The END of the NLCS

As I sit here watching the Phillies score runs like jackhammers and the listen to the TBS Announcers talk like jackasses, I have little positive to say about Baseball in this moment. It's now 8-3, scratch that, 9-3, Jayson Werth just hit his second home run, and it doesn't look like the Dodgers are even playing in the same league.

The Dodgers were simply overmatched this series. They didn't have to be, though. Nothing about how they played all season could have predicted that they would be. Many predicted that the Dodgers would be very far from overmatched in the NLCS. But I guess the Big Man upstairs just had a thing for the Phillies this year: they do both share a similar color scheme.

The most obvious and basic reason for the Dodgers' loss has been the futility of their offense. Sure, the Phillies scored the most runs in the league this year (820, the Dodgers had 780), but the Dodgers had the best batting average (.270, the Phillies hit .258, good for just 10th) and on base percentage (.346, vs. .334 for the Phils). The Phillies had a commanding lead in slugging percentage (.447 vs. .412), giving them a slim lead in OPS (.781 vs. .758), which bespeaks a whole damn lot of home runs. Which, to my dismay, doesn't have all that much to do with them playing 81 games in hitter happy Citizens Bank Park: they hit 108 home runs at home, but 116 on the road. Who would'a thunk?

During the NLCS, the Dodgers have outhit the Phillies 38 to 36, but have been out walked 23 to 12, and out homered 10 to 6. The Dodgers just weren't getting enough runners on base nor coming up with the big hits to score them. Their bats just didn't wake up for this series, simple as that.

Another uncharacteristic reason for the Dodgers losing was the collapse of their erstwhile stellar bullpen. George Sherrill gave up 3 runs in 2 innings. Belisario gave up 3 runs in 3.1 innings. Then of course Jonathan Broxton's historic Game 4 blown save/loss. Troncoso and Kuo have been on, but in those high leverage situations, the big boys just can't seem to hold down leads. But, again, if the hitters could have scored some more runs in key situations, instead of leaving the bases loaded however-many times, their relief corps wouldn't have been under such pressure to perform.

Now that the series is officially in the books, I'd like to bitterly lash out at the powers that be. Everyone has been talking about how lousy the umpiring has been over the course of the entire post-season, and we've all heard the stories about how 12 umpires (including 7 crew chiefs) are unavailable due to injury, but some of the more flagrant missed calls during Game 4 got me riled up enough to do a little research. Behold: photographic evidence of a wildly inconsistent strike zone courtesy of home plate umpire Ted Barrett:

(Before I show these pictures, however, I want to re-acknowledge what I've said all along: the Dodgers were simply outplayed this series. Even if every questionable call throughout the entire series went the Dodgers' way, it wouldn't have made up the 17 runs by which the Dodgers were outscored. It might have translated into a crucial out, or a crucial run, or even a crucial win here and there, but overall, the team that played better won the series. These are just simply some observations on some rotten umpiring to keep in mind when the collective bargaining agreement between MLB and the Umpires' Association expires this off-season.)

1st Inning
Ryan Howard vs. Randy Wolf (1 on, 2 out)
Result: Home Run (2 RBI)

Pitch 1 is hidden there behind pitch 3, and as you can see, both were called balls despite appearing to have caught the edge of the strike zone. Pitch 2 was a swinging strike. But check out pitch 4: clearly in the strike zone, but called a ball. Pitches 1 and 3 are questionable - if Barrett isn't calling the high strike or if he's confused by how close Howard stands to the plate, those could be balls. But there's no arguing about pitch 4, which, had it been called correctly, would have made the count 2-2 rather than 3-1. But the count did become 3-1, and we all know what happens to 90 mph 3-1 belt-high fastballs.

3rd Inning
Jimmy Rollins vs. Randy Wolf (0 on, 1 out)
Result: Flyball out

Pitches 1, 2, and 3: in the strike zone? I think so. Called strikes? By no means. Rollins made an out here, but it's the principle of the thing.








5th Inning
Carlos Ruiz vs. Randy Wolf (0 on, 2 out)
Result: Walk

I'll give you 2 and 4, but 1 and 6 were clearly strikes. Ruiz swung at pitch 5, so that's what's going on there.








Now let's look at some pitches called strikes against the Dodgers.

5th Inning
Rafael Furcal vs. Joe Blanton (0 on, 1 out)
Result: Groundout

This is just the first pitch, but, COME ON! I mean, it was a slider, so it may have looked like it passed through the strike zone, but looking at the pitches that landed in the strike zone and were called balls against Dodger pitchers, you can't help but wonder a little.




6th Inning
Russell Martin vs. Joe Blanton (2 on, 1 out)
Result: Strikeout looking

All three of those strikes were called, by the way. All are borderline pitches, to be sure, but pitches in the exact same location coming from Randy Wolf were called balls in the same game. It's clear that Barrett is just simply not calling the same game for each team.





7th Inning
Andre Ethier vs. Chan Ho Park (0 on, 2 out)
Result: Walk

What we have here is a case of the umpire shifting the strike zone two or three inches further towards third base than it should be: pitch 5 is clearly outside, but is called a strike. Noticing this, Ethier takes pitch six, which catches the inside corner of the plate, but is called ball four. Ethier realized that the strike zone can only be 17 inches across, and if it starts two inches further outside than it should be, it must also end two inches further inside than it should be. Ethier's a special player and was able to adapt in this situation, but he shouldn't have had to.

8th Inning
Russell Martin vs. Ryan Madson (1 on, 2 out)
Result: Walk

Just in the interest of fairness, here are some close pitches called in the Dodgers' favor. While you may think this piece of evidence nullifies all my rants about a clear anti-Dodger bias, it really just makes what you're about to see next even more infuriating...





9th Inning
Andre Ethier vs. B(r)ad Lidge (1 on, 2 out)
Result: Strikeout looking

Seriously? Pitch 5 is strike three called in the ninth inning with a runner on third and two outs? When was that pitch called a strike all night, even against the Dodgers? I have nothing more to say.







Except this: I don't mean to suggest that the umps were biased against the Dodgers or that they were on the take or that the boys in blue are being blacklisted because of Manny's steroid mess this season. I just want to point out that of the myriad missed calls during this game, the vast majority went against the Dodgers. I will, however, suggest a slight broadcasting bias. Whenever TBS's pitch trax showed a pitch in the strike zone that was called a ball against a Phillie pitcher, Chip Caray would undoubtedly cry out, "Pitch trax clearly thought that pitch was a strike, but called a ball..." but would remain blissfully silent whenever clear strikes were not called for Dodgers pitchers. Also, note that every time the Phillies scored a run or made a key out, Chip would make an elated outburst. But for a Dodgers big play: Nothing. Crickets. Just frustration on every level from a Dodger fan used to enjoying Vin Scully's Hall of Fame caliber broadcasts.

Okay, just some food for thought. I'll be signing off until the World Series....