FanDuel - WFBC

May 07, 2012

Cole Hamels Admits Hitting Bryce Harper on Purpose: Philadelphia Phillies pitcher Cole Hamels intentionally hit Washington Nationals rookie Bryce Harper with the first pitch he threw to him in the first inning of Sunday's game. "I was trying to hit him. I'm not going to deny it," Hamels said. "I'm just trying to continue the old baseball. ... It's just, 'Welcome to the big leagues.'" Harper stole home on Hamels that inning and Nats pitcher Jordan Zimmerman hit Hamels with a pitch. The Phillies won 9-3.

posted by rcade to baseball at 10:38 AM - 37 comments

It's interesting that Harper doesn't even look at Hamels after getting hit. He's trying pretty hard to shed the punk kid label.

The quality of fan-shot video is getting to be pretty good. The fan who shot that Harper vid put a big copyright notice on it, but that's not a wise move when the MLB claims exclusive rights on game footage.

posted by rcade at 10:44 AM on May 07

Isn't this an automatic day off for Hamels? Why admit it?

posted by yerfatma at 11:21 AM on May 07

Great response from Nats GM Mike Rizzo: "Cole Hamels says he's old school? He's the polar opposite of old school. He's fake tough. He thinks he's going to intimidate us after hitting our 19-year rookie who's eight games into the big leagues? He doesn't know who he's dealing with."

"They pull a knife, you pull a gun! He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue!"

posted by rcade at 11:46 AM on May 07

Punk move. Glad Harper stole home on him. Also glad that the Nats pitchers didn't retaliate.

ETA: Sorry, didn't read all the way through. My local sports radio station lied to me -- they were all about how much higher-class the Nats were being. That's a pity.

posted by Etrigan at 12:49 PM on May 07

Also glad that the Nats pitchers didn't retaliate.

They hit Hamels in his next at bat.

posted by yerfatma at 12:50 PM on May 07

They hit Hamels in his next at bat.

It's too bad it wasn't later in the game...one of those 100+ MPH Henry Rodriguez fastballs would've left Hamels down a rib.

posted by dfleming at 01:29 PM on May 07

It's interesting that Harper doesn't even look at Hamels after getting hit. He's trying pretty hard to shed the punk kid label.

If you know it's coming you don't react. There's nothing worse than hitting a guy with your best fastball and he just doesn't care. You want him to feel it physically and mentally.

posted by tron7 at 02:10 PM on May 07

Why would he know it's coming on the first pitch he faced in the first inning? I'm not aware of anything he did the previous game that would make the Phils angry.

posted by rcade at 02:46 PM on May 07

Jason Turbow suggests that Hamels was (a) responding to Bryce Harper questioning the strike zone in an earlier game and (b) sending a message about toughness to his own team.

posted by rcade at 02:50 PM on May 07

Ok, I deleted my comment somehow.

What I said was I'm guessing that they had some interraction if Hamels was pissed enough to hit Harper. But, I'm just guessing.

posted by tron7 at 02:54 PM on May 07

I never would have given this a second thought a year or two ago, but in light of all the recent attention given to the danger of football an hockey related injuries, is it still acceptable to willfully bean a player with a fastball?

posted by Joey Michaels at 03:32 PM on May 07

is it still acceptable to willfully bean a player with a fastball?

No. But you can hit him [almost] in the ass, like Hamels did in this case.

posted by tahoemoj at 05:09 PM on May 07

I swear to God I'm not trying to troll here - my question, I guess, is "if its not all right to deliberately hurt a player in one sport, why would it be all right to deliberately hurt a player in another sport?"

I find I kind of agree with what tahoemoj just wrote, but I feel I am being inconsistent with my own beliefs that, in regards to football and hockey, making a point to hurt another player is unacceptable.

It would be more intellectually consistent of me to just flat out believe that deliberately hurting another player is wrong regardless of the sport. I find myself moving in that direction, but its taking some mental effort on my part because I've always believed that beaning is "just part of the game." Maybe it shouldn't be.

posted by Joey Michaels at 05:48 PM on May 07

I've always believed that beaning is "just part of the game." Maybe it shouldn't be.

The word "beaning" usually refers to a pitch that hits a player in the head/helmet (or the "bean"). "Plunking" usually refers to a pitching that hits a player in the back/arms/ass/legs.

This was a "plunking", not a "beaning".

"Beaning" should never be part of the game.

posted by grum@work at 05:59 PM on May 07

I feel I am being inconsistent with my own beliefs that, in regards to football and hockey, making a point to hurt another player is unacceptable

Just one man's take on that issue--I think you need to make the distinction between doing something that hurts-making them feel pain, and hurting-i.e. injuring someone. On one hand, getting hit in the ass or back or arm by a big league pitch must hurt like hell. The intent, then is to make someone hurt, as in feel pain. The intent was not to hurt him, as in to injure or make him leave the game. Beaning another player has the capacity to seriously injure him, hurting him in the worst way.

It's the same as when a hockey player delivers a hard but legal check. He wants it to hurt the other player; he wants him to feel pain so he may be intimidated next time he handles the puck. However, most players will tell you that they have no intent to cause an injury.

So, to address what I think is your ethical dilemma. It's o.k. in almost all sports to intentionally "hurt" your opponent by making him hurt. Not o.k. to "hurt" your opponent by injuring him.

posted by tahoemoj at 06:31 PM on May 07

I can live with that.

Also, how have I never heard the term "plunking" before?

posted by Joey Michaels at 07:07 PM on May 07

Well said, tahoemoj.

posted by Etrigan at 07:11 PM on May 07

The whole think just comes off as bizarre. The awkward reasoning, the admitting, and just the fact that Hamels doesn't seem to be the type.

He's been suspended 5 games, which means 0 games in pitching terms.

On one hand, getting hit in the ass or back or arm by a big league pitch must hurt like hell. The intent, then is to make someone hurt, as in feel pain. The intent was not to hurt him, as in to injure or make him leave the game. Beaning another player has the capacity to seriously injure him, hurting him in the worst way.

That sounds great as long as there's an asterisk next to it that points out when throwing a 90 plus mph fastball at the back it's not outside the realm of possibility the ball gets away from you.

posted by justgary at 07:41 PM on May 07

as long as there's an asterisk next to it that points out when throwing a 90 plus mph fastball at the back it's not outside the realm of possibility the ball gets away from you

Absolutely fair enough. There is a risk of injury, even if there's no intent to injure. But isn't that true in the examples I cited, as well as many others?

posted by tahoemoj at 07:51 PM on May 07

He's been suspended 5 games, which means 0 games in pitching terms.

1 game, unless the Phillies want to disrupt every other starter's rotation spot. Given that includes Lee and Halladay, I don't see that happening.

posted by grum@work at 07:54 PM on May 07

There is a risk of injury, even if there's no intent to injure. But isn't that true in the examples I cited, as well as many others?

Yep. I'm not disagreeing with you. Just saying that sometimes things go wrong, and because of that, throwing at someones back, even with no attempt to injure, though part of the game, shouldn't be taken lightly.

posted by justgary at 07:56 PM on May 07

For that matter, nor should throwing at the strike zone, for some.

posted by Hugh Janus at 07:59 PM on May 07

The 5 days is more for the 5 days of salary than the games missed.

posted by jmauro2000 at 08:20 PM on May 07

In real life "old school" baseball, "the ball slipped out of my hand" is the proper response to a beaning. Hammels whining probabily hase more to do with the embarrassment of Bryce stealing home.

posted by rollfast at 09:30 PM on May 07

The 5 days is more for the 5 days of salary than the games missed.

I'm pretty sure that they don't lose any salary unless it's a suspension for violating the drug policy.

BTW, the hustle from Harper reminds me of Brett Lawrie on the Jays. Here, he turns a routine bloop single into double.

posted by grum@work at 10:19 PM on May 07

Cole Hamels says he's old school? He's the polar opposite of old school.

There is no 'old school' any more. Old school was Sal Maglie. He earned the nickname of 'The Barber' with his penchant for throwing high and inside with the count in his favor. It was said that he would knock down his grandmother if she stood in with 2 strikes on her. Brushing batters back is generally accepted. Throwing at a hitter with intent is accepted so long as the 'rules' are adhered to. That is, below the shoulders, above the knees, and try not to make it so obvious that you throw 2 feet behind the hitter's back. Good on Harper for not making an issue out of it, then showing Hamels up on the bases with his steal of home.

posted by Howard_T at 10:45 PM on May 07

Hamels only wishes he was old school .. from my vantage point he's more girl's school.

Harper, on the other hand, looks like the real deal. He's too young to have watched "Charlie Hustle" but he appears to have some of the same game.

posted by cixelsyd at 11:01 PM on May 07

1 game, unless the Phillies want to disrupt every other starter's rotation spot. Given that includes Lee and Halladay, I don't see that happening.

I don't follow the Phillies schedule close enough to know. I was going by a talk radio show where they claimed because of an off day they wouldn't skip Hamels. At the very least, they don't have to if they don't want to.

posted by justgary at 11:39 PM on May 07

I was going by a talk radio show where they claimed because of an off day they wouldn't skip Hamels.

The best combination I could figure is (if Hamels is the number 3 pitcher):

Pitcher 2
Day-off/Hamels' normal spot
Pitcher 4
Pitcher 5
Pitcher 1
Pitcher 2
Hamels comes back

He misses 5 games, the rotation isn't disrupted in any way, and he might have been skipped any ways.
However, that also means that he's sat down for:

3 days (Pitcher 4, 5, 1) before the suspension starts
6 days (5 suspension and 1 day off)

For a total of 9 days without pitching.

That might mess with him for sitting that long.

posted by grum@work at 11:58 PM on May 07

Hamels began serving his suspension Monday night. With Cliff Lee expected to come off the disabled list and start Wednesday, coupled with Thursday's day off, Hamels really won't miss a turn in the rotation.

Roy Halladay will likely pitch on regular rest Saturday and Hamels would then start Sunday against the San Diego Padres.

I don't know how that fits or if it changes what you posted grum. Too much math for me and it's late.

posted by justgary at 12:01 AM on May 08

That means they'll have to use 6 starters this week:

Monday (#1 Halladay)
Tuesday (#2)
Wednesday (new #3 Lee)
Thursday (day off)
Friday (old #3)
Saturday (old #4)
Sunday (old #5 Hamels)

OR

They complete re-jig their rotation and Hamel goes from being the #5 pitcher to being the #2 pitcher:

Last Sunday (#5 Hamels - gets suspended)
Monday (#1 Halladay)
Tuesday (#2)
Wednesday (new #3 Lee)
Thursday (day off)
Friday (#4)
Saturday (#1 Halladay - it would be day 5 in his schedule, so he'd pitch again)
Sunday (#2 Hamels)

Either way, Hamels' expected pitching date is only pushed back one day (from Saturday to Sunday), but the rotation gets funky during this time (extra starters or re-ordering with the return of Hamels).

posted by grum@work at 12:33 AM on May 08

Hamels only wishes he was old school .. from my vantage point he's more girl's school.

We'll know that the world is moving in the right direction when the insult of first choice directed at a male athlete doesn't involve comparisons to women or gays. In the meantime...same shit, different day.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 09:24 AM on May 08

If it means anything, I think a lot of us grimaced when we read that.

posted by tahoemoj at 11:17 AM on May 08

I wish people told me I played like a girl.

posted by rcade at 12:08 PM on May 08

Either way, Hamels' expected pitching date is only pushed back one day (from Saturday to Sunday), but the rotation gets funky during this time (extra starters or re-ordering with the return of Hamels).

Ahh, thanks.

posted by justgary at 01:37 PM on May 08

tahoemoj: in fact, it means a great deal. Thanks for that.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 08:40 PM on May 08

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.