Hitting The Cutoff Man

Tuesday night's tilt between the Dodgers and D-Backs in Arizona offered a strange pitching line. D-Backs starter Dan Haren recorded each of his first nine outs via the 'K,' while also giving up three singles and ended his night after six innings having struck out 10 and allowed 10 hits.

The double-digit strikeouts and hits jump out a bit, since you would expect that a pitcher dominant enough to rack up that many Ks wouldn't be giving up that many hits.

But how unusual a feat is it? Well, counting Haren's performance Tuesday, it's happened 276 times since 1920 and 16 times since 2000. Adam Wainwright and John Lackey both did it last season, and while no active pitcher has done it more than once, among the recently retired, Randy Johnson had seven such games and Curt Schilling had four.

The Big Unit had one particular outing that stands out.

On June 24, 1997, he started for the Mariners against the A's at the Kingdome in Seattle. Johnson gave up four runs on 11 hits that day, including two homers (one of which was a shot by Mark McGwire that was one of the hardest-hit baseballs I've ever seen). But he also struck out 19, one short of the record for a nine-inning game, even though he took the loss as Oakland won 4-1.

That's the record for most strikeouts in a 10-hit game that went nine innings, but it's not the overall record. That distinction belongs to Tom Chaney, who threw all 16 innings of the Washington Senators' 2-1 victory over the Baltimore Orioles on Sept. 12, 1962. He gave up 10 hits and racked up 21 Ks.

Conversely, the record for most hits allowed in a game with at least 10 strikeouts is held by Burleigh Grimes (one of the all-time great baseball names), who struck out 10 but surrendered 18 hits in 12 innings as his Brooklyn Dodgers beat the Boston Braves 6-5 on Sept. 9, 1922. However, nobody since 1960 has allowed more than 13 hits in a 10-plus K game.

Now Haren has something to work for his next time out.

Follow Hitting The Cutoff Man on Twitter at HitTheCutoff

First off, sorry for the long delay between posts. I’ve taken a new job that involved moving across the country, and things got a little hectic on me.

But now I’m operational again, and it’s coming at the perfect time, as pitchers and catchers start reporting to Spring Training Feb. 17 (although some teams wait until the 21st). To mark the occasion, I’ll be posting a different list looking ahead at the new season every day between now and when the first camps open.

Since there are six days left until Feb. 17, today's list is "6 Most Interesting Off-Season Moves." These aren't necessarily the biggest or most important moves, just the ones that caught my attention the most.

Phillies acquire Roy Halladay from Blue Jays and deal Cliff Lee to the Mariners
This was the biggest deal of the offseason and also the most interesting because of the Phillies' decision to swap aces. Philly could have gotten Halladay and still kept Lee, but apparently felt that would have left their farm system in bad shape. Still, the prospects they gave up for Halladay are more highly regarded than those they picked up for Lee, and you have to wonder whether the difference between the two pitchers is big enough to make it all worthwhile. The Phillies still look like serious World Series contenders this season, but this pair of trades was a little puzzling.

Red Sox sign Mike Cameron and Adrian Beltre
Neither Cameron nor Beltre has a particularly bigtime reputation, and they're both low batting average hitters. But both players are productive at the plate and superb with the glove -- Cameron in center field and Beltre at third base. These signings indicate Boston's newfound dedication to run prevention, something the organization shares with other cutting-edge teams like the Mariners and A's. Beltre and Cameron figure to be difference-makers in what could be a very tight AL East race.

Cardinals name Mark McGwire hitting coach; Cubs name Rudy Jaramillo hitting coach
Putting aside the hubub of McGwire's PED admission, his hiring and that of Jaramillo are interesting as they relate to the issue of a batting coach's real impact on a team. The importance of these coaches at the big league level tends to be overstated in my opinion, making them easy scapegoats during tough times. But it will be fascinating to see how these two guys do. The Cubs' offense is poised for a rebound regardless of coaching, as it's hard to believe players like Geovany Soto and Alfonso Soriano will be as bad as they were last season, but Jaramillo has a sterling reputation and could provide an extra boost. McGwire has gotten glowing reviews from players who have worked with him privately and might make a difference for Cardinals hitters not named Albert Pujols.

Royals sign Jason Kendall to a two-year contract
The Royals have made a litany of baffling moves recently, but this signing stands out. How does a team that figures to be nowhere near a playoff race justify not only signing the aging Kendall, but to a two-year deal? Of course, the easy answer is some mythical combination of "veteran leadership" and "grit," but the fact is that Kendall hasn't managed an OBP above .331 or a slugging percentage above .324 the past three seasons. In other words, he's an offensive liability, even for a catcher. The Royals could have signed someone younger and cheaper to do just as poorly, but if they did that, they wouldn't be the Royals.

A's sign Ben Sheets
Sheets missed all of last season after having elbow surgery and has started 25 or more games only once since 2004. But the small-market A's, looking to compete in what figures to be a rough-and-tumble AL West, outbid the competition for his services, inking Sheets to a one-year deal worth $10 million plus incentives. Will Sheets help keep Oakland in the playoff race, or at least stay healthy long enough to get flipped for prospects at the trade deadline? That remains to be seen.

Cubs trade Milton Bradley to Mariners for Carlos Silva
This was one of those classic "our problem for your problem" deals. Bradley had worn out his welcome in Chicago, to put it mildly, having been suspended from the team late in the season. Silva was making a lot of money and pitching terribly in Seattle. Basically this trade boiled down to the Cubs taking on the final two years of Silva's horrid deal in exchange for getting rid of Bradley plus acquiring some cash, which went toward signing Marlon Byrd. But while Bradley's situation in Chicago probably was untenable, he figures to produce a lot more than Silva this season and could be a real asset to the M's.

Tomorrow: 5 Intriguing Players to Watch in '10

Seeing as how there have been some rather significant developments in the Mark McGwire saga since I wrote about him last week, I figure it’s a good time to revisit the subject.

In my original piece, I wrote that McGwire, as a product of his times, deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. Sports Illustrated columnist Joe Posnanski, the best sports columnist out there today, summed up my thoughts on this much better than I ever could in his piece about McGwire’s admission, which is definitely worth a read:

“Let's be brutally honest here: McGwire was not the only person to use steroids in his era, and he's not one of only a few, either. He played baseball in an era when there was no testing and no real stigma attached to using performance-enhancing drugs. He had teammates who used steroids. He faced pitchers who used steroids. He had hits robbed by fielders who used steroids. Amphetamines had been part of baseball going back several decades. Steroids had been a prominent part of football for at least that long. Supplements that stirred smaller but similar effects to steroids -- such as andro -- were legal both in and out of baseball. I don't mean that as an excuse, I mean it as context. Mark McGwire used steroids in a very different emotional time.”

Posnanski goes on to talk about being ready to forgive McGwire, even when so many other baseball pundits out there are not.

Big Mac’s grand media tour didn’t exactly have that effect on me. The guy did what he did and should have admitted it a long time ago, but failed to because he was afraid of the consequences. Now he’s changing course, not because the beating of the tell-tale heart finally drove him mad, but because he wants to coach the Cardinals this season without the media badgering him about the issue every day.

The fact is, I already forgave Mark McGwire, long before his big confession. His admission of something everyone already knew doesn’t change much. I don’t agree with or respect what he did, but I understand it.

What I don’t understand is why so many people are so caught up in the fact that he refuses to say steroids had an effect on how many home runs he hit. Look, the important part was him admitting he took the 'roids in the first place. I don’t see why it’s necessary for him to also talk about their effects. If McGwire didn’t have supreme confidence in his own ability to hit a baseball, he never would have become a star in the first place. If he said now that he thought drugs helped him set the home run record, he probably would be lying to tell the public what it wants to hear, and didn’t being less than truthful help get him into this mess in the first place?

To use a somewhat clunky analogy: If a store gets robbed, and a while later a guy comes forward and turns himself in, admitting he committed the crime, wouldn’t that be enough? Or would we make him talk about the economic impact of his actions on the business? No, of course not.

But McGwire doesn’t even get off as easy as an actual criminal.

As St. Louis Post-Dispatch columnist Bernie Miklasz aptly put it:

“And reticence is a problem in our Dr. Phil culture. We demand full-blown confessionals, and you'd better open some old wounds and then tap into a new vein or two, and it better be messy and bloody, and by God it must be televised.”

In 1998, McGwire gave the public what it wanted: a home run chase and a reason to fall in love with baseball again. Now he's fallen short of its demands. I forgive him for that, too.

On Sept. 5, 1998, I sat in the stands at Busch Stadium and watched the Cardinals beat the Reds, 7-0.

In that game, the immortal Donovan Osborne threw a three-hit shutout, but of course that’s not what I remember. The memory that sticks with me is that in the first inning, Mark McGwire ripped a deep shot to left field that cleared the wall for his 60th home run of the season, tying Babe Ruth for second all-time.

I was ecstatic. Here I was, 11 years old, a huge McGwire fan, a witness to history.

That summer, the whole country was wrapped up in the home run chase, as Big Mac and Slammin’ Sammy Sosa made their assault on Roger Maris’ 61. Both would break it, with McGwire setting the new record at 70.

Of course in the years since, we’ve learned a lot about McGwire, Sosa and many other players. We don’t know with 100 percent certainty that Big Mac was using performance-enhancing drugs, but we can make some pretty solid assumptions.

For a while, all the talk of McGwire being a cheater was hurtful, something I felt in my gut. He was something of a hero to me, as athletes often are to children, and when people called his integrity into question, it was like them insulting one of my parents. When you’re a kid, you believe athletes are perfect, larger-than-life figures who can do the impossible, just as you think your parents can fix anything.

As you get older, you realize athletes are people who are incredibly talented but also flawed just like everyone else. You realize your parents, try as they might, can’t make everything better. You realize the world can be a dirty, nasty place and that human nature has some unattractive tendencies.

So although I’ve experienced some feelings of disappointment and even anger toward McGwire, I don’t harbor any resentment. When the Hall of Fame’s 2010 class is announced Wednesday, I hope he will be included even though he almost certainly will not be.

Look, McGwire was a very good baseball player who did something less than admirable but more than understandable. To not cast a vote for him is the height of hypocrisy.

For one thing, we don’t know for sure who else from that era did and did not take performance-enhancers. Without that knowledge, how are you supposed to make a judgment that McGwire should be held out while one of his peers should be welcomed in?

For another thing, players have been enhancing their performance for as long as they have played baseball for money. Pitchers have scuffed balls to make them break more. Hitters have corked their bats to make the ball go further. Players in the 70s popped amphetamines or "greenies" like they were jelly beans to give them energy on the field.

The point is, professional athletes are competitive guys with a lot of money on the line who will do what it takes to get ahead, and they will go as far as they think they can get away with. No matter how much baseball players are lionized, they succumb to the same base aspects of human nature as anyone else.

And plenty of guys in the Hall of Fame did much worse that stick themselves with a needle; they beat their wives or neglected their children or were virulent racists. We don’t seem to hold that against them or let it stop us from admiring their abilities on the field.

So maybe what I saw that September afternoon in St. Louis wasn’t quite “real.” I’ve come to terms with that. It’s time for the Baseball Writers Association of America to do the same and put Big Mac into the Hall.