Talk:José Bautista

2016 Season - Rangers Brawl - "Intending to break up a double play?"

This sentence is misleading and merits further consideration. Bautista, by his own admission, was sliding hard into Odor in retalation for being hit by the Bush pitch.

“I could have hit him,” Bautista said. “I could have hurt him. I chose not to. My cleats were down. I slid through the bag. Was it late? Yes, a hundred percent. But what can I do after they hit me? Should I ask my manager to let me pitch, which he is never going to let me do? Like, what am I supposed to do? Just sit there and take it?” Thoughts on this? I know the topic is controversial, but to say his intention was to break up a double play is pretty disingenious. He's quoted several times stating it was an immediate and intentional response to the hit by pitch. I feel the summary fails to accurately depict the situation and events which lead up to the altercation. - Pyrex238 (talk) 17:46, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Speaking as a retired umpire, no doubt about it,that was a hard slide but not a dirty one. There was no attempt by Bautista to spike Odor and a slide to break up a double play IS standard operating procedure and has been for decades. There is a new rule this year that is designed to give some protection to the fielder making the pivot/throw to first. The umpire made the correct call and the DP was recorded even though Odor's throw was yards wide of first base. Regards,   Aloha27  talk  17:52, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

We're both on the same page that it was a hard slide into second base. However, the purpose of the edit is due to a presumption of intent. As Bautista stated himself it was retaliation for the hit by pitch. My suggested edit would simply remove the aforementioned intent.

from:

"Two batters later, Bautista, intending to break-up a double play, made an illegal slide into second base and made contact with Rougned Odor."

to:

"Two batters later, Bautista made an illegal slide into second base and made contact with Rougned Odor."

or:

"In response, Bautista made an illegal slide into second base and made contact with Rougned Odor." I would prefer the first suggestion, as it is entirely impartial. However, if there is a consensus on the above quote, one might prefer to the second quote which ties in with the aforementioned HBP, and has better contextual flow. I believe either alteration better communicates the events leading up to the brawl, and makes the situation easier to understand. - Pyrex238 (talk) 18:00, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Even though the slide was ruled illegal, IMO the wording is still a tad harsh. 100 seasons plus before the Chase Utley rule, that slide was perfectly legal, and just reflecting a guy who plays hard, yet has no ill intent. A guy like Bautista whose been around for as long as he has doesn't just unlearn overnight a behavior based on a splet second decision. The sentence as it is now has a possible implication that Bautista was trying to hurt Odor, which I very seriously doubt, just as Chase Utley didn't intend to break that Mets player's leg. Terry Foote (talk) 18:24, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Although I completely agree with you that the new slide rule is excessive, and that Bautista's slide was not gratuitous or malicious toward Odor, omitting "illegal" would further confuse the next sentence and the explanation of the proceeding suspension. The slide, by defintion of MLB, was illegal, which resulted in the suspension. My only proposed edit is to remove "intending to break-up a double play," which, by the above quote, directly contradicts both Bautista's account, and the escalation of the situation. - Pyrex238 (talk) 18:29, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

I heard Bautista say that he was trying to send a message that he didn't like pitchers throwing at him, and he sent that message to Odor. BUT, he was doing this while at the same time doing a very routine thing runners do to break-up double plays, so I think that's a safe presumption. What else has Bautista said about this? How about something to the effect of, "while attempting to break-up a double play, Bautista made what turned out to be an illegal slide into....." ?Terry Foote (talk) 18:39, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Okay, your response reinforces my original edit that the slide into second base was in response to being hit by a pitch, as you put it, to "send a message." It seems we're all on the same page. The slide into second base was illegal, but all accounts, I don't believe any of us dispute that. I had no intention of editing that portion out. My proposed edit was simply to remove "to break-up a double play," as by all accounts presented so far (Bautista's statements above, your interpretation, my interpretation) the intent was not to break up a double play, but was a response to being hit by the pitch. - Pyrex238 (talk) 18:43, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

I think Bautista meant to send a message AND break-up a double play. The first is Bautista's style, the second turned out to be an illegal slide, which is not his style. IMO, of course. Terry Foote (talk) 18:45, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't have any objection to that. Maybe the inclusion of part of the above quote from Bautista would best serve to explain the emotions and intent of the event? the "In Response" proposal would seem to best tie the two together.

"In response, Bautista made a hard slide into second base and made contact with Rougned Odor." My only concern is the later sentence explains Bautista was suspended, however, there is no specific reason for such a suspension. The primary reason for the suspension, and the reason "part in" was used, is specifically due to the illegal slide into second base, which was Bautista's second violation of the new rule. - Pyrex238 (talk) 18:53, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

The "send a message" I heard Bautista himself say it while watching Sports Center, or something like that. I can scour around the web for a quote and a source if you think that would be helpful. I know it seems like knitpicking, but Bautista is a player of the old-school, and I get the impression that the press paint him and Utley out to be Ty Cobb like players who sharpen their spikes before a game, just looking for a reason to hurt someone. "Illegal slide" just has the baggage of a dirty play, which again, IMO, it wasn't. However I can see why Odor was angry. Terry Foote (talk) 19:00, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

I screw up links, so my apologies up front. Here's a link from "The Atlantic" of all places, confirming the "send a message" part of Bautista's slide http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2016/05/baseball-unwritten-rules/483141/ Terry Foote (talk) 19:07, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

References

Jewish?

Not sure this is newsworthy or relevant but I've read that Jose Bautista is Jewish, which is highly unusual for a Dominican (whose last name means "Baptist"). His father was Dominican and his mother was Israeli. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.118.213.209 (talk) 16:59, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

José Bautista is NOT a utility player

José Bautista currently leads the league in homeruns. A utility player he is no longer --Illuminati hater (talk) 23:35, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

When was he playing third base because Encarnacion was injured? Not anytime since July 20 I don't think. Encarnacion had a 9 game hitting streak going into last night. 02:23, 28 July 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.226.71.144 (talk)

Yes, calling Jose Bautista a "utility player" betrays a terrible lack of knowledge about baseball. 99.245.37.46 (talk) 14:07, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Saying that he's not a utility player betrays a terrible lack of knowledge of the term "utility player". -Dewelar (talk) 02:45, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Please propose a better disambiguating term to consider for a page move. My choice of fielder wasn't particularly good, and though I'm not fond of the current title, no other viable alternative has been presented to date. Mindmatrix 16:22, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

The problem is that Bautista doesn't play just one position. According to his Baseball-Reference page, he has most frequently played third base, but this season he has mostly played in the outfield, so using one position of the other wouldn't necessarily be accurate.

One option would be to revert to using José Bautista (baseball, born 1980), which was a previous title of this page. Another option might be to call the page José Bautista (outfielder/infielder), which is something I've seen used on other pages. I'm not sure either of those any better than the current title either, though. -Dewelar (talk) 16:29, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I would be in favour of either keeping "utility player" until he builds up a preponderance of work in the outfield, or using birthdate, which we don't have to switch at a later date. If we switch this one to birthdate, we should probably switch the pitcher as well, as they should be distinguished from one another on the same basis. Canada Hky (talk) 17:12, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, if this one is changed to birthdate, the other would have to be also. -Dewelar (talk) 17:14, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

The term "utility player" is widely misunderstood, which is where the problem lies. Most fans (including the "knowledgeable") think of a part-time player when they hear the term, and I would very much be in favor of changing the title of this article, even to something as simple as "José Bautista (baseball player)". Almost anything would be an improvement. Freshfighter9^talk 19:16, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, this seems like a much more viable option than keeping it the way it currently is. Objective44 (talk) 03:09, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

I've posted a link to this discussion over at WP:BASEBALL to see if there's consensus to move the page or keep it here. -Dewelar (talk) 03:58, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Jose Bautista (slugger)?  ;) FWIW, in the hockey project, when we need secondary disambiguation, we use birth year. So, Jose Bautista (baseball b. 1980) for this article, and José Bautista (baseball b. 1964) for the other. Ugly, but helps avoid questions of improper disambig titles. Resolute 02:50, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

The consensus over at the baseball project seems to be to keep it where it is for now, pending further developments. If Bautista winds up staying in the outfield next season, the page will probably be moved to "(outfielder)", which I think we all agree would be better. If he winds up back at third base or moves to first base or something, then the birth date seems to be the one that's at least minimally acceptable to everyone. OTOH, if his career ends due to a fluke injury or something between now and then, then utility player pretty well describes his overall career arc, so it can be left here. -Dewelar (talk) 03:10, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Again, what is wrong with the title 'utility player?' Even his description in the first part of the article just seems dumb. Utility player perfectly describes him. Please note the difference between utility and bench players...I really think the term should be used in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Infernocow (talk • contribs) 15:51, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

This is funny

"The 50th homerun by jose was done in september 23 2010.Jose is expected to hit 53 homeruns by the end of the season by his paste."

I will now say a prayer for the English language, which has passed on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Undervenued (talk • contribs) 18:25, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Bautista's position should most definately no be infield/outfield. congrats, you've just stated that he plays every single position except pitcher and catcher. His primary positions are rf and 3b. This edit of mine was changed earlier, and i truly can't understand why. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.115.133.106 (talk) 21:26, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect Photo on this page

I just clicked on the site, and the first thing I saw is a picture to the right that shows clearly the number 23 on the shirt. Jose Baustista's number is 19. That begs the question .... where is Jose Bautista ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.198.8.58 (talk) 04:57, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

His number last year was 23. It's just an old picture —Preceding unsigned comment added by Undervenued (talk • contribs) 18:22, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Request for Updated Picture

The picture is outdated, it says he is number 23 here, he is number 19 now, so his picture should represent it. Request for it to be changed ( I don't know how). Here is a suggestion: http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/2010/writers/joe_lemire/08/04/jose.bautista/jose-bautista-getty2.jpg Although I'm sure someone can dig up a better picture. Cheers.173.34.129.168 (talk) 06:08, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Images used on Wikipedia must be clearly licenced for such use. The image to which you link is copyrighted and unacceptable. Essentially, it'll require someone to post to Wikimedia Commons a photograph they took, and indicate that it is licenced for use here. Images found on the internet whose provenance is unknown are considered unacceptable. (Specifically, details such as the time, date, and photographer must be known.) Mindmatrix 14:38, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I do think we need a new picture. Obviously the bat flip would be nice, but that is copywrited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ljk3000 (talk • contribs) 15:50, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Move?

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. Jafeluv (talk) 11:18, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

---

José Bautista (utility player) → José Bautista —

• Per talk at mets=y|bluejays=yes#José Bautista redux (which follows talk at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Baseball/Archive_22#José Bautista where we had no consensus) regarding the poor disambiguator of (utility player), we'd like to move the players page over the disambiguation page, as he is the more notable of the two, and a disambiguation page isn't needed when there are only two cases to disambiguate Muboshgu (talk) 14:11, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
• Support Following this past season, I believe this player has raised his profile enough to warrant being the primary article for this topic. The fact that it also solves the naming issue is a bonus. -Dewelar (talk) 00:41, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
• Support Don't know much about baseball, but there's not generally much harm in picking a primary topic out of just two, and if it allows us to avoid the "utility player" disambiguator (whatever it may mean), that makes the idea look even better.--Kotniski (talk) 11:24, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
• Support per above. Wknight94 ^talk 15:24, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Stats

I believe the practice of reflected all the ballplayer's season stats, as here, is a deprecated one. Shouldn't they, then, be removed from this article, where they appear in tabular form? Thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 05:05, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 October 2016

The intro's last paragraph starts with "Since 2010, Bautista has hit at least 27 home runs each year..." In 2016 he unfortunately didn't reach 27 so that statement doesn't hold true anymore. He hit 22 which doesn't exactly have the same appeal as 27+ so perhaps this whole statement regarding his home run totals needs to be re-structured.

142.204.27.132 (talk) 19:13, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

 Done Someone beat me to it. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:05, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 January 2017

The 2017 salary information does not indicate the fact that the values are in US dollars (vs Canadian dollars). See http://www.cbc.ca/sports/baseball/mlb/jose-bautista-contract-blue-jays-1.3940896 for confirmation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.97.196.17 (talk • contribs)

Not done: Despite the fact that he plays for a Canadian team, I think it is implied that the value is in USD, as no dollar amount in the rest of the article specifies it. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:10, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on José Bautista. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121013122106/http://tsn.ca/mlb/story/?id=375348 to http://tsn.ca/mlb/story/?id=375348

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:24, 28 April 2017 (UTC)