheff.

My money’s on Fausto. Also, Sheffield is an embarrassment.

by jhon on Sep 20, 2008 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I was driving at the time of the incident. Our radio guys anticipated Sheffield charging the mound from the moment he was hit.
Ironically, our broadcasters used the same phrase, “we’re tired of his act”, that Sheffield used against Martinez.
Sheffield’s comments—and there are some good ones Ryan has left out in his summary—are so out of line with reality that for the first time in his career I have to admit that Sheff’s a little nuts. Nuts as in, he might actually be a crazy person. Lots of people have suggested this before, and there’s plenty of evidence that supports this, but only now do I really believe it.

I’m not gloating. It’s actually pretty sad.

by jhon on Sep 20, 2008 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Sep 20, 2008 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions 4 recs

Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

by Jay on Sep 20, 2008 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Of course not. Have you ever looked into Derek Jeter’s eyes? It was the first time I heard the Beatles.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Sep 21, 2008 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

FWIW, Sizemore WAS very much involved in the melee (check out the replay on MLB.com).

by LeftyCatcher on Sep 20, 2008 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I was screaming at him to run away. Let everyone else play “mine is bigger than yours.”

by fwembt on Sep 20, 2008 7:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Really? Your guy starts a fight after getting on base about the only way he still can and you come in here and defend him?

Let’s review: 1. Fausto misses inside and hits Sheff. 2. Sheff decides now is the time to break out the new Gary Sheffield Death Stare (patent pending). 3. Carmona seems more amused than anything. 4. Carmona throws to first. 5. Sheffield realizes the Death Stare isn’t cutting it and charges the mound. 6. Fausto, following the new Ohio castle doctrine, defeats the intruder with extreme prejudice. 7. Baseball fight (see also, macho posturing) begins.

I am not really seeing how this is anything other than another prime example that Sheffield is a total douche. He’s an overpaid, angry, past his prime player at this point and this is his schtick. Don’t pretend he’s innocent, just accept him for the freakish sideshow he is becoming.

by fwembt on Sep 20, 2008 7:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Gary Sheffield isn’t a fighter. It’s pretty reckless to call him a racist, too. Or crazy. He’s a HOF ballplayer. As Jhon says, he’s all temper. Part of that is why he’s such a great, intense hitter.

That said, Fausto knew who to hit to send a message for hitting Hafner. This has been a long time coming. If Pudge were still on the Tigers he might have been the one to get drilled.

Too bad this didn’t happen in July. Something that could have fired up the Tribe.

by odradek on Sep 20, 2008 1:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

You’re all about the psychological effects that spark teams, aren’t you?

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Sep 20, 2008 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Actually, I like to think I’m a little more complex than that.

by odradek on Sep 20, 2008 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, that’s what they all say.

It’s pretty reckless to call him a racist, too. Or crazy. He’s a HOF ballplayer

I’m not sure what connects these observations. He can be all three things, just like Ty Cobb.

by Jay on Sep 20, 2008 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think Sheffield’s a jerk. But I don’t believe he is clinically insane or a necessarily a racist.

I do think he is a hothead, loudmouth, etc. Maybe he is a racist, even, but I’d need more proof before I call a man a racist. He is almost certainly a HOFer, which is an undeniable part of his identity.

There’s more evidence that Cobb was a racist lunatic. And he’s in Cooperstown. So what’s the point? That’s why I pointed out he was in HOF.

by odradek on Sep 20, 2008 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Being a HOF ballplayer means you aren’t racist?

I called it years ago. What I called is that you’re going to see more black faces, but there ain’t no English going to be coming out. … [It’s about] being able to tell [Latin players] what to do — being able to control them. Where I’m from, you can’t control us.

Racism:

The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Sep 20, 2008 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ty Cobb was a racist, or so I’ve read. Racism is a loaded term, typically dealing with the superiority of one race over another. To say it’s just some benign sort of recognition of racial characteristics is disingenuous. I see nothing in Sheffield’s idiotic comment about Latin players being more compliant to suggest that African American players are superior. And they’re both black—of the same race. This isn’t a racial characteristic then, but a cultural one.

Racist is a strong word. Sheffield plays with Asian, Caucasian and black players.

by odradek on Sep 20, 2008 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

So because he works with these people, you can assume he isn’t racist?

All I’m saying is “reckless” is hardly the term I would use to condemn any characterization of Sheffield as a racist person. At worst it’s an educated guess based on evidence.

I don’t want to debate this. I want to celebrate Fausto punching him in the head, the come from behind win, and Choo’s rising Awesomeness Over Replacement Player.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Sep 20, 2008 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I presume you don’t know Sheffield. I don’t know him. Racist is a loaded term.

by odradek on Sep 20, 2008 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

“Latin people can be controlled” is also a loaded term. Not a “term” per se, but bear with me. If you say things like that, prepare to be characterized.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Sep 21, 2008 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

he flat out says that latin players are easier to control than black players.

that’s a “benign recognition of racial characteristics”?

black players are dumber than white players

latin players are lazier than white players

white players have less natural talent than black players

by your logic, these statements are all “benign sort of recognition of racial characteristics” because none of them explicitly assert racial superiority.

by Cap'n Snegiryov on Sep 20, 2008 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

“The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability.”

That’s the first part of Nick’s definition of racism. I think the definition is backward, because it sounds sort of benign. Racism is about superiority and is repugnant.

None of the above assert racial superiority? Intelligence, character, will?

by odradek on Sep 20, 2008 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

how about submissiveness?

sheffield explicitly said that one race (or, i suppose, ethnicity) is more submissive than another.

you’re willing to make an exception there, then? i’m just pointing out the inconsistency in your argument. according to you, a statement that one race is more submissive than another is not racism—it’s a benign recognition of racial characteristics—but a statement that one race is less athletically gifted, or less motivated, or has less intellectual aptitude is racism.

by Cap'n Snegiryov on Sep 20, 2008 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

and re: your assertion that racism is “about superiority”

you don’t think that sheffield was implying anything about the superiority of his race over the latino players with his statement?

you think he was just making an innocent observation? really? please. he says that his “race” demands to be treated with respect, but another doesn’t, and you don’t think there are any sort of value judgments in that statement?

by Cap'n Snegiryov on Sep 20, 2008 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2891875

sheffield is a trick.

“I called it years ago. What I called is that you’re going to see more black faces, but there ain’t no English going to be coming out. … [It’s about] being able to tell [Latin players] what to do — being able to control them,” he told the magazine.

“These are the things my race demands. So, if you’re equally good as this Latin player, guess who’s going to get sent home? I know a lot of players that are home now can outplay a lot of these guys.”

it’s “reckless” to call him a racist, huh?

sure

by Cap'n Snegiryov on Sep 20, 2008 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

For the record, let’s make note of what Sheffield is saying here. He’s saying that the management of major league teams prefer Latin players because they’re more docile. That’s a mild swipe at Latinos, but it’s actually a criticism of management who he sees as hostile to Black player (he apparently believes owners find Black players to have an attitude). There a lot of old tropes here from American culture: beliefs about Black males’ attitudes, the feeling that employers prefer immigrants to African-Americans (an attitude that extends well beyond baseball), the belief that employers (largely white) use race/ethnicity in deciding whom to hire, etc.

I have no real idea if Sheffield is a racist (in the sense that he believes one group to be superior). What’s clear is he believes that race is a factor in how baseball is evolving and he thinks that racial hostility to Black players is at the bottom of it.

by peter m on Sep 20, 2008 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i took it as a swipe at both management and latino players.

his whole argument is predicated on the premise that lations are more submissive than black players. even if he didn’t make that statement with the explicit purpose of bashing latinos, the effect is still the same. if i say “the democratic party targets poor black voters because they’re dumb and easily manipulated” i might be making a statement pointed at the democratic party, but most would say it’s based on a pretty racist and offensive assumption (please don’t read anything into this statement—it’s just a pure hypothetical to show my point).

i don’t see why everyone is rushing to sheff’s defense here.

by Cap'n Snegiryov on Sep 20, 2008 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I’m not defending him. Just trying to clarify what he said because I think it wasn’t being read properly by some of the posters here.

by peter m on Sep 20, 2008 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Cap, I think Sheffield said something to the effect that if Latino players talk back they get their asses booted back to the DR or something. Not that they’re necessarily compliant, but that they can’t afford to talk back. He is talking about an old plantation trope. It’s regrettable he sees things this way, and there are a lot of players who probably wouldn’t agree with him, but Sheffield views a lot of attitude addressed to him in racial terms—when it’s more likely because he’s a hothead. People wonder why there are so few African Americans ballplayers today. Maybe Sheffield’s perception is more common. If it is, it’s wrong.

by odradek on Sep 20, 2008 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

A nice contrast, by the way, is our old friend CC. He was also concerned about the declining numbers of African-American ballplayers and tried to do something about it by supporting organized baseball for inner city kids. Maybe Sheffield’s been involved with that, too, I don’t know. I hope so. He’s been a good player for a lot of years, so kids might be drawn to baseball by his involvement.

by peter m on Sep 20, 2008 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Any time – any time – you make a distinction between one race and another – rightly or wrongly – you open yourself up to the racist tag. Especially if your comment is outside of the groupthink. The RBI program is a good example. By all the interpretation I’ve read here it’s viewed as a positive, progressive program. CC is presented as progressive and benevolent since he is "concerned about the declining numbers of African-American (base)ballplayers". Now if Wally Szczerbiak started a mirror image program because he was concerned about the "declining numbers of European-American basketball players" I’m sure that he’d get excortiated for being a racist by at least some of the groups that proport to represent minorities.

Bottom line: it’s a no win situation anytime you inject race into the discussion. Sheffield’s comments are proof of that.

Resident LGT beer kinda sewer

by mauichuck on Sep 21, 2008 9:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Any time – any time – you make a distinction between one race and another – rightly or wrongly – you open yourself up to the racist tag.

The intent of these original comments weren’t to have a debate over whether or not Sheffield is racist, but whether calling him racist is reckless or not. It isn’t. That should be the end of it. Like I said, at worst it’s an improper tag that he opened himself up to by making a racist-sounding comment.

Now we can talk about Choo.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Sep 21, 2008 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I’m glad you have determined it isn’t reckless to call a guy racist based on a quote from ESPN.com. Or perhaps your decision is based on more vital (but unnamed) sources. Nevertheless, I am inspired by your declaration that the discussion is now closed.

For what it’s worth, I agree with the final sentence of your first paragraph. Sheffield may well be racist, but there is a possibility he might not be.

by odradek on Sep 25, 2008 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Right. So … why is it “reckless?” It’s based on something he said.

I think it’s reckless for you to assume that this discussion is closed. Just because, yknow, I basically said something that very much implies that. But still, you’re being reckless.

And the quote was in GQ magazine.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Sep 25, 2008 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Funny, but I can’t find it online. GQ omits any reference to it in their June 2007 issue, which could imply the presence of lawyers.

It’s not reckless to make an incidental statement on thin proof. It is, to me, reckless to call someone a liar, a racist, a thief, etc. without solid evidence.

Sheffield has no business talking about this. He’s dumb. He’s in way over his head. But that doesn’t mean we can conclude from his statement that he is a racist—a person who believes in the philosophy which holds one race superior and another inferior.

Here’s a fuller quote from what has been cited on ESPN.com (secondarily, referencing the GQ article).

We’re at least three layers removed from what Sheffield said.

by odradek on Sep 25, 2008 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i think it’s reckless to say someone is being reckless.

by Brick. on Sep 25, 2008 5:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think he’s essentially racist.

Denying this requires us to either (a) believe that the quotes are inaccurate, a charge which has never been made by anyone to my knowledge, or (b) split hairs about the precise meaning of what he said.

I see no reason to split hairs, and Sheffield certainly has said and done nothing to earn the benefit of the doubt.

by Jay on Sep 27, 2008 12:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Why can’t we find the original GQ story? That it’s not on the GQ website suggests to me there was some reason to retract it.

Please read the fuller article highlighted above.

Sheffield has played with players of other races through his long career.

I mean, damn, I don’t want to defend a knucklehead. But there is much said here about how inaccurate and reckless MSM is. Yet this is believed with relatively little doubt.

by odradek on Sep 28, 2008 1:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I’ve been reading Sheffield’s nutball theories for years. Unless he’s been misquoted all this time, this is credible, that’s all.

by Jay on Sep 29, 2008 6:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree. We badly need to provide suburban kids with more playgrounds, basketballs and opportunities to participate in organized sports supervised by knowledgeable adult coaches. I support Wally’s program 100%.

by peter m on Sep 23, 2008 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

well, that is certainly a legitimate interpretation of his comments. i didn’t read the GQ article, so maybe ESPN took his words out of context.

i think reasonable minds could disagree over whether sheffield is racist, or at least whether his comments are racist. i just took issue with the comment that it was “reckless” to characterize him as such.

either way, i’d rather avoid a “dialogue” about race relations if possible. let’s not get too heady, here. . .lol

by Cap'n Snegiryov on Sep 20, 2008 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

He confesses to have a running “strikes policy”, ie this was Fausto’s “third strike” in his book. He is a seething creep who has vowed revenge on us. He says a bunch of stuff that doesn’t make any sense. He has a persecution complex. He interprets events in twisted ways.

Ok, so he’s not clinically insane, but something is dangerously off with that guy.

I think he’s nuts, and he’s also not good at playing baseball anymore.

by jhon on Sep 20, 2008 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Any ideas for how many HBPs in today’s game? Didn’t the Tribe set the AL record yesterday? They’ve been hit 94 times. Tigers pitchers have hit 19 Indians this year, by far the most of any opponent. (By comparison, Detroit has hit nine White Sox batters.) Indians pitchers have hit seven Tigers.

by odradek on Sep 20, 2008 1:32 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs