Eric Cammack should get major league win

[Joe Rigatoni]

I was watching Mets Classics the other day on SNY and they showed the
10 run bottom the eighth miraculous comeback win against the Braves on
June 30,2000 to turn a 8-1 deficit into a 11-8 win.I remember Eric Cammack
got the win and I saw him pitching the top of the eighth of this game and it's
been a while since I heard his name so I was curious about his lifetime stats.
I remember him pitching in 2000 for the Mets and I remember he wasn't on the
2000 Mets postseason roster but I was curious if he pitched in other years with the Mets and if he pitched for other major league teams as well.
So I went to baseball-reference.com and I was surprised to see that his
lifetime record was 0-0.How could that be if he got a win in this game?
So then I went to baseball-reference.com and clicked on box scores and I
saw that on June 30,2000 Armando Benitez got the win and Terry Mulholland
got the loss.The winning pitcher is incorrect as Eric Cammack got the win and
Armando Benitez got the save.Even though Cammack pitched poorly to say the least in pitching 1 inning in this game and giving up 3 runs Cammack still
should have got the win.This would be significant if you were him as Cammack's lifetime record should be 1-0 not 0-0.And no,I am not Eric Cammack's cousin.(lol).Well,at least baseball-reference.com acknowledged
that Cammack with the bat was 1 for 1 lifetime with a triple and a rbi.
And SNY showed the final linescore on the screen after they showed the
game as they correctly noted that Cammack got the win,Mulholland got
the loss,and Benitez got the save.Tom Seaver and Gary Thorne called that
game.So if baseball-reference.com becomes aware of my request I hope they
would rightfully change it so that it shows Eric Cammack's lifetime record is
1-0 not 0-0.Eric,I'm looking out for you,buddy.(lol).I got your back.(lol).

Grote said to Koosman:"You don't give up any runs,we'll guarantee you
at least a tie."(lol)

[theAmazingMet]

Wow! BBR is usually spot on with stats. I remember this game, but don't remember Cammack getting the win. I remember Cammack, just not if he got the win. If you say he did I believe you, and the fact that BBR got his stats wrong now makes me question the validity of their stats. BTW do you have a link to the boxscore?

[Joe Rigatoni]

Wow! BBR is usually spot on with stats. I remember this game, but don't remember Cammack getting the win. I remember Cammack, just not if he got the win. If you say he did I believe you, and the fact that BBR got his stats wrong now makes me question the validity of their stats. BTW do you have a link to the boxscore?

Unfortunately,I don't know how to do the link but if you go to
www.baseball-reference.com then click on box scores then click on the
year 2000 then click on June 30 you would see the box score.
Thank you for your interest.I really appreciate it.

Grote said to Koosman:"You don't give up any runs,we'll guarantee you
at least a tie."(lol)

[metfan13]

Official scorer may have changed it after the game. They have some leeway, especially in crazy games like this to not give a win to an ineffective pitcher.

[VIBaseball]

That is in fact what happened:

"Armando Benitez (2-3) pitched the ninth inning and was credited with a victory by the official scorer, who ruled that the rookie Eric Cammack -- who had been the last pitcher before the game-turning outburst, did not deserve the decision."

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/07/01/sp...sturbance.html

[Macker]

But the rules don't allow what the scorer did. The bit about not pitching effictively applies only when the starter did not pitch at least 5 innings. Otherwise, there are a whole lot of underserved wins out there, such as this one by Mitch Williams --

http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1...110ATL1993.htm

[ipitch]

But the rules don't allow what the scorer did. The bit about not pitching effictively applies only when the starter did not pitch at least 5 innings.

Wouldn't this apply?

EXCEPTION: Do not credit a victory to a relief pitcher who is ineffective in a brief appearance, when a succeeding relief pitcher pitches effectively in helping his team maintain the lead. In such cases, credit the succeeding relief pitcher with the victory.

[Macker]

Wouldn't this apply?

No. The way the rules read on mlb.com, it would appear the scorer's had the leeway to make that decision. However, that is a recent change. The 1993, 2005 & 2007 rules all indicate the scorer would have discretion in awarding the win only in those games in which the starter did not pitch five innings.

The currents rules have notes that 'brief' is less than one inning, and Cammack went one inning in the game in question.