http://m.mlb.com/video/v70867883/seaoak-zunino-doubles-off-fuld-at-first-base/?game_pk=413735
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-first-2-1-double-play-that-you-have-ever-seen/
Very obviously, a 2-1 double play is unusual. It passes the broadcaster test:
What this doesn't say is it was the first 2-1 double play since 1987. What this does say is it was the first 2-1 double play since at least 1987, and, given that that's a long time to go without one, chances are the last one didn't occur in 1986. We're left to guess, and they're not even particularly educated guesses, but there's some, non-zero chance this was the first 2-1 double play in major-league history.
Certain conditions are necessary for a 2-1 double play. Clearly, you need a runner on. Clearly, you need there to be fewer than two outs. But you then need more, a lot more, or else this wouldn't be the first one of these in forever. The biggest difference-maker, in this case: Sam Fuld took off on the pitch. Mark Canha softly put the ball in the air. He hit the ball to an area where it would've been difficult for Fuld to see it. But Fuld was also not looking.
Rather, he was looking ahead. Ahead, there was a trap!
Felix said they were able to double off the stealing Fuld on the foul pop because Cano tricked him by acting as if he turned a double play.
A side view, where, again, you can just barely see Cano's fake throwing motion
And we've heard of infielder decoys. It's a relatively common strategy, and usually it doesn't do anything. Here, Robinson Cano might've bought the Mariners an extra split-second or two. It was by that margin that Fuld was thrown out back at first base.
So, Fuld was going on the pitch. He was thrown off a little bit by the second baseman, before he hit reverse. Still, that didn't just lead to an automatic 2-1 more parts were required. That "1" means the pitcher had to be covering a bag, or at least be in the vicinity. What that means: the hit ball had to cause both the catcher and first baseman to converge. And then the pitcher had to be aware enough to get in position. And, at last, the catcher had to realize quickly that there was a chance to get another out with a fast and accurate throw.
It's difficult to spot an obvious error. Or, I guess it isn't Fuld never picked up the baseball, after he took off. But that happens often, and he was deceived by the player just in front of him. The ball was hit in the air literally behind his back, and it nearly got out of play. In another ballpark, it very well might've. We've seen runners like this get doubled off. We've just never seen it happen where the catcher makes the catch and then throws to the pitcher
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-first-2-1-double-play-that-you-have-ever-seen/
Very obviously, a 2-1 double play is unusual. It passes the broadcaster test:
quote:
Sims: I dare you to say you've seen that before.
Blowers: Can't say that I have. Can't say that I have.
What this doesn't say is it was the first 2-1 double play since 1987. What this does say is it was the first 2-1 double play since at least 1987, and, given that that's a long time to go without one, chances are the last one didn't occur in 1986. We're left to guess, and they're not even particularly educated guesses, but there's some, non-zero chance this was the first 2-1 double play in major-league history.
Certain conditions are necessary for a 2-1 double play. Clearly, you need a runner on. Clearly, you need there to be fewer than two outs. But you then need more, a lot more, or else this wouldn't be the first one of these in forever. The biggest difference-maker, in this case: Sam Fuld took off on the pitch. Mark Canha softly put the ball in the air. He hit the ball to an area where it would've been difficult for Fuld to see it. But Fuld was also not looking.
Rather, he was looking ahead. Ahead, there was a trap!
Felix said they were able to double off the stealing Fuld on the foul pop because Cano tricked him by acting as if he turned a double play.
A side view, where, again, you can just barely see Cano's fake throwing motion
And we've heard of infielder decoys. It's a relatively common strategy, and usually it doesn't do anything. Here, Robinson Cano might've bought the Mariners an extra split-second or two. It was by that margin that Fuld was thrown out back at first base.
So, Fuld was going on the pitch. He was thrown off a little bit by the second baseman, before he hit reverse. Still, that didn't just lead to an automatic 2-1 more parts were required. That "1" means the pitcher had to be covering a bag, or at least be in the vicinity. What that means: the hit ball had to cause both the catcher and first baseman to converge. And then the pitcher had to be aware enough to get in position. And, at last, the catcher had to realize quickly that there was a chance to get another out with a fast and accurate throw.
It's difficult to spot an obvious error. Or, I guess it isn't Fuld never picked up the baseball, after he took off. But that happens often, and he was deceived by the player just in front of him. The ball was hit in the air literally behind his back, and it nearly got out of play. In another ballpark, it very well might've. We've seen runners like this get doubled off. We've just never seen it happen where the catcher makes the catch and then throws to the pitcher
