Well That Was Awesome...

Anyone get the number of that bus?

I'm of course talking about the Mets stellar outing yesterday at the Padres. Did anyone else see that one coming?

It is truly a sight watching a team set a record for runs in a game. It truly sucks, however, watching that record set against your pitchers. It's times like these that you need a quick mental exercise to take your mind off the joy of watching your team get shelled. Yesterday's game and the pitching performance of one reliever in particular got me thinking, would Newton have liked yesterday's game?

I say: absolutely! This has to deal with the baseball statistic ERA and Newton's first law of dynamics which states: An object in motion will stay in motion unless occupied by another force or something, you get the jist. So how would Newton find this funny?

Other than finding comedy in wondering what Jerry Hairston Jr's monster grand slam would have eventually crashed into had it been in a vacuum and undisturbed by the 3rd floor balcony in left field, Newton might find it funny considering just how far his first law of dynamics truly applies. Earned Run Average (ERA) is a simple thing to calculate and understand. You take a pitcher's total earned runs, divide it by their total innings, and multiply it by 9. Voila! You have, on average, how many runs a pitcher gives up per 9 innings they pitch. Simple, comprehendible, powerful.

But...what was Raul Valdes' ERA for last night? 4 earned runs, 0 innings pitched. Where art thou, high school algebra? That's an undefined or infinite ERA. Some baseball statisticians are quick to jump up and say ERA doesn't apply here, that infinite is an ERA that doesn't make sense, and that any pitcher worth noting has recorded at least one out. But I say nay! All you have to do is think of it like Newton would have.

An object in motion will stay in motion unless occupied by another force. Yep, that definitely applies. Think of it this way. An infinite ERA says if they had left Valdes in there he would have kept giving up runs forever. Last I checked there was no mercy rule, so theoretically it totally makes sense. The object, the Padres' run total, would have kept on keeping on, and I would have started watching Japanese baseball instead of the Mets.

Practically, though, this makes no sense. An out would have HAD to been recorded eventually. If not, Jerry Manuel, unless wanting his career at manager for the Mets to be "occupied by another force," would have pulled Valdes eventually. And even if those didn't happen still, the Padres may have begun getting out on purpose, for fear of pure exhaustion. Did I just stumble upon the next great baseball tactic? Give up an exhorbatant amount of runs in game 1. Let your players literally sleep in the field. Then take every subsequent game in the series. Brilliant!

All in all, this is nothing but a mind exercise, but something has to pass the time when your team is getting rocked. So next time one of your all-star relievers is having a "lotta runs, few outs" performance, just imagine them as floating on and on in a vacuum.

I'll leave it to you to pick what abruptly stops them.