I didn't really get to watch last night's performance, but I obviously saw the line and couldn't be happier. Since the tumbleweeds are blowing around this forum again, I'd just like to see people's impressions that watched him work last night. I guess it's obvious he had great control last night and was thus able to keep the walks down. I'll be honest... I didn't think he was yet capable of staying in a game 8 innings.

With what we've seen this year from not only Lester but others rumored to be in various trade proposals, it seems it truly is a blessing that Minnesota and Boston did not come to terms this offseason on Mr. Santana.

I'm not as optimistic as maybe I should be after 8 IP of shutout ball. I don't think he had great control - he still walked four people (more than he had in most of his games this year). I still think he needs an offense that helps him out a bit.

Yeah, but he hasn't gotten out of the 7th inning all year this year either. If Tito had pulled him after getting the first two outs in the 7th (which is as far as he's gotten all year), his line would have read:

6.2 Inn 1H 0 ER 3 BB 4 K

He walks Hill for his 4th walk of the night, then gets a Flyout, 2 Ks to start the 8th and a ground out to end it. 5 baserunners in 8 innings is damn fine pitching, especially coming from a guy who had allowed only 2 walks in each of his last two starts, but allowed 9 and 10 hits in each as well. He also got more Ks than he has in any other start this year.

Very encouraging performance out of Lester last night.

4 walks eh? I assume he had kept the walks down staying in the game 8 innings. The Jays must have been hacking away then. At any rate, I'm glad to see us end up on the winning side of a pitching gem. Too bad he didn't officially get the W.

Even with the four walks Lester only threw 98 pitches, 58 for stikes. He also had 24 stikes looking, while only 5 swinging stirkes.

Question for anyone that was able to watch the game; How were the umps? Especially with the strike zone?

Edit: Just found Lester's game chart. Looking at his charts it seems that when he's misses the strike zone, he really misses the zone. The thing that concerns me is that the majority of his strikes were in the heart of the zone, it seems that he is had trouble finding the lower or upper part of the strike zone. Since, I didn't get to watch the game, can anyone confirm or refute this?

The Jays weren't really hacking last night though. They were swinging at strikes. And at lease 2 of his K's were looking. He had better control last night and threw with confidence. I really think the Halliday match up helped in 2 ways. First because he played up to his competition and second, the pace of the game. Both pitchers had a great flow and had it all game.

He didn't fall behind in counts as much as is typical for him. He threw more first pitch strikes than normal. He seemed to work faster than usual, which I like. He wasn't touched with any of the 4 walks by getting some timely double plays...

The one factor that leaves me not so optimistic is that he was getting strike calls on his normally high and outside fastball that has been called a ball all his previous starts. I fully expect him to regress back to not controlling the strike zone and falling behind hitters his next start with an umpire that has a per usual more conservative strike zone. Sorry, I just don't think all of the sudden "he get's it". Hope I'm wrong.

Edit - heinie, just saw your question about umps, good timing.

http://boston.inside-edge.com/PRCPG.aspx?dt=042908 - there's the Inside edge scorecard. Not exactly the end-all, but gives a bit of a breakdown. His command wasn't great, and from just looking at these numbers, I'm guessing the Jays were chasing a bit, and not getting good wood on the ball (hence the low hit numbers).

A good sign, a very good sign, but still only a sign. Ask me again after he's put together a string of five or six quality starts with less than 3 walks per nine. 4 walks is too many for 8 innings.

Delighted, however, with the recent string of solid starting pitching. The bats will come around - it is so much harder to get consistent good pitching. If that holds up, the Sox should be back on track very soon.

Looking at his last two starts, something that is really encouraging is the combined 25-7 groundball/flyball ratio. I'm not ready to say that it's a blessing we didn't trade him for Santana, but I do see good things ahead

My impression of Lester was that he was both lucky and good. He was lucky in that the ump was giving every pitcher some generous outside strikes, and that most of the Blue Jays were making weak contact. He was good in that he threw many more first strikes than usual, and he threw more of his pitches more effectively than usual. We went from the usual Lester outing of 4-seam fastballs and cutters to those plus his changeup and curve, all of which he was able to throw for strikes at various times. The mixing of his pitches directly led to much of that lucky soft contact, and more first-pitch strikes early on probably helped to earn him the outside strike calls as the game went along (although the ump may have just had a large zone, we've still seen what happens when wild pitchers hit a corner as opposed to guys who have been throwing strikes all night). For the 4 walks, 3 of them were clearly temporary losses of control (4 or 5 pitches), and Lester recovered immediately after all of them instead of losing his cool and going wild for the next 2-3 batters. A great outing overall, and while I wouldn't say that this stuff was dominating, he was much better at maintaining his composure during the brief rough patches than normal.

I'm not sure how well I trust that chart.

If you look at Halladay's chart from the same game, he doesn't have anything at the bottom of the strike zone either. Not one pitch, called or in play. This from a guy who not only has the best sinker in the game, but was killing people all day with his curve low in the zone.

I think the bottom 1/3 of their strike zone box might be just a hair low.

From what I saw (and I missed a few batters, because this was one of those games where I'd try to do something during an ad break, I'd come back 2 minutes later and there would already be two outs), Lester was pounding the bottom of the strike zone.

Two of Lester's 4 walks were of the 4-pitch variety. That seems pretty typical for him. But usually that's when you see him do that big agonizing walk around behind the mound. That wasn't there last night. He walked Aaron Hill on 4 pitches in the 7th. There were two outs, but in a scoreless ballgame it felt like it could be one of those situations where he becomes a little bit unglued. But he got right back on the rubber. Took a little bit longer than he had been to throw the next pitch, but not enough to cause the batter to step out. Came right back with a strike. One pitch, inning over. It was a well struck ball. The only OF out of the night in fact. I wonder how that AB might have gone if Overbey hadn't been hacking at the first pitch. Bottom line, though, Lester came back with a strike, and he got the out.

He actually followed all 4 of his walks with a first pitch strike (3 of them with a first pitch out). 3 of the 4 walks came with 2 outs. Walks are still walks, but Lester looked more aggressive last night than usual.

Which brings up a question: Why is it that the "pitcher of record" when the final lead-change is established is credited with a victory?

I know it's a tradition, but it's a stupid one. Last night's game was a perfect example of a pitcher who contributed the most to his team's victory being shut out of a decision.

I think the official scorer should have some leeway in awarding wins.

Another thread, perhaps?

Intriguing idea. Where would you draw the line, like if a SP came out after 7 scoreless, and his team scored the winning run in the ninth? I don't see any change in this area though.

WRT Lester's pitching pace, a poster over on SOSH wrote that Lester said he was actually trying to keep up with, or mimic Halladay. Of course, Doc is a notoriously fast worker. What I like about that is that it keeps the fielders on their toes, can't fidget or fall asleep between pitches.

he still doesn't throw enough strikes for me, but he did work much faster last nite.
Remy suggested that Halladay's efficiency sort of inadvertently forced Lester to pick it up as well, which I thought was a great point.

Under the Clyde Rules, could the scorer elect not to award a win to any pitcher in, say, a 10-9 ballgame in which the pitcher of record (under normal rules) was a reliever who gave up 3 runs in 2/3 of an inning?




Interesting thing about that...according to these rudimentary ump stats, last night's plate ump Bruce Dreckman is just about at the bottom of the league in strikeouts per game, and right in the middle of the pack in BBs per game so far this season.

Those numbers could mean lots of different things, especially this early in the season (he's had the plate for just 5 games)...but at first glance, it doesn't seem like he has an especially liberal strike zone.

The problem with relying on those aggregate umpire stats (and I've been trying to leverage them for years on and off) is that a wide zone doesn't necessarily result in more K's...hitters hack at worse pitches and make more outs (probably), but you don't necessarily see the impact of the umpire's strike zone in k-rate. Similarly, umps with a tight zone might not result in more BB's, as the pitchers need to throw more hittable pitches, which then...you guessed it, get hit.

The newer generation of pitch data looks to be WAY more promising, but I have yet to play with it. I have been keeping an umpire spreadsheet for years (the original version of which got lost in a hard drive crash after 2006...grr) in which I track the stats you mention as well as more qualitative analysis from watching games. What has been really striking to me is how little the actual K/BB trends differ between umps which seem to be very good and very bad.

Speaking of the new generation of pitch data, Ive been trying to delve into MLB Game Day and pitch f/x recently. I think the walks werent the result of poor control last night. His curveball was moving more than usual, perhaps. He was right around the zone all day, except for the curves, which were moving like crazy. I think his control was better than usual and that resulted in the improved results.

Looking at the four BBs on MLB Gameday: http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/gameday/index.jsp?g...tormlb_bosmlb_1

1) Walks Overbay in the 2nd - Was ahead in the count, missed with a curveball high. Missed with a high fastball.

2) Walked Vernon Wells in the 4th - First two pitches look to have been in the strikezone but were called balls. Nibbled a bit once he fell behind.

3) Walked Zaun in the 6th - Was right around the strikezone, threw four pitches all to the same spot. One curve, four fastballs. At least one the ump missed and the other could have been called strikes. They all ended in the same spot though, so I guess that was the book on Zaun - low and inside.

4) Walked Hill in the 7th - Barely missed with a couple, but walked him on four straight pitches.

He was right around the strikezone. If you look at these ABs I dont think you come away with the idea he's walking too many guys b/c of control problems.

That thought crossed my mind. Like I said, "at first glance." Knowing an ump's percentage of strikes and balls, as opposed to Ks and BBs, would be more useful. Having actual pitch data – and being able to compare an ump's balls/strikes to the objective strike zone would be better still.

At any rate, I didn't think from watching that Dreckman was extraordinarily generous. That's all subjective, though. It was noted earlier that Lester was getting calls up in the zone that he doesn't usually get. I didn't see that, but I saw a couple of generous calls on balls low and away to lefties. A couple calls during the game that got an "ooh that was close" out of me, but nothing on either side that had me inventing objects or tenses for the verb "to f***." That's my unscientific barometer for ump performance.

Without getting any further into that...I wonder, too, if pitching against a guy like Halladay – who is throwing strikes 65-70% of the time and probably getting umps to expand the zone slightly in the process – tends to help or hurt.

Obviously, from the standpoint of what Lester did, the talk is of how he tried to match Halladay's pace.

But from an umpiring standpoint, would the general tendency in games like this be that Halladay sets the strike zone (to a certain extent) that the other pitcher has to work with? Or is it the exact opposite, with opposing pitchers not getting some close calls that they otherwise might because they aren't working in the zone as much as Halladay does? Or is the pitching matchup a generally neutral factor in how a game is called?

Walks are still walks, but Lester looked more aggressive last night than usual.


I would say 24 called strikes out of 98 pitches was aggressive enough, and pretty damned good stuff!

My impression is that Jon's put on some weight & getting stronger - being in a game with Halladay and a locker room with DiceK and Beckett - all guys that expect to got 8-9 every time out?

Sounds like a program to me.

Some people have a point when they say after Lester gives up a walk he tends to start thinking too much and vastly slows he game down. To me, he pitched a pretty good game but still must keep his walks down some. I don't know if it is a league wide things with the umps having a tighter strike zone this year because it looks to me like walks are up all over baseball.

I hadn't thought of trying to look at the gameday data - this tells a much better story than just the location charts. Thanks for the link, and the analysis. Maybe with a different ump in there, those might not be walks.

Just a slight hunch, but I think this was his best game yet.

I can't believe he walked two guys tonight. What a useless ****ing scrub.

Way too many pitches

Nice bump! Unreal! So happy for him.

2 miles from home, anxious to watch the game on tivo...My brother inlaw sends me a text "Lester 8.2 to a no-no"

If I kill him will anyone convict me???

Might even have some volunteers to help you hide the body!!

My impressions:

1) Kudos to Jon, this was a HUGE achievement and a delightful exclamation point to his statement that he is a cancer survivor.
2) WAAAAY too many pitches. I fully expect a DL stint at some point his summer, probably by the end of June.

And to think that last Thursday there were plenty of good seats available for this game...and I didn't bite.

He will be getting an extra days rest in his next 2 starts.

Not to take anything, at all, away from what he accomplished tonight....

...but damn does playing a team like Kansas City come in handy. I have no idea how Lester wound up over 120 pitches or whatever. KC chased EVERYTHING. I guess even chasing everything, the pitches add up when you throw in 9 Ks and 2 BBs. But wow. I don't think "aggressive" is the right word for their approach. More like "stupid." He had all his pitches working, and he was throwing first pitch strikes, and he obviously deserves a ton of credit. But they helped him out a lot. A lot.

He'd better. As awesome as tonight is I hope it doesn't bite him in the a$$.

Is Varitek now tied for the record for most no-hitters caught (4)?

According to ESPN, Varitek now holds the record in the modern era (since 1900).

Ray Schalk of the White Sox caught no-nos in 1914(twice), 1917, and 1922.

Varitek has had 3 others go into the 9th:

Pedro in 2000 at the Trop
Wake in 2001 at the Trop
Schilling in 2007 at Oakland

Pretty amazing.

survivinggrady.com has some terrific footage of all the hugs and congrats from the coaches and teammates.....Terry Francona is just a magnificent human being..we are lucky to have this guy steering the ship. His hug with Lester made the eyes a little moist.

Pedro and Schilling both shook off Tek when their's got broken up.

Also, the front page of mlb.com has a 5 minute video of all 27 outs in case anyone missed it.

Tied for that, and also the only catcher to catch four different pitchers' nono's.

only a Red Sox fan could look for, much less find, the negative in this.

I know a guy who fixes sarcasm meters, cheap.

Its amazing the way this organization is now run. We have a stable of young talent that is reminiscent of the Big Red Machine.

Rookie of the Year and World Series Hero Dustin Pedroia made a great defensive play that saved young Ace Clay Buchholz' no hitter last season.

Early frontrunner for Rookie of the Year and World Series Hero Jacoby Ellsbury made a great defensive play that saved young Ace Jon Lester's no hitter this season.

That's also the best part of the success we're seeing... its only just the beginning.

All true, but that's usually how these things happen. CB no-hit the lowly O's, DLowe did it to the Rays, Nomo to the O's. Clemens' 20 K games came against the Tigers and M's, two lousy teams.

The most surprising part of last night's performance to me was the bump in velocity Lester seemed to get. I don't recall seeing him at 95 before and he seemed to hit that a number of times last night.

Word will now get around that he's pounding the zone on the first pitch and hitters will adjust. He and Tek will have to counter-adjust by adding a wrinkle here and there on the first pitch.

Holy mother of god that was awesome.

I'm still in a daze.

So, soon to be Mrs. Lockland understands that Red Sox games get first billing on the big TV, and she's a pretty good fan that doesn't mind watching a lot of games, which is nice. However, on Mondays if the Sox take a sizable lead or are getting killed, I just hit record and then we watch her Monday shows.

She could not understand why I was getting so insanely excited for every out with a 7 run lead, she was also curious why I hadn't cued up How I Met Your Mother for her.

Then it hit her and it was a really funny reaction, "Holy crap, screw Doogie Howser!"

Oh man, good times, good times indeed.

Exact quote from me after the 5th inning..."Oh cool, Lester has a no-no going" and of course after that inning (amid mentally slapping myself for that comment) the TV was switched over to GTA IV so my roomate could kill some people and Jon Lester could continue his no-no without any distractions from my loose lips. Thankfully, that seemed to balance the universe and he finished his no-no just before I switched back for the post game show. And to think, all the years I have played ball and I make a mistake like that. Thank god GTA IV came to the rescue.

One thing about last night, the key to his success, and it is not a mystery to any pitcher, first pitch strikes. If he could just do that more often he could very well jump from a number 3 or 4 guy at best to a decent number 2. All in all, it's a great accomplishment for the guy, and will hopefully elevate his confidence further so the Sox will get many more dominating performances from him over the season.

Curious, does he have "baseball mentality"? We're supposed to not talk about it even on Internet boards, as if we could influence a no hitter from here. Last year, a guy on SOSH mentioned Schilling's no hitter in a post in the sixth or seventh inning, and I thought others were going to hunt him down and tar and feather him. He no longer posts there either, maybe they killed him. Come to think of it, Schilling called the guy out in his blog.

Not having any TV for the game, I found out about the no-no when Charles Barkeley and crew mentioned it at halftime of the Spurs NO game, which I was watching delayed. Of course I then went and DVRd all the ESPN highlights. To Barkley's credit, he immediately said he was happy for Lester, being a recovering cancer victim. Later, he called it "half a no hitter" because it was KC. Oh well, that's Charles.

He posts there almost daily. (Lucen) Schilling made fun of him is jest though, not in a major way, but yea, he got sewered for a while over that.

guess I'm in the minority.
that "not talking about the no-hitter" thing seems incredibly stupid.... especially for the radio/TV people calling the game.
are they that arrogant to think what they say will impact what happens on the field?

I don't really believe in it either, and don't practice it at all.

The rational part of me knows there's nothing we do that affects what happens on the field (shy of tackling baserunners), but even so, why risk it? Even if it's ridiculous to even think it, it doesn't cost anything to just not say anything. It's kind of like a lot of dumb superstitions, and it's at least been observed historically.

Although listening to Orsillo and Remy say everything BUT 'no-hitter' last night got old after about the start of the 8th.