Mystery Photo #7
by Score Bard
2006-08-21 9:25

Our seventh mystery photo comes courtesy of Cliff Corcoran. Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to help figure out the who/when/where of the photo.

Click on the image for a larger view.

Thanks for all who sent in photos this weekend. I have enought to keep us going another couple weeks. Nonetheless, please send in more. If you have any old (non-copyrighted) MLB photos that might suit this game, please email them to mystery At humbug .com.

Comments: 35
1.   Bob Timmermann
2006-08-21 09:28

1.  My initial guess (and it was wrong last time) is Houston at St. Louis.

2.   Bob Timmermann
2006-08-21 09:29

2.  It's also relatively early in the game since you can still see the lines in the batters boxes.

3.   Bob Timmermann
2006-08-21 09:30

3.  The bigger question is: Why was Cliff in St. Louis?

4.   mehmattski
2006-08-21 09:39

4.  I dunno, I'm thinking its the Nationals, not the Cardinals. The red letters on the jersey look more blockish, and I don't see teh characteristic birds on a baseball bat. Nats jersey here:

http://tinyurl.com/z52dd

5.   King of the Hobos
2006-08-21 09:42

5.  Mike Matheny wore 22, so if it is the Cardinals, the game occurred before 2000 or after 2004. The pitcher is pretty clearly 22, but what's the catcher? 19?

6.   Bob Timmermann
2006-08-21 09:42

6.  Well, I did say I could be wrong. Especially since the Cardinals haven't had a 22 pitching them for quite a while.

7.   yankz
2006-08-21 09:43

7.  No Cardinals pitchers on the current roster wear number 22, which I'm pretty sure is the pitcher's number. Another year? A DFA'd pitcher this year? Nationals after all?

8.   mehmattski
2006-08-21 09:43

8.  If its the Nationals, that narrows it down to 2005/2006. In 2005, John Patterson (#22) made a start against the Astros on July 24, going 8 innings:

http://tinyurl.com/eck4y

9.   Padgett
2006-08-21 09:43

9.  John Patterson is #22 for the Nats; that pitching motion is too similar for that not to be him.

http://washington.nationals.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/team/roster_40man.jsp?c_id=was

10.   Travis
2006-08-21 09:43

10.  #22 for the Nationals is John Patterson; #29 is Gary Bennett.

11.   King of the Hobos
2006-08-21 09:44

11.  John Patterson wears 22. Gary Bennett wore 29, so I'm guessing that's the battery.

12.   yankz
2006-08-21 09:44

12.  I'm starting to agree with post 4.

13.   yankz
2006-08-21 09:46

13.  Guzman at short?

14.   King of the Hobos
2006-08-21 09:46

14.  I think this is probably the game; http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/B07240WAS2005.htm

15.   Travis
2006-08-21 09:47

15.  #8 must have the game right. If so, the batter has to be Morgan Ensberg, the only Astro righty to bat with a runner on second.

16.   Travis
2006-08-21 09:48

16.  15 Correction: it could also be Humberto Quintero.

17.   Padgett
2006-08-21 09:54

17.  I think that's likely Ensberg. Quintero is a stout guy, listed at 5-9, 215, while Ensberg is five inches taller at about the same weight. Plus, Quintero (sometimes?) has some ankle armor.

18.   mehmattski
2006-08-21 09:55

18.  Patterson did not pitch in the four HOU at WAS games this year, so its gotta be 7/24/05. Palmeiro was on second with Ensberg up in both the first and third innings. It could also be Everett on second with Quintero at the plate (second inning). I agree with Bob that its early in the game, so those are the three choices.

19.   King of the Hobos
2006-08-21 09:55

19.  Ensberg:
http://www.astroasylum.com/files/images/Morgan%20ST9.jpg

Quintero:
http://houston.astros.mlb.com/images/2005/06/03/EWzbeJzN.jpg

In my opinion, the runner has Everett's frame, as he appears skinnier than the already small Guzman, although Palmeiro's not much larger.

20.   mehmattski
2006-08-21 10:00

20.  Yeesh. I've just set up perhaps the first unsolvable mystery:

Palmeiro singled and stole second in the first. Then he doubled in the third. Is it even possible to distinguish which situation this picture follows? At the very least, here's all the people:

AB: Morgan Ensberg
On Second: Orlando Palmeiro
Nats C: Gary Bennett
Nats 3B: Carlos Baerga
Nats SS: Cristian Guzman
Umps: HP Troy Fullwood,
2B James Hoye
3B Dana DeMuth
None of the 39203 fans.

Luckily Cliff cut out the third base ump so I don't have to do more digging like the last two...

21.   Padgett
2006-08-21 10:01

21.  Well, the possible innings are these, right?

ASTROS 1ST: Taveras grounded out (shortstop to first); Palmeiro
singled to center; Berkman popped to second; Palmeiro stole
second; Ensberg singled to third [Palmeiro to third]; Lamb flied
to right; 0 R, 2 H, 0 E, 2 LOB. Astros 0, Nationals 0.

ASTROS 2ND: Everett singled to center; Vizcaino popped to third;
Everett stole second; Quintero struck out; Rodriguez struck out;
0 R, 1 H, 0 E, 1 LOB. Astros 0, Nationals 0.

ASTROS 3RD: Taveras was called out on strikes; Palmeiro doubled
to right; Berkman flied to left; Ensberg was called out on
strikes; 0 R, 1 H, 0 E, 1 LOB. Astros 0, Nationals 0.

ASTROS 6TH: Berkman doubled to center; Ensberg flied to center
[Berkman to third]; Lamb hit a sacrifice fly to right [Berkman
scored]; Everett struck out; 1 R, 1 H, 0 E, 0 LOB. Astros 1,
Nationals 1.

I would say the last one is out; the runner on second doesn't look like Berkman.

22.   mehmattski
2006-08-21 10:01

22.  20 I meant third base coach, not ump. The ump is DeMuth.

Sadly, I doubt we can solve the 1st or 3rd inning mystery, unless we say that the batters' box would have been more destroyed by the third inning...

23.   Padgett
2006-08-21 10:03

23.  One distinction between the 1st and 3rd innings could be whether Palmeiro had to slide into second on his double. Does second base look like it just had a close play? I'm not sure.

24.   Mr Customer
2006-08-21 10:06

24.  23 If there was a slide on the double, it's definitely the first. Palmeiro's uniform is pretty clean.

25.   Cliff Corcoran
2006-08-21 10:07

25.  I'm not sure I can help distinguish the inning either. Perhaps tonight I can go through the other photos I took at the game to look for additional clues (assuming I took a bunch of photos in one inning and then put my camera away, which is what I typically do).

You guys, of course, got the game right. Perhaps the most boring game I've ever attended. Just brutally dull. I was hoping the Astros would pinch-hit Roger Clemens as the extra innings drudged on (they did pinch-hit Brandon Backe and the Nat's pinch ran Ryan Drese), but no luck. At least it was a beautiful day and I was sitting in a shady part of the upper deck with some good friends.

26.   mehmattski
2006-08-21 10:08

26.  24 Except that the stolen base was in the first, and almost certainly had a slide. Then again, Everett also stole second, so that doesn't really help.

27.   Cliff Corcoran
2006-08-21 10:09

27.  24 Quite possible. I know I took some photos before the game started, so I might have kept my camera out, snapped some action shots in the first and then put it away. But I can't say for sure.

Oh, and yes, I stayed for the whole thing.

28.   Travis
2006-08-21 10:23

28.  I just checked the archive on MLB.TV:

Palmeiro slid on his stolen base; his right pant leg is clearly dirty in both the first and third innings.
Both batter's boxes are still visible in the third inning.
Palmeiro didn't have to slide on his double.

29.   Padgett
2006-08-21 10:28

29.  I zoomed in Photoshop and noticed, albeit with a low degree of confidence, that:

(1) the runner seems to have a left ear flap;
(2) the batter seems to have sideburns;
(3) the batter seems to have a narrow stance;
(4) there appears to have been at least some action at third base.

Palmeiro's a lefty; Ensberg is clean shaven and has a fairly wide stance; and in the 1st no play had yet gone to third. Plus, the opposite batter's box looks more messy than if only two batters had used it (the case in the 1st).

Thus, I'm now for the Everett/Quintero situation in the 2nd.

30.   Bob Timmermann
2006-08-21 12:30

30.  But has Cliff ever been to St. Louis?

31.   Cliff Corcoran
2006-08-21 12:32

31.  Nope.

32.   Bob Timmermann
2006-08-21 12:41

32.  31

You can go there to watch the Yankees play Games 3 and 4 of the World Series this year.

33.   das411
2006-08-21 18:51

33.  Why would the (Mets/Dodgers/Astros/PHILLIES) be playing their home games in St. Louis Bob?

34.   Ravenscar
2006-08-21 23:54

34.  What if I said I thought it would HAVE to be the first inning, because the infield dirt is still wet from having been watered down? I think by the 3rd it wouldn't be that wet. For that reason, I say it's the 1st inning. Not only that, the spots that AREN'T wet would come from the little bit of running around in the first inning, otherwise the dirt would be more kicked up in the third.

I would like to say with confidence that I think it's the 1st inning of the aforementioned game and that I'm a smart monkey.

35.   Cliff Corcoran
2006-08-22 07:34

35.  I think 29 is better evidence that this is the second inning than 34 is that it's the first. Not that I, as the photographer, could honestly confirm or deny either.

Comments on this post are closed.
This is Ken Arneson's blog about baseball, brains, art, science, technology, philosophy, poetry, politics and whatever else Ken Arneson feels like writing about
Original Sites
Recent Posts
Contact Ken
Twitter

LinkedIn

Email: Replace the first of the two dots in this web site's domain name with an @.
Google Search
Web
Toaster
Ken Arneson
Archives
2021
01   

2020
10   09   08   07   06   05   
04   

2019
11   

2017
08   07   

2016
06   01   

2015
12   11   03   02   

2014
12   11   10   09   08   04   
03   01   

2013
12   10   08   07   06   05   
04   01   

2012
12   11   10   09   04   

2011
12   11   10   09   08   07   
04   02   01   

2010
10   09   06   01   

2009
12   02   01   

2008
12   11   10   09   08   07   
06   05   04   03   02   01   

2007
12   11   10   09   08   07   
06   05   04   03   02   01   

2006
12   11   10   09   08   07   
06   05   04   03   02   01   

2005
12   11   10   09   08   07   
06   05   04   03   02   01   

2004
12   11   10   09   08   07   
06   05   04   03   02   01   

2003
12   11   10   09   08   07   
06   05   04   03   02   01   

2002
12   10   09   08   07   05   
04   03   02   01   

1995
05   04   02