Effectively Wild: A FanGraphs Baseball Podcast - Effectively Wild Episode 2027: The First Half of the Season, Summed Up

Episode Date: July 1, 2023

Ben Lindbergh and Meg Rowley attempt to create a hierarchy of highlights, then (21:36) mark the midpoint of the regular season by reviewing the most salient storylines of the first half, the teams and players who’ve most underperformed or overperformed their preseason projections, and what they’re most looking forward to in the second half, plus […]

Oh Tony, le stat blast, le beef boy est so chouette Les avis pétantes, et super, une fête Je pense que c'est effectivement cool Je pense que c'est effectivement wild Effectivement sauvage Effectivement Sauvage. Effectivement Sauvage. Hello and welcome to episode 2027 of Effectively Wild, a Fangraphs baseball podcast brought to you by our Patreon supporters.

I'm Meg Raleigh of Fangraphs and I'm joined as always by Ben Lindberg of The Ringer. Ben, how are you? I'm doing well. How are you? I'm all right. Well, we have reached the halfway point of the 2023 regular season. Sort of snuck up on us, maybe sort of snuck up on a lot of people. Here on this podcast, we consider the first half, or at least I consider the first half to be the literal first half of the schedule, as opposed to pre-All-Star break. All-Star break, it's a handy way to distinguish between before and after, but it's not halves. It's just not. I'm sorry. It's somewhat close to halves, but it's not halves. So we can be more precise. We are exactly halfway, I guess, just infinitesimally past the halfway point. We have had 1,216 of the scheduled 2,430 regular-scene games, so that's 50.04% of the way through the season. We couldn't be any closer to the halfway point as we record on Friday,

through the season. We couldn't be any closer to the halfway point as we record on Friday. So figured we could do a little state of the season or retrospective on the first half for at least part of this episode, but it's a milestone. We should mark it. Yeah. Like here we were trying to get people to stop using quarter pole incorrectly and a graver, more pervasive misapplication of a word was just like sitting there the whole time. So, yeah, it would be maybe computationally more difficult. I don't know. Maybe it wouldn't. But it's kind of consistent to say it's the All-Star break every season, except that the All-Star game is on different dates and at different percentages.

So there's no perfect way to do it. But let's be pedantic and say that we are halfway through the season, even though we just got the All-Star announcements. I did have one thing to bring up before we get to that. I was watching a couple just extremely pretty slides from the past day or two. Jose Ramirez stole home. Yeah, he did. And it was really pretty, just a beautiful slide. They stole most of that game, didn't they? Yeah. But that play was really nice. He sort of slid toward the outside of the plate and just got that hand in there. And then there is an even prettier slide that Ben Clemens wrote about, which was a Matt Verling slide for the Tigers. And this one was just glorious. He was running to second, he doubled. And I don't know that he took an optimal path to the bag unless he had this whole thing planned out, but he sort of ran past it. He overslid almost and didn't even really touch the bag on the initial slide. And then he went past the bag, and then he managed to

raise his hand over Marcus Simeon's glove swipe. The ball definitely got there before Vierling did, and Simeon just sort of put his glove where Vierling's body would have been if he had just done a standard slide. And instead, Vierling did a, oh, now you see me, now you don't, you can't catch me, I'm too fast. And he just raised his hand and then Semyon's hand and glove just swiped air and Verling put his glove down. I'll link to this. It's obviously more entertaining if you can watch it as opposed to hearing me describe it probably. But these were both just beautiful slides and it made me question my personal hierarchy of highlights, because I've always thought that fielding highlights, defensive highlights were my favorite. I've said that

in the past, probably that I think hockey highlights might be my favorite highlights in all sports. It's watching pretty goals once you can sort of slow them down enough to actually see what happened. I was going to say, way to brag about being able to follow hockey. Yeah. But right next to that, right after that, 1A, if hockey highlights and scoring highlights are one, are catches, I think, in baseball. Those are just, you know, web gems are my favorite, I've thought, historically. But now this is making me question everything because a pretty slide actually might be better than a pretty catch in my mind.

It's close, but I just wanted to put this to you. If we say that there are five main categories of highlights, putting aside just silly stuff and bloopers and players embarrassing themselves in one way or another, but actually performance highlights where someone's doing something good. You could probably divide that into batting highlights, pitching highlights, fielding highlights, throwing highlights. You could include throwing within fielding, but I'm going to say those are different things. Fielding is like catching and throwing is throwing. And then base running. So batting, pitching, fielding, throwing, base running. How would we collaboratively rank those highlights?

would we collaboratively rank those highlights um okay wait we have to talk about the fielding versus throwing distinction that you're drawing here because some highlights are i guess well maybe i phrase the question this way can highlights occupy multiple categories i'm gonna say no because there are fielding highlights that start as, oh, I've caught it. And then, oh, I've thrown it. Yeah, so kind of a combo. Yeah. What do you do with that, Ben? Well, I don't know.

Maybe those highlights are the best because they're combining multiple categories. But if we had to separate it and keep it to only one category. Right. That's a cheat. You could say like batting turns into base running, right? That Verling highlight, he had to get a hit to have the slide. Yeah, but I think that the distinction is clearer. I guess what descriptive power does separating throwing from fielding broadly give us i'm being pedantic about your pedantic categories like a really fun party guest gotta define the categories before we can rank them yeah i'm just i'm just fielding

obviously it encompasses throwing i mean a fielder has to throw, but those are such different genres so many plays that are just a catch with no throw or just a throw with no catch. Or really, like if you think of the great throwing plays, like some of them might include both. Like Willie Mays, let's say, like part of it was the catch and the throw. let's say like a part of it was the catch and the throw but but a lot of them are just like the unicess but it's or the each row or some of those just like laser throws it's hard for me even to remember what preceded them it was just a hit right and they retrieved it and it wasn't even a catcher a spectacular catch or anything so those just seem like different sort of skills to me. They use different parts of your body, different tools. You could be great at catching and not so great at throwing and vice versa. So maybe it's arbitrary, but it gives us five categories,

which is satisfying. So if we were to separate those, I see your point. So if we were to separate those, I see your point. I'll grant the premise. I'm just, you know, I'm probing, asking questions about the nature of the categories, if only so that I can understand how we distinguish them and thus rank them appropriately. If you could include both under the umbrella of fielding, if fielding got catching and throwing, I think that's an easy number one. I mean, that's your stat at that point, right? Because those are two of the best kinds of highlights. So I think if we separate them, maybe it's more competitive. Maybe there's a less obvious

number one overall. So like, what's your number one? I would have said fielding. That historically has been – and by fielding, I mean just catching. I love a good catch. I love a home run robbery. I love just laying out just a shoe top catch. I love just a Superman flying to the side lateral catch. I love over the head, no look kind of catch at Jim Edmonds. There's just so, you know,

running up the wall, running through the wall, coming in, going back. There's so many just incredible. And that's maybe the most obvious display of athleticism in some kinds of athleticism, at least. So I think fielding slash catching, that has been my number one. I'm questioning it now that I'm seeing so many beautiful slides. Like a really beautiful slide combines a lot of different types of athleticism too. I guess fielding, you probably get tags with fielding, I think. Because that's not throwing so fielding probably gets to sure it's the catch gets to count tags too and a pretty tag a javi baez type tag that can be

great too although i think avoiding a tag is more satisfying than applying a tag even if it's really applying a pretty tag, it's still better to do the defying gravity, like jumping over the glove or sliding over the part of the plate that is uncovered or doing a deke and confusing the fielder. That to me is still better than just tacking, I think. Here's a thing for us to consider. How much does the relative rarity of the highlight matter versus the aesthetic quality, shall we say, of the highlight? Because bounty works against pitching highlights and hitting highlights for that matter, because we have such a volume of them. Even the really spectacular ones seem to occur more often than a really, really wonderful slide

or even a great tag or a throw. I still am uncomfortable with the distinction we're drawing here. I feel like we're separating out little throws in a way that we don't really need to. But even still, I think that it is a rarer event. And so that does sort of drive an appreciation for it that a really well-struck home run maybe even doesn't. Yes. Home Run maybe even doesn't because I get that there is a difference between, say, a wall scraper and something that's like 10 rows deep and something that leaves the ballpark, right? Or I think that my favorite genre, I don't know if I'm going to stand by this statement, but I'm going to try it out and see how it feels. I wonder if my favorite genre of Home Run how it feels. I wonder if my favorite genre of home run highlight isn't even the like exiting the ballpark one, although that is so satisfying, but like the big clang on something home run,

you know, like when it's running into something, it's almost more satisfying, right? Like the, it's almost more satisfying right like the whenever anything hits the western metal supply company facade at peco like that's great or like if it clangs off a a foul pole that stays fair or it it thunks against a scoreboard those ones they're like there's something extra to them but i think that if a if a home run doesn't leave the ballpark or almost leave the ballpark you get diminishing highlight returns on even the ones that are like really rocketed out there you know once you've cleared the like first five ten rows threshold of a home run you know you you really have to do something for it to be like, whoa. Right. Yeah. Sam used to argue that home runs are the most overrated highlight or the least interesting highlight, I guess, because of the lack of suspense. It's gone. You know,

it's gone. You just watch it go unless it's just a wall scraper. Right? So I don't totally agree with that. I think that's maybe a minority opinion as I think he has conceded, but I see the point. It's just such an impactful play that it's exciting in the moment whenever it happens because, hey, a run scored, maybe multiple runs scored, but it's true watching it after the fact. It's not always super exciting unless it's like an edge case or it's just a titanic clout that you just marvel at, as you said, if it leaves the stadium or something. So yeah, I wouldn't say even necessarily that a home run is the most exciting batting highlight. Although if you talk about other exciting batting highlights like triples, let's say, well, is that actually an exciting batting highlight? Not really, right? It's an exciting base running highlight, I think, which again, it comes down to, can we draw that

distinction? But the actual hitting of the triple is not all that interesting. It might not even look off the bat any different from a double, right? It's just that the base runner and, you know, maybe sometimes it's the fielder screwing up, but it's the running part of that that's so exciting. I guess you could say the same about bunting, potentially. I think a well-executed bunt is nice, is aesthetically pleasing, but it also does come down to can you beat it out right and that's more of a pace running so again it's hard to maybe draw these distinctions but but you're right that some of these are scarcer than others although obviously if we're just thinking of the genre i guess we don't need to consider that if you look up your favorite base running highlights or your favorite fielding highlights you're gonna get plenty them, even if they are fewer and further between.

I think that my answer involves base running now. I think that as we sit here today, my answer is base running highlights are my favorite, but I'm not letting go of the scarcity idea. I do think that a lot of that has been appreciating those singular moments more in an era of lower stolen base rolls. And you don't have to steal a base to have an exciting base running highlight, to be clear. Those are not, the Venn diagram isn't a perfect circle. And I do think that a lot of them take place within the context of base stealing.

So I think we're going to see more cool stuff, which is exciting, And I do think that a lot of them take place within the context of base stealing. So I think we're going to see more cool stuff, which is exciting, but maybe diminishes the individual value of any given base running highlight. But as we sit here today, I think base running probably, and then maybe fielding in its amalgam, including tags. And then probably, probably hitting and then pitching. Why do we have to choose between our children? You know, that's a question we could ask ourselves also. Yeah, wouldn't want baseball to be devoid of any one of these categories.

But I am leaning that way too. Base running, I think base running maybe has leapfrogged fielding for me. And maybe it is because there's just more base stealing going on, which means more fun slides. So I'm going to go base running number one, assuming that I can count the base running component of hits. If hitting highlights, batting highlights are what happens in the batter's box and base running is everything after that. I think that that's fair. Here's maybe part of why I, just to return to my previous comment, like, you know, I think that the way we want to think about them is like, how are they defined in terms of role, right? So like, we have hitters,

we have base runners, we have pitchers, we have fielders, you know? And like all of those. Now, there are times when in the rulebook, I think they're described as the runner hitter. But like, that's because the rulebook wants to be popular with Gen Z and embrace the notion of a liminal space, you know? that's really what's motivating that yeah right or batter runners yeah but right batter runner yeah yeah so so we're we're sort of artificially separating those perhaps here but i think i'm going base running and then i'm going fielding because a great catch is still great and And then I'm thinking throwing or pitching, right? Those are sort of the same action, except that one I'm talking about pitchers and one

I'm talking about defenders, other defenders, fielders who are not pitchers, non-pitcher fielders, very clear. I'm talking about non-pitcher position players obviously have to define this in great detail. Throwing to a base, throwing someone out. Catchers, too. We're getting more base stealing attempts, and so we get more throws from catchers. Like Bo Naylor's incredible play. Oh, yeah.

That was, I guess, a catch and then a throw. But the fact that he got the throw off and that it was a successful throw, if people didn't see this, I will link to this too. But it was a pitch out, which is a great rarity these days. But the throw just sailed and he had to reach up and stab to catch it and then do a spin and basically like a no look, no scope throw to second and somehow got Nicky Lopez. That was an incredibly athletic play. So that was great. I think I'm going to go pitching third, though. Just like, you know, the whole pitching gif culture.

Maybe there's just too much of it now. There's too much of it now. but yeah but there are a lot of really pretty pitches pitches just they move so much these days and I like the reactions that the pitchers have after a whiff after a strikeout like a slow mo and then you get like an occasional knuckleball, which is beautiful. You get the spin rate, the ultra slow-mo rotation on these things and the overlays and it more special, but also means you're just not going to get as many. Most throws just aren't that close, aren't that competitive. And then batting, yeah, I think batting highlights would be at the bottom for me. I still like them.

Still like batting. Definitely need to keep batting. But I would rather watch a montage of all the other kinds of highlights probably before batting highlights if we're stripping out the rest of the play, essentially, what happens after the actual swing and the contact. I think that's defensible. I mean, look, they're all good. They're highlights. It's like in the name right there. But I think that that's defensible. Maybe I'm persuaded. Okay.

All right. Well, let us know if your rankings differ or if you quibble with our categories. Listeners are going to be like, I'm definitely going to email them to quibble so they talk about the subtle distinctions between these categories more because what we really need is that. Right. Yeah. We broke it down into five very broad categories here. And perhaps that was too many as it was. But you could break it down even further.

I mean, each of these five categories could have subcategories. You could talk about which types of throws are best and which types of catches are best and which types of base running plays are best. It's just a whole wealth of highlights out there that we could classify perhaps on a future episode, but we have established the broad parameters here. All right. So we're halfway through the season and I guess we can do a few things here. I have compiled some stats on the teams that have fallen furthest short of their projections and outplayed their projections

by the most, and then I have done the same for players. So I guess you could call those the surprise and disappointing teams and players, but maybe we could also just broadly discuss the best storylines of the first half of the season so far, all of which we obviously will have spent a good

amount of time talking about. But is there kind of a defining story of the first half for you or a highlight, not in the way that we were just talking about highlights, but in terms of narrative highlights. I think that for me, and we've already talked at length about how surprising or whatnot these individual teams are

and sort of the gradations between them. So I don't need to belabor at that point. But I really think that for me, it is the emergence, even if we don't expect sort of permanence in the case of all of them, of young, recently rebuilding clubs sort of taking a step forward and not just being in wildcard contention, but often leading their divisions and really sort of staking out a spot for themselves in the competitive landscape. I think we do want there to be consistent powerhouses

season over season. I think that there is narrative value within the sport to the Dodgers and the Yankees and the Astros of it all, the Braves of it all, right? I think that you want that as part of your sort of narrative engine to your understanding of baseball. And I think that those teams being consistently very good over the years has sort of other value to the sport in terms of how, you know, aspiring clubs think about team building and spending and whatnot. And I think the race should probably be on that list. Excuse me, race. Sorry, Jeff. terms of how you know aspiring clubs think about team building and spending and whatnot and i think

the the race should probably be on that list excuse me sorry jeff sorry sorry you know sorry um it's not like a pointed thing it's just he's busy um but i i also think that as we've discussed before like part of what fuels continued interest in the sport is having a sense, however, you know, sort of wispy and, and, and sort of fleeting it might be at times, but having a sense, if you're a fan of a club that isn't one of those pillars that your team can be in it, that you can spend your way or draft your way or develop your way toward a competitive roster and having real evidence of that churn I think is is valuable and it's it's exciting like we talk every off season as we approach opening day about how like we we have the the preseason projections and we

tend to get a lot of things right, at least directionally when it comes to those, but it would be really boring if we had a perfect sense of what the season is going to look like on opening day. And so it's good for there to be surprise and movement and energy. And I think particularly when you look at a team like say the Reds, where the off season narrative around their ownership group was such a bummer for their fans, right. To have a young, exciting team for that, you know, fan base to, to get invested in and hopefully to see like the benefit that fielding a good team can have for clubs is, is good and positive. And so, you know, I'm sure that if you're a fan of the Cardinals or the Mets or the Padres,

you're kind of bummed right now, that might be pretty mildly, that your teams have not really played to expectation. But I think that it is good for the sport for there to be upstarts. And I think that Chris Gilligan wrote for us this week about where we sit as we approach the half-season mark. At the time he wrote that, we were approaching.

We were approaching. We weren't there yet. But as we kind of got close to the All-Star break, there's definitely a range in it that clubs are but like i think he found something like 20 teams that were still ostensibly in it to some degree or other that's valuable you know i think that keeps people engaged and that's my i think that's my thing like good job marlins and reds and i am not surprised by the Diamondbacks. I was a believer all along, although I did not believe that they were going to be in

first place in the division come June 30th. So maybe I should have gone a little harder there. You know, good job, Orioles, Rangers, right? I think that it's a good thing. It's a valuable thing. Yeah, that I think is probably my top story of the first half as well. I don't know exactly what to call it, but parity or unpredictability or mobility when it comes to team performance. It's just there's almost a zero correlation

currently between payroll rank and winning percentage rank. It's below 0.1. There's essentially no connection there. And that's because of some teams with high payrolls that have underperformed. And it's also because of some teams with low to middling payrolls that have overperformed. And because of that, you have this big jumble because a lot of the teams that were supposed to be really good have not been good. Now they haven't been disasters, they haven't been the A's, but they've been a lot worse than they were supposed to be. And then teams that weren't supposed to be so good, they've been better than they were supposed to be. And so everyone's kind of together to some extent here. And that gives

you a lot to talk about, a lot of surprises, some disappointing surprises, some unwelcome surprises, and some really exciting surprises. And I was going to mention that piece by Chris Gilligan, because compared to last year, probably compared to most years, there just are more teams in it. to most years. There just are more teams in it. And that's partly a function of the expanded playoffs. But I think certainly even compared to last year, it's striking just how high a percentage of the games these days are being played between teams that are contenders as of now. And I don't know what that's going to mean for the trade deadline. I could imagine that that means that the trade deadline will be more active. It could be a lot less active because everyone's in it in theory. But there are teams like the Mets and the Cardinals that are at least seemingly entertaining being sellers, surprisingly, depending on how July goes, right? So we might end up with like the teams that were supposed to be good aren't good, but they're not terrible. And so they're still theoretically in it. And just because of the expectations, they're not going to want to

take away from that and tear it down and wave the white flag. And so they might sort of hold. And then the teams that are surprising, they're going to want to be upgrading, but where are they going to get those upgrades? So I could see it just turning into like a really interesting trade deadline where a lot of players and teams do things that we wouldn't have expected, but it could also be a totally stagnant deadline. But that's something I'm looking forward to finding out in the second half. But yeah, that has been, I think, one of the bigger stories of the first half. And I think we thought we knew coming into the season that we weren't going to see any super teams in the way that we

have for the past several seasons. And I think that's been borne out kind of. Now, there are still teams that are on pace for super team type win totals, right? I mean, the Rays are on pace for, I think, 108 wins. The Braves are on pace for 107 wins. Van Grasse, which take into account how those teams have done, but also how they were and are projected to do. Only the Braves right now are projected to get to triple digits. Their win total projection is 100.6. The Rays are at 97.8. And then it's a pretty steep fall off to the Dodgers at 91.5. So the teams like the Dodgers and the Astros that have been so good for so long, they're still obviously contending and likely playoff teams, but they are clearly diminished and

more vulnerable. And I guess the Braves would probably be the closest to a super team that we have. Like, they're just stringing together a ton of division titles, but they're not usually... We were seeing teams win 106, 107, 111 games, right? I don't know if anyone's going to get there this

year. So there are fewer teams that I look at and think, wow, that is an all-time great team. That team is going to be extremely difficult to beat. So the Braves and the Rays, they've sustained their success for a long time. But I feel like they have more holes than some of the super dominant teams that we've seen in recent years. And that's probably a good thing.

Yeah, I think that's a good thing. think that's a good thing and i i so you know we've had a bunch of seasons with these like powerhouse super teams where they're putting up win totals you know 100 105 110 wins right i think that there's the piece of that that is those clubs and those rosters being really really good at baseball and then there's the part of it where they are able to play i mean not the a's every year right or a team as bad as the A's every year. Although even the A's are not as bad now as they were at the beginning of the season. They're still really bad. They're still really bad. But we tended to focus on the top end of the super team distribution distribution and didn't always acknowledge like how much or maybe not much is is too much but what portion of that win total was attributable to just like really garbage rosters at the bottom of

the of that distribution right and i feel like we're you know if we can avoid the bottom being so bad it's naturally going to curtail some of the high highs at the top, but that's okay. I don't want everyone to try to manage to an 87-win season because that has its own problems, but I do think that if we're pulling up the bottom somewhat, it's good for as many people as possible to be able to watch like respectable baseball like that's that's something that philosophically we should aim toward so the

topsy-turviness of the standings and these uh exciting upstarts and also these train wreck teams that lead to a lot of rubbernecking all of of that has been fun to watch and to talk about, other than for the fans of the trainwreck teams, but for the rest of us, I guess, for the neutrals also. So that's, I think, one of the big things. Obviously, the new rules, one of the huge stories of the season to such an extent that maybe everyone's sick of talking about them, but we like them.

We've analyzed them a lot. There was a ton of intrigue about how they would play. And mostly they have been successes or at least have not done great harm to the game and in some cases seem to have been boons to baseball. So it was an experiment that we have not seen the likes of in Major League Baseball for quite a while now to make such sweeping changes in a single season. And there was some disaster potential, I suppose, and it has been far from a disaster. The games are shorter, they move much faster, and there's a lot of excitement on the basis as we just covered in our little

highlights ranking there that has maybe made me shake up the the top placement on my highlights ranking so that's been a huge part of the season and for the most part a success so i can't can't ignore the new rules we've talked about them so much that it's almost like we don't talk about them so much on a day-to-day basis anymore. But that's a good thing that it hasn't run off the rails in such a way that we're lamenting those things. We're celebrating them. Yeah, I agree. And I think that the fact that it didn't occur to us as the very first thing is a testament to it working maybe the the way we really wanted it to right because the worst version of this would have been that it is highly noticeable and feels disruptive to

your experience of watching the game and i that has not been no i think the experience even in instances where you do see a pitch clock violation and, you know, you're reminded like, oh, that's happening differently. That moment is proceeding differently than it would have in a previous season. The fact that it is like worked and then we have just sort of moved on is like, good, this all this this worked. Have you noticed that Craig Kimbrell has 10 pitch clock violations? Yeah. He has more than any other pitcher and obviously does not throw nearly as many pitches as many other pitchers. Yeah.

Also, Ben, what's up with the Rays? You notice all these, the Rays, they seem like they have a lot of violations. The Rays. Yeah. Interesting. a lot of violations. There is. Yeah. Interesting. I don't know. I'm just I'm tickled by Kimbrel just basically being like, I don't care. I'm just going to keep doing my thing.

He still does his like peering in for the sign thing, which these days I don't know if he's a Pitchcom user or not. It seems like he just he just wants to do that. He's like, yeah, I'm in my mid-30s. I'm not going to change at this point. So this is who I am. So on a rate basis, he's got a violation every 58 pitches, which maybe doesn't sound like so much, but it is a lot compared to other players.

He's the first pitcher to get to double digits for timer violations, and he's a reliever, right? So it seems to be working for him of late, but he's just like, yeah, yeah, whatever. Shake it off. I'm just going to do my thing. You can call me for a violation if you want. But yes, there are very few players who have triggered those things with that kind of regularity. So that a relief not a huge surprise but still a relief so new rules standings i do think that along with the positives of the standings that we were just talking about in the team level results there are some negatives that have also been notable obviously the a's have been one of the biggest stories of the first half of the season, right?

Not a good story, but how much have we talked about them? A lot for multiple reasons. One, because of the ongoing Las Vegas exodus and the whole ballpark saga and the reverse boycott and just the enmity toward Fisher and Rob Manfred bad-mouthing A's fans and defending Fisher and just all of that has been swirling around the season in addition to the fact that the A's look like one of the worst teams of all time. So there's been a lot of tracking of, wow, their run differential is still on pace to be by far the worst, right? And their record has rivaled some of the worst teams of all time. So, gotta say the A's are one of the stories of this season. Just not an uplifting story. An infuriating story, a frustrating story, a depressing story, but also one that we have returned to time and time again.

Yeah, I think that we shouldn't mischaracterize the season. It hasn't all been good. I mean, I guess we can add into that category sort of the league. I have such a rude way of describing this, and I'm not going to do it. I'm not, because why make Shane bleep a thing? Why make him bleep a thing when I could just say it differently? Tripping over itself when it comes to pride. Is that neutral enough?

Yeah. You can say. Yeah. Also, I think the centrals. Yeah. The centrals have been a big story this season. Just the mediocrity of them, which is not totally separate from the positive aspects of what we were just talking about, which is a lot of teams in contention, theoretically. Part of that is just that a lot

of central teams are lousy, but none of them is good. And so even the lousy ones are still in the running. So that would be the counter to, hey, everyone's in it, is that a lot of those teams are just bad and no one seems to want to win those divisions, really. But I think it's still nice to have some parity in competition, even if it's between not-so-great teams. And some of those not-so-great teams are fun, even though they're not great, great teams. But the Reds, obviously, are one of the most fun teams of the season and they're in the Central. So there's that. And then there's the Cardinals being one of the disaster teams of the season. And there was, at least for a while, hey, the Pirates, good vibes around the Pirates

for a while now that has subsided somewhat, but there are encouraging aspects of the Pirates season. somewhat but there are encouraging aspects of the pirate season so the centrals just blandness in terms of their actual records and the lack of separation there and how many times have we compared the al east to the centrals and the worst al east team is better than the best central team, right? And the orders of their records line up that way. So that's been a big talking point and justifiably so. But again, maybe not the best that there's such a mismatch there that it seems like the centrals are kind of outclassed year after year. Yep. I think that's definitely on there. I would maybe throw in, and it doesn't have to just be rookies necessarily, but I think there's a group of really exciting young guys who are in part helping to drive the surprising

performance of some of these clubs. And so maybe I'm double dipping, right? But you're Ellie De La Cruz's,'re Corbin, Carol's Corbin. Please, I hope your shoulder's okay. Yes, me too. Yeah, I actually had sort of as a separate entry National League phenoms, right? They're not all in the National League, but the most exciting.

Yeah, Carol and De La Cruz and Yuri Perez are probably for me the three most exciting rookies. And they're all in the National League. So not to slight all of the other excellent American League players, but those three are probably the pinnacle for me so far. Yeah, I think that it's just incredibly exciting. You have the sort of season-long, continuing sustained excellence of Carroll, and then guys who come up a little bit later but have really hit the ground running.

We're going to see how Ellie kind of adapts now that the league is adapting to him, and so we get to see that phase sort of coming through. But I think it's very exciting as we look at these young guys. Here's a less fun one, but probably one that we should mention is the injury stuff. It seems like we have, gosh, I like hesitate to even jinx it. to even jinx it. But, you know,

we seem to have a slower pace. But the early part of the season at least strongly defined by the concern over injuries and trying to sort out, you know, how much of that might be the new rules, but just the rate of attrition, particularly on the pitching side, was very

dramatic for a while there. Yeah, we have not talked about that as often lately, which is great. I would love to continue not to talk about that. But there was a while there where every other episode we were lamenting the latest walking wounded. Everyone seemed to be dropping like flies. And then there was concern about why that was happening and is it pitch clock related. But the most recent figures I saw, it seems like it has subsided to the point where this season is not really an outlier it was just it was like spring training and early in the year and those things have fortunately fallen back

to earth a bit but yes that was definitely a part of the conversation and then we haven't really talked about individuals so much other than those rookies and phenoms, but I think there are three players. No other individuals that we've ever spent any amount of time on. On this podcast. But I think there are three players whose individual seasons have been intriguing enough that they have become among the best stories of the season to me. And Corbin Carroll and Ellie and Uri Perez, they're up there, but it's not like they're chasing some particular statistical milestone or there's some record chaser or something

unprecedented necessarily. It's all that they're really good. I guess Perez has had a almost record-setting start when it comes to ERA over his first nine starts, right? But I got to put Otani, obviously, and then Luisa Reyes and his chase for 400, which will ultimately probably be futile, but not futile because it's given us a lot of entertainment every day, right? I think players who make me check their box scores on a daily basis, right? And Otani, I'm probably watching on a daily basis, so I don't need to check the box score. But if I missed his game, I would want to know, what did Otani do? And if I didn't see the Marlins game, I would want to know, how many hits did Luis Uribe have. And then I think I would put Ronald Acuna in that category just because he is his power speed combo. I mean, it's pretty special. And so I had that, I thought, bold prediction at the start of the season. He'll go 50-50.

He is ahead of the stolen base pace and behind the power pace, although the power pace has picked up, I think. Like, it would not surprise me at all if he were to hit more home runs in the second half than he did in the first. But even if he falls short of 50 homers, we're still talking about a possible 40-70 season or something. Forget 40-40, like 40-70. 40-40, like 40-70. And I think if it were just 40-40, it would be exciting, but you'd have to discount it slightly because stolen bases are up considerably.

But if he blows by 40 stolen bases, then you don't even really need to caveat it. If he gets to 40-60 or 40-70 or something, then you could say, yeah, he would have gotten to 40 anyway. So his combination of power and speed as a probable MVP favorite, I think he is up there. That trio has kind of defined the season when it comes to individual play for me. I support that.

And it doesn't take that many guys having spectacular seasons like that to make that a special component of the year like we've lamented the the lack of record chases and interesting legendary records being broken but if there's even just one guy going for something like that if there's Aaron Judge last year trying at least to exceed 60 and 61 then that's's riveting. That is something that's going to keep your attention on the game every day. If Shohei Otani is trying to top himself and have some unprecedented, unbelievable two-way season, that's obviously something that's going to keep me glued to the game every day. And then you have one Luisa Rise making a run at 400. You have one Ronald Cooney. It's not like you need many players who are having some sort of outlier

season. If you just have one or two, that's enough really to kind of dominate the conversation and give you a reason to tune in every day. Yeah, I think that that's right. I mean, we just need the long stretches where the action isn't necessarily great at the team level or the division level or whatever to be punctuated by really exciting individual performances. And then we're pretty content, you know. Maybe we're too easy. Yeah, I mean, we're soft touches, I guess, when it comes to the sport.

We like it. But I do think this has been a fun first half of the season. It's always hard for me to say that was a good season, that was a bad season. Because they all contain multitudes. And there's always a lot of interesting stuff. There's so much that happens that it's almost hard for me to differentiate. They all have just more than you could possibly experience personally. And that's just an embarrassment of riches every time, really, if you love baseball.

But I think this has been an above-average first half of Major League Baseball, whatever that means. I don't know how to quantify that. But my gut feeling is that this has been good. This has been better than normal. I think that that's right, even in the face of Manfred-driven nonsense, which is really saying something because some of that nonsense. Yeah, he's been working overtime. Yeah. So the team differences from the projections here, this won't be a great surprise based on the conversation we just had. But just looking at the change in projected final win total between the start of the season and now. So I'm not talking about pace. I'm talking about the projection for your final win total. How much has that moved since the season started? And on the plus side, you have the Rays who have boosted their win total projection by 12.2. And then you have the Orioles at 11.9 and the Diamondbacks at 10.0. And the Reds at 9.2. And the Marlins at 8.2. And the Rangers at 7.9.

We didn't talk so much about the Rangers earlier. And they don't really fit into the low payroll category so much. They were sort of one of the teams that tried to win the offseason. And so often it seems like the team that kind of wins the offseason does not win the season. It ends up being a bit deflating, but not in the Rangers' case. You know, things could still fall apart for them, but it has been a really fun first half for them. I mean, they have like most of the AL All-Star starters. Yeah, how about that? A lot of them deserved.

Some of them maybe not as deserved. Look, Josh Young's having a good first half, but Jose Ramirez should probably be your All-Star starter at third base. But hey, if Rangers fans are enthusiastic about their team and are stuffing the ballot box, then bully for them. I'm glad they're into baseball again.

So I think it's satisfying, though, to have a plan like that come together because it's a totally different plan. It's not really the Reds' plan or the Orioles' plan, which was we were bad for a long time and we traded a lot of players and then we got good players back and we drafted some good players. And now the worm has turned and we're good again. And we're calling up all our exciting young guys. The Rangers have some when it came to Marcus Semien and Corey Seeger is really looking good now because Corey Seeger has been incredible. He was hurt, obviously, but when he's been healthy, he's been amazing. Marcus Semien having yet another excellent year, still probably underrated for how good he is and how durable he is. So it's that up the middle combo. how good he is and how durable he is.

So it's that up-the-middle combo. And then even if it's not DeGrom, it's some of the pitchers that they signed as free agents have panned out quite well. And it's also some guys who've improved who are sort of surprising. You're Adeliz Garcia's and you're Jonah Heim's and you're Nathaniel Lowe's and all these other guys, some of whom had been okay before and some who are just exceeding everyone's expectations, Ezekiel Duran, et cetera. So that's been really fun too. So those are the top six teams

that have raised their projected win total by the most and by some significant degree. And then on the downside, you have the Royals. The Royals at negative 15. Their projected win total 15 wins lower now than it was when the season started. So by that metric, they are maybe the most disappointing team. I mean, they didn't have such high expectations. So maybe you can't be as disappointed.

But relative to what was expected for them and the progress that people were hoping for, no, it's been bleak. So they have been even worse relative to expectations than the A's, believe it or not. The A's negative 14.3. And then you have the Mets at 10.0, Padres at 8.9, and White Sox at 5.1. Those are your six most disappointing teams by win total being lower now than it was when the season started. When we did the discussion recently about most disappointing team, we kind of landed on the Cardinals, right? pointing team. We kind of landed on the Cardinals, right? But I think since then, the Mets have passed them probably. They've passed them on this little leaderboard here barely. It's close. It's neck and neck. But maybe the Mets, if we're excluding the two truly terrible teams that have been abysmal but were never expected to be good in the Royals and the A's, then I think the

Mets may have taken the lead. Although, man, the Padals and the A's, then I think the Mets may have taken the lead. Although, man, the Padres and the Cardinals, they're keeping it competitive. I keep thinking, one of these days, they're going to look like they're supposed to look, and none of them has. My answer changes every day, which one is the most disappointing, just because it feels like, and I am not here to say that this is a feeling rooted in science. But doesn't it feel like at least one of these teams loses in a devastating and or embarrassing way on any given night? It does, yeah. It feels like they kind of trade off amongst them.

And so sometimes you're like, oh, surely it'll get better. And then it doesn't get better. it'll get better, and then it doesn't get better. I am grateful for the presence of the Rangers, despite the fact that they're making it hard for the Mariners to do anything. But, you know, you made your own bed, Mariners. Now you've got to sleep in it. But they are at least partially, I think, an important antidote to the narrative that I'm sure will emerge around the Mets and Padres about like spending who needs it because the Rangers sure have been willing to do that.

Now, of course, the thing that I as an honest interlocutor have to reckon with is that like their biggest bit of spending this offseason as opposed to the prior two was a guy who needs Tommy John. So, you know, like, are we seeing the fruits of the DeGrom signing? Not like we expected to, but, you know, I do appreciate that this team has spent very recently and to a great degree in a way that at least says, hey, you know, sometimes you make the big moves and you make them when they're available to you and then they were down to your benefit later. So, I think that that's honest while still making the point I want to, hopefully. Not that DeGrom's injury was the least foreseeable thing that could have happened. But yes. All right. And I guess I should mention, they didn't crack this list of teams that have raised their projected win total by the most,

but they were probably one of the last cuts there. The Giants have really made that NL West race interesting. I certainly did not expect the Giants to be eight games ahead of the Padres at the end of June and half a game back of the division leader, which I did not expect to be the Diamondbacks. But the Giants are two and a half back of the Diamondbacks and two back of the Dodgers. And yet again, the NL West is just inscrutable and expectation defying and dashing. Right. And I guess part of that comes down to the Padres perennially just not being quite as good as it seems like they should be. But it always seems to be it's like we think it's going to be a three team race and then it's a two team race and it's a team that no one foresaw being in the race or this year. So far, it's a three team race and the Padres are not one of those teams so it definitely keeps us guessing it throws us for

a loop I'm enjoying the NL West these days I guess what is not unforeseen is that the Dodgers are not atop the division and are not the dominant Dodgers of old, that was one of the expected storylines coming to the season. It's just that people presumed that the Padres would be the team to take advantage of that. And thus far, it has not been. I have a list also of the players who have exceeded their projections by the most or fallen the furthest short of them. exceeded their projections by the most or fallen the furthest short of them. So what I did for this was I looked at the preseason depth charts projections. So that's a combination of Zips and Steamer.

And then I pulled the actual winds above replacement thus far this season. And then I just kind of compared and I took the projection from the start of the season and then I took into account how many games each player's team had played and just looked for the difference between what their war is now and what you would have expected their war to be over this number of games based on their preseason projection. So I will note that there were a few notable players who did not have depth charts projections. Maybe they had steamer projections, but not zips or something. So they don't show up here.

But guys like Matt McLean, Patrick Bailey, Jose Caballero, Zach Netto, those guys are one win or more and did not actually have projections. So they would not show up here, but they should be mentioned, I guess, and Tanner Bybee as well. But I don't think they would crack the top of this list even if they had had projections. So I'll give you the disappointing guys first, I guess. So the player who has fallen the furthest short of his projection pro-rated thus far is Gene Segura. So despite the fact that the Marlins have exceeded expectations,

So, despite the fact that the Marlins have exceeded expectations, Gene Segura would have been expected to have 1.5 war at this point, and he actually has negative one. So, that's a difference of 2.5 war from where the projections saw him being at this point in the season number two tim anderson right tim anderson has been part of those disappointing white socks so he is 2.4 were short of his projection kike hernandez is next 2.3 war short colton wong is also 2.3 war short. I liked that pickup, and there has not been a lot to like about that pickup since the season started. I thought he'd be good for them. I thought he was underrated. I was like, oh, yeah, okay. You could have spent big on someone, but trading for Colton Wong, that's a nice handy little move there.

And he's been almost a win below replacement level. Yeah, it's been pretty bad. It's not great. Yeah. He's been almost a win below replacement level. Yeah, it's been pretty bad. It's not great. Yeah.

And then Jose Abreu, a notable slow starter. He is 2.2 wins below his projection and is still well below replacement level. Jose Miranda of the Twins, 2.2 wins below. Alec Manoa, a notable kind of collapse this season. He is 2.1 war below where he would have been expected to be. Carlos Correa of the Twins is also about 2.1 war below. After the offseason frenzy, the Carlos Correa sweepstakes the three teams that thought they had signed him initially. And I guess the first two

are probably not too sad to have missed out on him. It hasn't been an ankle problem as far as we know. It's been foot problems and other performance problems. But yeah, I guess I don't want to say

dodged a bullet like he's been better of late and he may well be better over the rest of the season. But the ratio of how much we talked about him over the offseason to how much we've talked about him this season, it's a very high one because he just has not given us a lot of reasons to talk about him. There are some on there that make more sense than others, right? Like, I didn't think that it would happen like this, but like, Jose Abreu, older player, right? Yeah. You can see sort of—

Something of a power outage last season, too. Right. And so you can sort of recast the last year he's had and look at it in a different way and say, hey, was this a signal that we kind of ignored because he was still producing and we were intrigued by like the shape of that production changing in a way that seemed like it might be cool and allow him to adapt. And it's like, no. Turns out, maybe not. And then there are guys where it's just really a lot more surprising. Like the Manoa stuff is still so wild did you hear how his first um yeah what was it 11 runs as he's down there yeah i don't right i don't know how much to read into that right i

was gonna say like you know in a the idea of sending him down there seemed to be to sort of rework from the ground up and so it could be that that was hey throw that pitch like just that and let's see what we're working with and then it got teed off on um but yeah it it's not you know it's not the best right even if there is a developmental context that makes it make more sense and i don't to be clear no for sure that there is but you always want to be a little careful reading into those things. But also, boy, it's easy to read into 11 Runs. The Korea of it all, man, have we entertained the notion that he's cursed? Like, do we, is there a small demon living in his leg?

Could be, yeah. I guess one of his legs or some part of his lower body, maybe it's moving around in there. Yeah, maybe it's a migratory demon. Yeah, could be. It's a small migratory demon. And that's, you know, as good an explanation as any. So there's that piece of it.

I wonder, here's a question I'd like to put to the Giants fans who listen to this podcast. How are you feeling? Like, where are you in your feelings right now? Because at various points in the offseason, we were quite concerned for the emotional well-being of Giants fans, and we felt like we had good cause. And I think we did.

And there have been points in the early part of the season where it was like, oh boy, oh boy, oh no. And now, I would imagine, I might offer that if you're a Giants fan, you're like, okay. Okay. Yeah, Aaron Judge is hurt. Kars Correa not playing so well. And not to suggest that anyone in that fan base is delighting in those misfortunes. I'm not suggesting that you're trying to be nasty or anything. But it feels like it must have been...

I bet you're all very tired is probably the primary feeling. Because being whipped around like that, highs and lows and everything in between, you're probably exhausted. I know I'm exhausted. I'm not even a Giants fan. I'll read you the names of some other players who have notably

underperformed their projections. Are you going to say Julio at some point here? We'll see. Tyler O'Neal, Oledmus Diaz, Jerickson Profar, Rowdy Tellez,

Cabert Ruiz, Ahmed Rosario, Corey Kluber, Vlad, Vlad Jr. Right. Maybe, hopefully, he's starting to, the power will pick up, but it has not been great. Yeah. Anthony Rendon, Jesse Winker, Luis Rias. Yeah, Jesse Winker. I guess it was not the Mariners that was the problem with Jesse Winker.

Or at least not only the Mariners. Woodruff, Nick Lodolo, Kyle Schwarber, Starling Marte, Jake Cronenworth. I'm only going to go to 1.5 or below projections here, but all of these guys are Jake Cronenworth, MJ Melendez, Corbin Burns. Weird. Yeah, right. Yeah, so you have Woodruff and Burns here. Obviously, Woodruff hurt. Burns just not really pitching like his old self. Obviously, Woodruff hurt. Burns just not really pitching like his old self. And then you've got Machado on here and Cronenworth, some underperforming Padres. And then Julio Rios, Nolan Arnauto, not having a typical Arnauto season.

Especially in the field. I'll put the full list online for anyone who wants to see it. But Julio is actually only about half a win below, which I guess his projections maybe had not fully bought into how great he seemed to be last year yet. I think that's right. Plus, like, when his center field defense, I think, is really helping to bolster the profile there. And he's still hitting for some power. So, yeah, although not like last year. It is funny. So you like Burns and Woodruff, like underperforming. And then you sit there and you're like, the Brewers and the Reds, they have the same record. And then you're like, wait, that's not bad. Yeah. Weird season. I mean, good. I think a lot of it is fun and good, but some of it is profoundly strange. I guess that's what happens when expectations get flipped on their heads. Yeah.

Some of those names you named, I'm less surprised. And then some of them, it's like, weird. It's weird. It's a weird thing. And then I'll give you the guys who have been better than expected. Which is less depressing to talk about. So, the number one player who is outperforming his projections thus far is Geraldo Perdomo of the Diamondbacks. Who is 2.3 war ahead of his projected pace through this point of the season. That's right.

Yep. Luke Raley of the Rays is at 2.1 above. TJ Friedel of the Reds is at two war above. And then Shohei Otani. I named three players there who were fairly obscure heading into this season. Right. And they've all been great. And that is great. But also Shohei Otani, who I think had the highest war projection coming into the season, if you add up his pitching and hitting projections. And yet he is still number four on the list of over-performers, despite how highly he was expected to perform. So he is still two war ahead of his better-than-anyone-in-baseball projected pace. Then you have Adeliz Garcia, who is also two war ahead.

What a nice season that guy is having. Yeah, it really has been. Corbin Carroll, who is to War Ahead, and Zach Gallin, back to back. Zach Gallin, 1.8, and obviously we thought Zach Gallin was good, so he's been really good to exceed the projections. And then

Ezekiel Duran mentioned earlier, and Ronald Acuna, who also had a great projection and has still exceeded it by 1.7 war through this point. Then Kevin Gossman, J.D. Davis, Bryce Elder, Sonny Gray, Lamont Wade Jr., Justin Steele. All these guys are at like one and a half war or more. And then Mickey Moniak.

I guess those are probably the notable ones. Yenier Cano is up there too for a reliever, which is impressive. He's 1.4 war ahead of the pace, as is Brandon Marsh, as is Nathan Ivaldi, as is Jamer Candelario, as is Mitch Keller. I was sort of surprised that Yandy is not higher on this list. He's actually only like 0.7 war ahead of the pace, I guess, because of base running and defense, maybe. And we're looking at war here, not just WRC+,

which would be a somewhat different list. But these are names that have surprised us. Not a surprising list of names, given what we've seen, but certainly would have been if I had showed this list to you before the season started and told you how good Gerardo Perdomo and Luke Raley and

T.J. Friedel were going to be. Friedel, Friedel. I don't know. There's just like nice musicality to that name. I don't know what about it gets me. But you saw that Yandy Diaz is an all-star, an all-star starter. Yes. So he is premium ground beef. Yes. Yes, he is. Is that anything? I don't know. We're going to keep trying with this until we land on something we really like. I really

hope Corbin Carroll's okay. Me too. Yeah. So that's our snapshot of where we stand exactly halfway through the season. And I guess the things I'm looking forward to in the second half are largely related to the things we just talked about enjoying in the first half. Like, will this continue? What will the trade deadline look like with this great jumble of teams, this amorphous mass of contenders? teams, this amorphous mass of contenders. So that's one of my things I'm looking forward to. And just like, will any of these teams that just have not clicked yet, will any of them, like,

will one of the Mets and Cardinals and Padres please stand up? Like, will they get any better over the second half of the season? Obviously, that's something I'm intrigued by. Arise, I'm not even giving it a high enough probability that I would list it here. Obviously, if he stays somewhere near 400, that will continue to be one of the most interesting storylines of the season, but who knows how long he can keep that up. Obviously, Otani will always be my number one, my ride or die, so he will be at the top of the list of storylines of the season that I will be following most closely. Can he get to 12 War or something ridiculous like that? He's just competing against himself at this point, more or less. So I guess those are the things I'm really looking forward to, just seeing how this jumble of contenders sorts itself out.

Every time you talk about Otani now, I hear Always Be My Baby by Mariah Carey playing in the background. It's like my internal soundtrack while you're talking about him. That's nice. I want to see if you can hit the high notes, Ben. Let's do it. I've got a good falsetto. All right. So let us know if we missed anything obvious or that you have been most intrigued by this season, anything we've given short shrift.

We talk about so many things that I hope that we've hit on the notable things at some point on this podcast. But let us know if you think we've neglected anything or should be rating anything more highly. be rating anything more highly well i mean every time every time we do one of these i feel like we end up hearing in a way that is very cool about like some maybe not notable maybe a story that like we're forgiven for not knowing because of our scope but like you know i feel like almost every club has some thing that has happened that is like kind of driving some part of fan interest and so i yeah I enjoy hearing those stories because we miss out on them when we're trying to monitor all 30, plus the minors, plus we have dedicated Otani coverage.

It's a lot to juggle. So if we've missed one, let us know. We want to hear about your fun. You can tell us about the not fun stuff too. I don't mean to, you know. But particularly if there are cool little bits and bobs we've missed, let us know. Yeah, we often do an episode or two at the very end of the calendar year, and then we solicit what did we miss and what should we talk about. But if there's something we should be paying attention to that is happening now before the season ends, then please clue us into that. And I guess just one follow-up from

last time we talked on our email episode, we answered one about Arise and about a play that one of our listeners, Bobby, Patreon supporter, thought was sort of suspicious, sort of fishy, generous scoring to give Arise a hit on that play. And I corresponded with one of our listeners who's an official scorer, and we went back and forth. And he explained that it wasn't really anything unusual, no conspiracy theory, no smoking gun here that MLB is trying to put its thumb on the scale and help Arise hit 400. But Bobby, the Patreon supporter, he wrote in in response to a David Lorela tweet, which was about a Joey Wendell play. He reached on a ground ball single.

And Lorela mentioned that official scores rarely charge errors anymore, he said. And Bobby was wondering, he said, I wrote earlier about what I thought was a questionable scoring decision based on the Red Sox radio reaction to a Luis Arise hit on June 28th. Bent sent some helpful links and really helpful comments from an official score. It really helped me realize that it's not so cut and dried. Today, David tweets, this official score is rarely charge errors anymore. I'm sorry, but I think I missed the memo about this at the beginning of the season. It's hard to believe that this is really happening. But then I've seen a few strange things recently, including last night's Arise hit that have caused me to wonder, was there any guidance given by MLB to scorers to lean away from charging errors? What would happen if we just got rid of errors, counting them at all? It feels like we are starting on that path. Obviously, they would still happen and we would have to change the scoreboards and box scores.

that path. Obviously, they would still happen and we would have to change the scoreboards and box scores. What else could we count? We talked about how we could replace errors in the line score with something else recently. But I think error rates have declined a bit relative to earlier errors. Errors, not errors. I don't think that we have suddenly seen errors stop this season. But there have been some changes that have had an impact on just the way that appeals happen and the way things are scored. And I will read another question that we got just recently because it pertains to this. Listener Jack said, I was wondering if it would make sense to use defensive metrics like outs above average or something similar to quantify errors instead of the scorekeeper just kind of going, I just feel like that was an error. Set a limit at something like 90% catch probability for fly balls, let's say,

and if that out is not made, it's scored an error. Does that make sense? And I sent that to our official scorer listener, and he said, and I didn't really know this, hit and catch probability are used as references currently, and I would speculate that they will be used more in the future. During the appeals process, these statistics are used as well as exit velocity to justify positions. I would say these are included in the scoring decisions, but MLB is getting more and more of this information available and getting scores comfortable applying these data points.

I feel it is included today, but mostly referenced in the appeals process. It's something all scores are very aware of, but MLB has not pushed for this to be the only metric for the decision process, just another tool to assist. So that's interesting because I mentioned they've made an effort to sort of standardize scoring decisions and also eliminate some of the hometown bias. It's almost like umpires getting graded based on their zone evaluation system, based on, you know, pitch effects and stat cast, right? And they're not yet using those systems to call balls and strikes, but they're giving umpires feedback and they're being evaluated

based on how they conform to that data. So it's sort of similar, I guess, that official scorers now are referencing these stats and keeping them in mind. And if there is an appeal filed, then it's a data point that could be brought to bear here to justify, say, changing a hit to an error or vice versa. So I was not really aware that that was happening, but that is happening. Yeah, me either. Yeah. So I don't know if you can fully just use that only and take the human element out of this i guess there are certain things i don't know it's always like some errors that are just assessed as hits instead of errors because it's like it touched someone's glove and they bobbled it versus they just completely missed

it or it got lost in the sun or something, I guess you could kind of quantify that with outs above average with catch probability. You don't necessarily need to know how or why they didn't catch it. It's just they didn't catch it. So therefore, it's an error. I guess you could do it programmatically that way. Or you could just get rid of errors entirely at that point, right? Like, do we even need to have an algorithm assign

errors or can we just do away with them entirely and just move past earned runs? You know, teams are certainly looking at like expected stats already. It's not like ERA is really affecting a player's earning potential probably anymore. Teams are already looking at metrics like these, though I guess there's a case for keeping them just for statistical consistency across eras. I think that there's probably still some value in just like, let's assume, like think of your, just mentally, imagine you're sort of like, it's weird to describe an error in terms of a platonic ideal, I realize, but like, you know, your prototypical error, textbook, easy, you know, the first thing you show an official

score when you're, like, doing the training and then you graduate to harder stuff, right? So pick that. We probably do want to distinguish instances where a batter-runner reaches as a result of that versus a hit, right?

We probably do want to make distinctions between those moments, right? Yeah, I think so. So we need some mechanism. And I am nervous about seeding it entirely to the vagaries of the algo because I think that that's confusing to people. You know, I think that part of what you're, when you're building sort of the scoring or rule structure of a sport,

like accessibility and understandability, comprehensibility is the word I actually want, on the part of people watching is important to sort of the perceived legitimacy of those rule and and scoring structures and so having it purely be this thing that like we can talk about and that we do have some insight into but that is inscrutable to a lot of people is probably not to the benefit of the sport in terms of us being like, yeah, we get that.

And of course, like the human element introduces sort of variability around that question too. As I understand these emails, that can cause confusion too. It's not like it's perfect. And I think adjusting the slider up and down in terms of how much influence the one versus the other has is like a worthwhile conversation. But we probably don't want it to only be that because then it's, you know, it's tricky.

I think this is part of why, in addition to them not being as good in fairness, but this is part of the reason that the sort of defensive side of war has always been viewed a little more skeptically than the offensive side, because it's just harder to be like, well, but is that right? You know, and how do you do? And so, yeah, I's just harder to be like, well, but is that right? And how do you do? And so, yeah. I'm just going to say a lot of half sentences and then have people blend it together like magnetic poetry.

Yeah. And our official scorer contact also said that there have been some changes to the appeals process. About a decade ago, like 2012, there was more standardization and a new appeals process in response to some player complaints during the previous CBA talks. But there's an update now. He says now it's even more streamlined for players and agents. Players have an app that allows them to directly appeal. So a lack of changes now is due more to in-game oversight

and support that was not utilized or available in the past. There are more eyes, more feedback in-game to help scores make decisions than ever before. It's designed to make sure rules are applied correctly and give oversight for consistency across the league. So there's an app for that. Now, if you think that you should have gotten a hit instead of an error, then you can just appeal it on an app for that. Now, if you think that you should have gotten a hit instead of an error, then you can just

appeal it on an app. And I wondered, I asked whether he had any idea what percentage of appeals are successful and if that's changed over time, because I don't think that data is public. You can see the record of classifications that were changed, but you can't necessarily see all the ones that were appealed that there were no changes. But you can't necessarily see all the ones that were appealed that there were no changes. So he said since the process has started, appeals have generally been stable with perhaps a slight uptick. It's easier to do now if you have an app and there's no penalty, I guess, to trying. So why not try? Probably if someone was appealing every single call that went against them, that might be frowned upon but he said overturns have also been at consistent rates with maybe a slight reduction in recent years due to these new measures the current appeals committee is composed entirely of x players they have the players best interests in mind both former hitters and former pitchers are on the committee and give feedback i believe

the players are comfortable knowing that guys who played the game are giving an oversight to this process and the ultimate decision in my personal opinion i believe current players are comfortable knowing that guys who played the game are giving an oversight to this process and the ultimate decision. In my personal opinion, I believe current players are at least satisfied with the process. So it seems like it's gotten better on the whole from what we can tell. There's more standardization and oversight and consistency and I guess recourse if you disagree with a decision. So those all seem like good things. Yeah. And of course, MLB is very concerned about gambling and betting and wagering, right? And so I think maybe that's part of this drive, right? To just make the scoring process more uniform and transparent so that the people who you are enticing to bet on baseball are not mad because there was some wacky scoring decision that seems like it's inconsistent. So I guess that's a good thing that can come out of something that we're less interested in. Anyway, we will end with a future blast.

Oh, how appropriate, given that I was just talking about betting on sports. I was wondering when we would get to one of these. 2027, you bet and new trop. A's curious fourth-game loss in the ALCS, when a three-run lead evaporated through five straight bases on balls, reminded MLB that the sport had been dancing on the edge of the gambling precipice for years. The investigation into A's players and coaches with worrisome Las Vegas relationships went on for more than a year, resulting in several coaching suspensions and a half-dozen multi-game suspensions for players for inappropriate relationships with known gamblers. Even the RoboUMP system was under investigation, with the possibility that the game videos were hacked in the few seconds it took from the challenge being raised to the video being watched or the data being reviewed. As a result, MLB issued

a Rule 21 reminder to all the players and coaches and cited pitch-by-pitch betting as a matter of special concern. In the midst of these worries, the astounding base running success of sprinter Tuanisha T.T. Terry proved that the designated runner was a wide-open door for women baseball players. As Major League Baseball adopted the new rule for the 2027 season, Ann Terry progressed from the Bowling Green Hot Rods to the Montgomery Biscuits to the Durham Bulls, and in September to the Tampa Bay Rays, amassing an incredible 153 stolen bases in all. She won the inaugural Golden Spike Awards for base stealing and did it in front of larger crowds than usual for the Rays, who enjoyed some honeymoon attendance in their new 30,000-seat ballpark, averaging 22,232 for the season, an all-time high, though that still left the Rays in 20th place in average home attendance. First, of course, were the Dodgers, averaging their usual 47,000-plus, followed by the Cardinals and the Yankees, averaging their usual 42,000-plus. So I guess

we've got some bad news and we've got some good news when it comes to baseball in 2027. How about that? Although we might need a different name for that award, the Golden Spike Award. That's taken, right? It's your best amateur baseball player in the United States. So it might cause some confusion. I don't want to tell the future award namers how to do their jobs. But if we're bestowing Golden Spikes Awards on amateur players, maybe we need a different name for the sprinters and the base runners. You heard it here first. Ben is a fan of college baseball. It's not exactly what I said.

I'm aware of the existence of it. Sometimes. Sometimes. Sometimes. Sometimes. Well, after we finished recording, I'd say trade season officially started. The Royals traded Aroldis Chapman to the Texas Rangers, which seemed like an obvious fit. Doesn't seem like the Royals got the greatest return, given that they're dealing maybe the best relief arm on the market and well before the deadline to boot. But that does kind of kick off deadline season. the market and well before the deadline to boot. But that does kind of kick off deadline season.

And it also makes me wonder who the heck is going to be the Royals all-star this year, because without Chapman, man, slim pickings. If Granke gets added to the roster as a legendary player like Albert Pujols and Miguel Cabrera were last year, does that count? Or do you have to have a non-honorary all-star? Because I do not know who it would be. Salve's well-known. I guess you could give it to him. Bobby Witt Jr., Mikel Garcia. Whoever it is will wear, I read, a new kind of uniform. Not just a new design for the All-Star uniforms, but a new uniform technology called Nike Vapor Premier, which will debut in the All-Star game and will be used by all teams beginning in 2024, which sounds like good news if you're into ogling baseball players. which sounds like good news if you're into ogling baseball players. According to the MLB.com piece, Vapor Premier's breathable, lightweight, high-performance fabric is made from at least 90% recycled polyester yarns. It also gives the jersey 25% more stretch and allows it to dry 28% faster with moisture-wicking, dry-fit ADV technology keeping players cool.

Sounds like the opposite of George Costanza's cotton uniforms. But here's the key sentence. Nike body-scanned more than 300 baseball players to find the ideal fit, which is more athletic and form fitting than previous models. Ooh la la. So there's a reason to tune in. You can be warm for their forms and their forms will be less warm because of that moisture wicking technology. You can also support Effectively Wild on Patreon by going to patreon.com slash effectivelywild. The following five listeners have already signed up and pledged some monthly or yearly amount to help keep the podcast going,

help us stay ad-free, and get themselves access to some perks. Maddie T., Kyle W., Ryan Young, Dalton Hartman, and Chris, thanks to all of you. Patreon perks include access to the Effectively Wild Discord group, access to monthly bonus podcasts, including a library of 20 that are sitting there for you right now waiting to be listened to. Thank you. on site and anyone and everyone can email us at podcast at fangrass.com. Send us your questions and comments. Send us your Effectively Wild theme song. If you want to record one that can be added to our intro and outro rotation, you can rate, review, and subscribe to Effectively Wild on iTunes and Spotify and other podcast platforms.

You can join our Facebook group at facebook.com slash group slash Effectively Wild. You can follow Effectively Wild on Twitter at EW pod, and you can find the Effectively Wild subreddit at r slash Effectively Wild. Thanks to Shane McKeon for his editing and production assistance. Happy Canada Day to those of you who celebrate. We'll be back, I believe, before July 4th, but we hope you have a wonderful weekend, and we will talk to you early next week. Romantic, pedantic, and hypothetical.

Semantic and frantic, real or theoretical. They give you the stats, and they give you the news. It's a baseball podcast you should choose. Effectively Wild is here for you about all the weird stuff that players do. Authentically strange and objectively styled. Let's play ball. It's Effectively Wild. It's Effectively Wild. It's effectively wild. It's effectively wild. It's effectively wild.

A siren just started. Oh yeah, I hear that. Oh my gosh, that's so funny. Sirens are usually on my end. Yeah, geez, I hope everything's okay. All right, well, here we go. Let me try that again. Hello and welcome to the show.