Effectively Wild: A FanGraphs Baseball Podcast - Effectively Wild Episode 2052: New Kids on the Block

Episode Date: August 30, 2023

Ben Lindbergh and Meg Rowley banter about classifying throws by infielders that are actually made in the outfield, imagine a multi-sport two-way Shohei Ohtani, and belatedly acknowledge Scott Cooper��s singular cycle, discuss Kyle Schwarber’s possible sub-replacement-level 40-homer season, break down the NL MVP race featuring Ronald Acuña Jr., Mookie Betts, and Freddie Freeman, pat Kyle […]

A baseball podcast, analytics and stats, with Ben and Meg, from Fangraphs. Effective in the high end. Effective in the low end. Effective in the high end. Hello and welcome to episode 2052 of Effectively Wild, a baseball podcast from Fangraphs presented by our Patreon supporters. I am Ben Lindberg of The Ringer, joined by Meg Raleigh of Fangraphs. Hello, Meg. Hello. joined by Meg Raleigh of FanCraft. Hello, Meg.

Hello. So I have, I don't know if I would call this a peeve or a slight objection or reservation, but you know how infield throws are all the rage these days, the stat cast measurements of how hard infielders are throwing. I think this may have come up on one of the episodes when I was away, just the difficulty of distinguishing between two velocities. When you have an infield throw, sometimes you'll see a throw and it's like, well, that was hard, but was it that much harder than that other throw? I don't know. It's kind of tough to tell. But also, we're hearing a ton about this these days because

Elie de la Cruz seems to top himself every week, right? And my objection reservation, though, is that some of these record-setting throws that he's making as an infielder are from the outfield. They're relay throws, right? And that is part of why they are thrown so hard. Now, to be clear, he throws very hard on regular infield throws also. So it's not like a product of the play entirely, but I think it is partly a product of the play because his two fastest on record are both relay throws. So he had a 99.8 mile per hour tracked throw. This was back in July. And then just this week, he had a 99.7. And those were both relays where he was way out in the outfield and he was catching and throwing and really laying out like on the first one in July, he may have actually fallen down after the throw during the follow through on this most recent one. He

didn't fall down, but he definitely put his whole body into the heave and sort of stumbled after it a bit. And to me, that's a different category than just your regular infield assist when you're on the grass in his case, I guess, that it was important that he throw it that hard but when it's in the outfield a you're getting your whole body behind it so it's more like an outfield throw sure and B I also can't really tell the difference officially between 99 and a 97 and a 95 it sort of looks the same to me when I saw it I was like oh yeah that looked hard. But if you had told me it was a 97 and not a 99, I would not have known the difference, right? Right. what he makes the throw. But part of why we divide infielders and outfielders, partly it's just that infielders don't tend to have as strong arms, at least at some positions, because they don't have

to make as long throws as outfielders do. And partly it's just that the opportunities that they get don't allow them to put their whole body into the throw the way an outfielder does. Right. So when it's like a hybrid, it's like an in-between, it's a relay throw. That I think is meaningfully different in terms of like how much oomph you can put into it as opposed to if you're just throwing a grounder and trying to get it over to first before the guy beats it out. Yeah. I think I accept your trutherism. I thought you were going to be like, you know, my on ellie is that he doesn't actually throw it that hard you know it's like i'm not going that far he throws he throws really hard i think it's an important distinction to be made not not

that it makes like a a really zippy throw from the outfield like inherently less cool like some of those are really cool yeah but there is context to those throws that you've highlighted that is important to note when it exists you know i i'll uh i'll allow the correction in the record but i also challenge you to find even one person who's gonna let you make him sound less cool than he already does. I think you will meet resistance in that project, which isn't really your project. It's just that he's so cool, you know? People like him because he's so cool. Yeah.

When people say, I'm not trying to take anything away from... They immediately try to take things away. Yes, right. They definitely are taking something away yeah it's like and and right away you know it's it's on the immediate other side of that but right yeah it's not arguably not taking it away it's just not giving them credit that they don't deserve i guess now that doesn't sound better ben you know like that sounds that sounds like it's you're making it more personal somehow. Like when Mason Wynn made his throw, he made a 99.9 mile per hour throw.

That was this spring, right? And then there was a previous one that was in the Futures game, right? And that one was like 100 miles per hour, right? Yeah, that one was really like, whoa, yeah. Yeah, but those were actual infield throws, right? They were just like fielding and throwing. And in his case, it looked almost casual. That was a routine play to shortstop, basically, in the Futures game.

He had time to set himself and take a couple steps, but it was largely a regular infield throw. And then the one he had in spring training this spring, this March, it was like he dove and then and got up quickly and had to get it over to first as quickly as but it was like on the lip, maybe just on the border between the outfield and the infield. But it was like a regular infield play. And so the fact that he got to triple digits or just about on those plays, I think is more impressive than if those had been relay throws.

Like these Ellie relay throws were not as hard as those Mason Wynn ones, and they were relay throws. Ellie does, at least for now, also have the fastest tracked throw by an infielder that was not a relay, 97.9. But that's still a meaningful difference. That's like almost two miles per hour between his fastest routine infield play throw and his fastest relay throw.

So I think it's different. And again, it's not like incorrect. Technically, he was an infielder wherever he's standing. And it makes it more impressive that he's an infielder making that throw even if it's from the outfield. But because StatCast gives us the precision to actually know where the throw was made, we could make that distinction. This was actually a throw by an infielder made in the infield as opposed to a throw by an infielder that was more like an outfield throw. Yeah. So, in my mind, it's a meaningful distinction.

Is it a particularly important one? Not necessarily. But it's something I've been thinking of every time I see one of these record-setting plays. Well, sure, because you hate L.A. De La Cruz. Yes. Like, personally, you know, professionally. I don't see what all the fuss is about. Yeah, you are in opposition every moment of your day from when you wake up until when you go to sleep.

All you're thinking about is bad, bad, Elie's bad, bad, bad, Elie's bad. Yeah. I take every chance to tear him down that I can get. And, you know, you need multiple chances because he is so tall. So to tear him down, you know, that takes a second. Yep. Well, now that I've made that very important point, just a couple of follow-ups from last time. So the latter part of this episode will be one big follow-up from last time.

One big follow-up. I've conned deep down the catcher defense rabbit hole. Yeah. defense rabbit hole. The last of several stat blasts on our most recent episode was about the downturn in wild pitches and past balls that we've seen. And we brought up some potential explanations for that. That has sparked a lot of discussion and responses from listeners. And we have a follow-up and we're talking to a subject matter expert, Tanner Swanson, who's the Yankees catching coach. And he's going to give us some insight. And then I will relate some other statistical insights I have gleaned and some other

theories that have come to the fore. And we'll see if we can get to the bottom of that. But a couple briefer follow ups from last time. So one thing we talked about was Otani 2.0, could there be an even more impressive player archetype than two-way Otani? Is there something that he could do or that some other player could come along and do that would blow our minds even more than what Otani has accomplished? And one thing that people wrote in about was the potential for a two-way player. was the potential for a two-way player. So not the two-way player in the sense that Otani is, where he pitches and hits, or even, as we discussed,

someone who plays defense regularly too, but someone who does that and also plays multiple professional sports, right? So go back to the Neon Dion and the Bo Jackson days and two sport players, right? If Otani were suddenly to turn pro in basketball or football or something, someone like that comes along. That would be more impressive. I didn't think of that because I think the question specified,

or at least I interpreted it as what could you do to be more impressive in baseball? In baseball, yeah. Whereas, you know, if you were also an NFL player, an NBA player, an NHL player, that wouldn't make you more impressive as a baseball player. It'd make you more impressive as an athlete overall. Sure. But yes, that certainly, that would be more impressive if you were able to do what Otani's doing

and also find the time to be a professional athlete in another sport. What if you found the time to do what Otani's doing and also find the time to be a professional athlete in another sport. What if you found the time to do what Otani's doing and also have a successful law practice? Yeah, that'd be impressive in another way. Do you get a sense early in episodes like how serious I am going to be on any given day and then you're like, I got to roll with this because Meg's in a mood. I am going to be on any given day. And then you're like, I got to roll with this because Meg's in a mood. There was actually a piece written recently by Tom Haberstroh about why we don't see the multi-sport star anymore, which is a topic that I think we've discussed on this podcast

before. But that would appear to be either endangered or outright extinct, right? Just the idea that anyone could or would do that. And I think we've covered the reasons for it, but it's probably partly just that it's so hard to do and it's gotten, if anything, even harder as the caliber of play improves across sports. But also a bunch of it has got to be about the money, right? You're jeopardizing so much money these days if you endanger yourself by playing multiple sports and playing sports year round. Like there's a good argument to be made that not specializing early and playing multiple sports when you're a youth,

that that can actually benefit you long term. But once you get to the highest level, then to not have an off season, because as soon as one sport ends, you go off to another, that's got to be tough physically. And it just, it cuts into your practice time and your developmental time. And in the day, there were objections to that, that players who were really committed to it had to overcome. But nowadays, it would be really tough. Like people talk about Patrick Mahomes and Kyler Murray. And yeah, they probably could have done it. They might have the talent to do it. But it would just be so difficult to get teams to agree to let you do that now and also to endanger your earnings in one sport by subjecting yourself to the strain of doing that in multiple sports. It just seems like something we're not going to see again. But I would have said that about two-way players pre-Ohtani, too. Sure. I mean, I guess the real hubris at the heart of the question is that we can perfectly anticipate the next really eye-opening thing that will delight us because, you know, we didn't really see Otani coming. I mean, we did once he was, you know. But, like, the sustained excellence at the big league level, I think, surprised a lot of people, particularly once he was really committed to doing both and yeah like kyler even if you set aside the way that that decision kind of ended up goofing things up for the

a's from just a draft perspective like all you have to do is look at how murray's nfl career has proceeded and be like you you think that you know we're being picky about letting these guys go parasailing we're not going to let them do this, where they're getting just roasted by big defensive ends for 18, 19 games a season. So there's that piece of it. But where is our CBS procedural for the guy who is a pitcher and also argues in front of the Supreme Court, Ben?

I'm stuck on this now. We have 100 different NCISs, an inexplicable amount of naval crime. Like, what is going on in the Navy that there are so many of these? And nothing about the humble lawyer who, you know, takes the ball every five days. Where's that show? Give me that show. Yeah. Yeah.

I'm receptive to that. You're like, I have nothing to say to that. Pay the writer so that Meg will stop talking. She just keeps pitching shows. There's also, I guess, the possibility of like a sequential two-way sports star. So you're not playing both sports at the same time, but maybe your career in one sport ends and then you make the transition, right? Maybe your career in one sport ends and then you make the transition, right? Like a Kyler Murray could do that. Or if Michael Jordan had decided to stick with baseball instead of returning to basketball, maybe he could have made that work. Because really, the thing is that it's been so long since anyone even remotely came close to doing what Otani did.

You have to go back a century to Ruth and Bullet Rogan and maybe some more marginal two-way guys recently who dabbled. But to do it at a star level, that's been ages. We haven't seen that within living memory. But we have seen the two-way sports star within living memory. I mean, Bo and Neon. I mean, this was the 80s, the 90s. Brian Jordan, right? I mean, this was the 80s, the 90s, Brian Jordan, right? I mean, this was not ancient history. And that makes me think it's more plausible skill-wise and just in terms of the physical ability to pull it off, but less plausible in terms of getting the permission to do it and then also just justifying it to yourself and to your family and to everyone from a pay perspective.

Right. And obviously we know even more than we used to about the risk of injury in various sports, especially the NFL. So. So, yeah. So that makes me think that it could be done. It just probably won't be for all of those reasons. for all of those reasons. Yeah. I mean, like we could see a time where, I don't know, to pick a guy who we know does another thing at a very high level in a sport where he could presumably have a sustained career after the fact, like what if the first and arguably most meaningful chapter of Mookie Betts' sporting life is baseball. And then he like is done and becomes a professional bowler. You know, we could see that. We could see curling. It seems to be a sport that can be inclusive. Where is the great baseball into pickleball player, you know,

in our lifetime, Ben? You know, people are still, still, I thought it would have tapered off by now, but people are still really enjoying pickleball. They're still really into it. I'm flummoxed, but yeah. But so I think that that is a more likely avenue, if only because there are a number of different sports that are, you know, I don't want to diminish them by saying they're less physically demanding, but they seem to be accessible at greater ages in a way that would accommodate a baseball playing career and a lengthy one and then a transition into something else that might be more accessible, perhaps. Yeah, yeah.

And then the other follow-up, one of the stat blasts last time was about players who had passed up the opportunity to cycle, who had had the chance to do it. They had all the hit types except one, and then they decided to stretch it to take an extra base instead of stopping that would have given them the cycle. They kept going. They took the extra base. They passed up the cycle.

This was prompted by Gunnar Henderson becoming the most recent player to do that and the first in quite a few years. And so Ryan Nelson helped out with this, our Frequent Stat Blast consultant, and we came up with a list of 17 previous times that that had happened. So a fairly exclusive club. However, there was one player, as listener Michael Mountain pointed out in our Patreon Discord group, who should have been mentioned, who wasn't mentioned. And he wasn't mentioned because he actually did end up cycling in the game. mentioned because he actually did end up cycling in the game. However, he did pass up an earlier opportunity to complete the cycle and then he completed it later nonetheless. So this was Scott Cooper. So Scott Cooper, former Red Sox player. This was April 12th, 1994. Scott Cooper had himself a day. So he started off with the double.

Then he got the home run. Then he got a triple. Then he reached on an error. Then he got a double, right? So he needed the single at that point. But he took the double, took the extra base. And at that point, it looked like he's probably passed up the opportunity. He decided to take that extra base. But then he got another chance. And in the ninth inning,

with the Red Sox ahead 22 to 8, this is why he got so many opportunities in this game. Wow. He singled in the ninth to complete the cycle. So this is the best of both worlds, I think. This was pure. This was completely unselfish. He passed up his first opportunity to do it. He said, no, for the good of the team, or just to pad my own stat line in a different way, I'm going to get the double here. But then the universe smiled upon him and decided to give him another opportunity. And then he got the single that time. So he was able to really, I think, join the Gunnar Henderson club of players who pass up the cycle, but then was rewarded regardless and got his cycle in the end.

So good for him. Scott Kubrick didn't want to pass him up just because he did eventually complete the cycle. He still deserved to be mentioned just as much as any of those other guys. That is a wildly impressive game. My goodness. Yeah, sure was. All right. So we have to talk, I think, about the best of times and the worst of times when it comes to National League players here.

I want to talk a bit about the NL MVPvp race because uh it's heating up it's pretty impressive but and the discourse around it blazing yeah discourse around that but also wanted to talk about the discourse surrounding one kyle schwarber and his stats because he has quite a freaky stat line right now, right? Where he has a chance to have the most home runs ever by a sub-replacement level player, according to War, right? Yeah. Holy crap! Wow! Okay, okay.

Wow. I am just now, you know, I pulled it up and boy, boy, howdy., he is still in the red. He is at negative 0.2 on the season, despite the fact that he has 36 home runs on the season. This is like the definition of an all or nothing year for Kyle Schroeder. So I saw a tweet the other day. This was by someone who went by Jolly Olive on Twitter. I think I'm going to call it Twitter forever. I cannot call it. It's very much like, you know how we've talked about how when stadium ballpark rebrandings happen and we still continue to call it what we used to call it?

Now, in many cases, it's still a different kind of corporate brand that we call it. But, you know, you still call it Safeco in many cases, right? I mean, some of them are just such word salad, sort of like, gosh, this doesn't feel like it's a ballpark name at all. But you get it, you associate a ballpark with maybe the first name or the name you grew up with or the longest tenured name. And then just because someone else decides to pay for the sponsorship, you know, the team has to change the official name and the broadcast maybe have to call it that name. But we don't. Fans don't, right? So we don't have to call Twitter X.

I think we can continue to call it Twitter if we want. Yeah. I mean, I think that just in general, we're well served to not indulgent attention seeking behavior. So we have that going for us, too. three, this is where he was then. Kajwerber has the chance to become the first player ever with 40 home runs and negative war. This was quote tweeted by someone with the long handle at Panasonic DX 4500. OK, and that that person said, you know, if a guy is hitting 40 plus home runs with roughly a 780 OPS and war is saying that you'd actually win more games with a replacement player, it probably says more about the limitations of war than about him.

People love this line. It says more about the strat than it does the player. Right. So that's the conversation that has been sparked. And when you see this, because look, And when you see this, because look, he's making a run at history here. He has 36 home runs right now. So he's leading the NL in strikeouts. He has a 187, 332, 452 line. So that's a 784 OPS as we speak on Tuesday afternoon. And it's true. Once you know the OBP and the slug, the batting average tells you something about the shape of the player's production.

Oh, yeah, sure does. But doesn't necessarily tell you that much about the value of the player's production. But he is now tied with 1983 Tony Armas for the most homers ever with a sub replacement level war, according to baseball reference. They trail only 2009 Adam Dunn, who hit 38 homers and had himself a negative point for war. Right. So this is like the Dave Kingman all stars, the Dante Bichette all stars. All-Stars, the Dante Bichette All-Stars. There's a famous 1999 Dante Bichette season where he was like multiple wins below replacement, even though he had 34 homers, because that was a combo of bad defense and park adjustments for pre-humidor cores as well. So, Kyle Schwarber, I mean, he's certainly on pace to hit 40 plus homers, and he could very well end up with a replacement level war or sub replacement level.

So if he pulls it off, and I got to say, I'm rooting for him. Yeah, like I am more invested in this than Arise hitting 400 all of a sudden. So to what degree do you think this calls into question war? To what degree do you think this calls into question war? And to what degree do you think it just reinforces the fact that Koshwarber is a singular player having a singular season? And here I get to sit in a spot of relative ease and comfort because our version of war has him slightly above zero and not in the negative. But I guess my question, it's always so interesting to see these arguments because I think that we should welcome them most of the time. Because first of all, we shouldn't assume that everything's always going great with advanced stats. I think that it is incumbent upon proponents of advanced stats to make the case, you know, and give your theory of the case, right?

Like, looking at his season, can we justify his war number just based on our understanding of like where value in baseball comes from? So I think that that's useful. And even if the answer to that ends up being, as I suspect it will here, like, yeah, this is right. It affords an opportunity to like have a conversation with someone about what goes into the number. And if they're open to having that, maybe it impacts the way they think about baseball going forward in a way that they find edifying. You know, that possibility exists, right? So I think it's useful to have that conversation. I guess, like, the first place I would start, and my on-mic reaction to Schwarber's line

was equal parts about how he is hitting, both in terms of what his average is and the home run total, and then, like, just how atrociously he rates defensively. And so I would take both of those things, which traditionalists like to talk about batting average, right? And I think that traditionalists like to whack sabermetric folks with the accusation of, well, do you even watch the games? And so let's engage in a more generous version of that and say, have you watched Kyle Schwarber play defense?

Because it's really bad. And to Schwarber's credit, I know that we have joked a lot on this podcast about the Phillies just signing an entire team of DHs and being like, I don't know, we'll figure it out later. The plan was for Kyle Schwarber to DH a lot at the time, right? And injuries have forced him into the field for much of the season. I know that he has gotten a little more DH time as Harper has come back and been healthy and been able to play first base. And so they've not had to put him in the DH spot, although he's been DH-ing again. So like, who knows how long that lasts. But like, Schwarber drew a bad assignment

that he is not well-equipped for and he's making a go at it anyway. And the nobility of that is not captured in war, but how bad he looks out there is definitely captured in war. And sometimes, in much the same way that you might see what is rated as a particularly zippy throw, and you're like, was it fast? Was it slow? Who could say how it is like sometimes you watch a guy play defense and you look at what the advanced metrics think of that defense and even knowing all of the caveats around sample size and stabilization and all of that you'll be like that doesn't really comport with my my vibe based assessment of him right or my

visual assessment of him yeah but then you watch kyle schwarber play defense and you're like that seems right you know so that seems right like it's pretty bad out there and god bless him for trying but like this is pretty bad out there so there's there's that piece of it and then like he's hitting 187 and yeah like he he is being buoyed he is being buoyed by those home runs they are yanking him up in in the same way like he is being buoyed. He is being buoyed by those home runs. They are yanking him up in the same way that he is yanking him out, right? But like my guy is hitting 187. So, you know, that's not great.

Batting average isn't a perfect stat. It doesn't tell us all the stuff, but it tells us some stuff. And like that's not good stuff it's telling us. It's telling us not the best stuff right now. Yes. Right. Yeah. And, and I feel like batting average has gotten a bad rap because Tango and others have pointed out that yes, it tells you almost nothing from a value perspective, as long as you know, OBP and slug. But I feel like that's partly because batting average is already a big part of OBP and slug. And so it's a bigger component of those things or at least as big than other stats are.

So I feel like if you're just taking OBP and slug and saying, well, you don't need to know batting average. I mean, yeah, but batting average also is a huge component of OBP and slug. That said, yes, he has a 332 on base percentage, which is, you know, fine. It's above average, but it's not great. And he has a 452 slug, which is fine. Okay, pretty good, but not great, right? Because the batting average drags those things down. So even though he walks a lot and even though he hits a lot of home runs,

it's not a great overall offensive line. He's got a 111 WRC plus, right? So when you put that on a scale that also accounts for his other shortcomings as a player, this is why we want war or why we need war so that we can make calculations like this and say, oh, this guy's hit 36 dingers, but also he strikes out a lot, but also he walks a lot, but also he doesn't give you any value on the bases. And also he's bad at defense. Like without some sort of statistical war style framework, how do you balance those things in your mind? Probably not very well. Right. How do you balance those things in your mind?

Probably not very well, right? So maybe he would have been overrated in the past because people would have fixated on the dingers or underrated because people would have fixated on the batting average. Yeah. So the frameworks that we have now enables us to put these things on the same scale and say, okay, this is a plus and this is a minus and here's how it all works out. So seeing that he has 36 homers and could be on pace for 40 plus and could still be sub replacement level. Yeah, on the surface, that's like, wow, that's never happened before. But then you dig into the individual components

and I can't say it shakes my faith in war or the framework of war. Because yeah, if this were a player who had no history of being bad at defense or if the eye test said that he was actually okay out there, that would be oneressed more or something, or we have more confidence in the things that he does well than the things he doesn't do well. So let's pump the brakes a little bit. But it's Kyle Schwarber. We've all seen it. And he has a history of that. And the various fielding systems agree on their evaluation. Sometimes they disagree, but he's- Not in this case. No, negative 18 DRS, negative 16 outs above average. Last year, they were identical negative 14s, right? He has a history of this. So you could certainly say this is on the Phillies that they're

forcing him to do a job he's not equipped to do. It's not his fault that he's being forced to play out of position, which is at a position period, right? So you could say that it's more of a team fault than a player fault, but we account for these things by assessing what actually happened on the field and apportioning that to the player. And so I think it is fair to say that he has been somewhere around replacement level, at least given what we know i agree you know and i think if you if you want to mentally credit him for standing in there when he's forced to okay i think that that's fine that's context for for his performance that is useful for us to

know we you know we don't want to remove that context in terms of how we you know at the end of the year when you're sitting around with your buddies like talking about these Phillies and their vibes like if you want to say it didn't go great, but boy, he really tried and did a thing that the team needed him to. And it sure is a bummer that he couldn't just DH every day. Like, I think that's defensible. That's a totally fine way to think for yourself about like your understanding of his season. But in terms of us putting a number on his actual production and value, like we have to account for the fact that he is just really rough out there like there's there's no way around that i don't think that it says anything

all that like revelatory about war as a stat i do think that it shows that we maybe still have work to do as a community to like help people understand what what we're accounting for? And I think that like if you as a Phillies fan or someone who covers the team want to like kind of separate out his defense and just say, look, we're going to acknowledge that this is bad and it is a situation born of necessity. So just like bracket that off and don't think about it. And then like sit there and, and try to make sense of him as a hitter. That's fine. You can do that too. Like you can sit there and say like, look,

he doesn't hit for average. He walks a fair amount. He still strikes out a fair amount. Like he's running close to a 30% strikeout rate, but he hits a bunch of dingers and you add all that together. And the thing that comes out of the oven is a one 11 WRC plus hitter. Okay. Yeah.

Like, you know, no one's, I also find these conversations so strange because it's like, who are you fighting? Is there someone on Twitter being like, I can't believe you like Kyle Schwarber. It's like,

people like Kyle Schwarber, like a likable guy, you know? I think it's also just, it's particularly funny to me within the context of this Phillies team, which is like, and I say this, I want to be clear, with just like a tremendous amount of affection. Like, they are a collection of, right now, good players who are hurt or, until recently, were dramatically underperforming and, like, vibes guys. And what it has amounted to in the second half is them being in the first-in-all wildcard spot. Like, it's okay, you know?

Like, you could focus on Schwarber having the season he's having or you could instead think about the fact that, as Jay Jaffe wrote for Fangraphs today, that Bryce Harper's sitting for power again, or that Trey Turner, who had to put up a billboard thanking the city of Philadelphia for giving him a standing ovation is like back to himself seemingly. Like, you know, they're weird. They are a weird roster. And that weird roster went all the way to the World Series last year. So like, a weird roster and that weird roster went all the way to the World Series last year.

So like, focus on that. I don't know. Yeah. Yeah. All right. And wanted to talk about the players at the top of leaderboards in the National League too, because suddenly an extremely exciting NL MVP race, which it seemed like Ronald Acuna Jr. had sewn up for most of the season because he had the war lead and also maybe just the fun lead because of his power speed combo, which I think he still probably holds. So he's now about to become a 30-60 player, which is not something that existed before.

So he got his 61st steal and hit his 29th homer. So he has the most steals ever by anyone with that many homers. Or wait, I guess it's the other way around. Maybe both. He definitely has the most homers by anyone with that many steals. It's a lot. It's such a strange combination of stats. I jokingly predicted maybe he can have a 50-50 season at the start of this year.

He has let us down, I guess, in the power department. I thought he would hit more homers than this, but he has exceeded my expectations in the speed and stolen base department. So he's right up there. But on the fan graphs war leaderboard, at least, he has now been exceeded by Freddie Freeman and by Mookie Betts, who is at the top and behind only Shohei Otani and E.Y.D. And if you look at this baseball reference, they also have Betts second overall in baseball, first in the NL with Acuna a bit behind him.

And then they have Freeman a little lower after Ha Sung Kim and also Corey Seeger in the AL. Anyway, it now appears to be a three-player race for NL MVP, with two of those players being teammates, and all three of them having extraordinarily fun and impressive seasons in different ways. So I'm not invested in any one particular player winning, and I think, obviously, you still have more than a month left to go in the season, and that may very well decide who wins this thing. So these conversations are almost always premature when you have them months

before the end of the season. But as of now, there's no wrong choice here. It would be pretty tough to actually choose one over the other and make a convincing case that he'd been meaningfully better than the others. They've just done it in different ways. How do you imagine for a moment that you had an MVP vote and you're trying to make sense of the cases for these three guys? What are your thoughts about Acuna's very impressive stolen base total and the way that it is interacting with the rule changes? Are you applying a mental discount to that number? What are your thoughts? Because this has emerged as like one of the points

of argument betwixt in between them, because you're right. Like when you think about the raw stolen base totals and home run totals, I feel like we can be confident that he will hit, you know, a couple more before the season is done right those are big numbers those are cool milestones and thresholds to pass and i think some folks who are perhaps a little miffed that like bets and freeman but particularly bets isn't getting like the consideration that they maybe think he deserves in part because people haven't updated their Acuna priors, or maybe more accurately, their Betts priors, right? Are like, well, but the rules are such that like stolen bases are just way up across baseball anyway. So all of that to say, what do you, how do you think about those? I think it's definitely appropriate to apply a discount. I

don't think that he would have 61 stolen bases if the rules had not changed. However, he has a large lead on everyone else, right? He is leading Esteria Ruiz by 10 stolen bases now league-wide, MLB-wide, and he's leading Corbin Carroll by 21 steals in the National League. So he is head and shoulders or foot and ankle ahead of everyone else. Right. So it's not that he is the fastest guy in baseball. He's speedy. I think maybe sprint speed underrates him, if anything.

But he's not the fastest guy. He's just he's been very aggressive. He has gone all the time. He's picked his spots well, and he has taken advantage of the rules changes more than anyone else. So yeah, I would apply some discount, but still give him some credit. It's not like everyone is stealing 60, right? So the thing is, I do think it is more fun than it is valuable. If you look at his, for instance, his fan graphs, base running metric, it's like five and a half runs right now. It's like half a win. I mean, that's why guys don't run as much anymore or weren't before the rules change.

It's not that beneficial. not that beneficial. It's kind of amazing that someone like him is actually leading both leagues and by a lot because he's a superstar whether he runs or not because he hits so well overall. He's batting 335. He's got 29 homers, right? He doesn't have to run. If anything, it endangers his availability to run so much. If you're Estrella Ruiz, then yeah, you run because that's your game. If you're Ronald Acuna, you could easily just say, I'm not going to run anymore. And that wouldn't affect your playing time one whit, right? So he just really likes to run. He just likes to showcase his speed. And even post knee injury, he's still able to do that, which is a great relief. So yeah, I mean, like Freddie Freeman, who surprisingly has more stolen bases than Mookie Betts. Yeah, how about that? He has 17 in 18 attempts, I think. And his base running value is like a run less than Acuna's. So it just doesn't translate to value the same way, but it does translate to attention and highlights and excitement.

Right. So whether you think that should be a part of his case for MVP, I could very well see it not be, but it is part of his case for being sort of the player of the year, you know, like not necessarily value, but just who we enjoyed watching most or who was most emblematic of that season or who was most exciting. I think Acuna potentially has an edge there, but that's just not quite factored into war, nor should it be.

Yeah, I think that you always, in much the same way that we want to like take the entire context of shorter season into account like you can't completely dismiss the impact that the rule changes have had i think it's fine to like the way that i've been thinking about it in terms of say a corbin carroll season for instance is that you know because he's got 40. And so he is being put in conversation with other young rookies who had like 40 stolen business and 20, at least 20 home runs and all of this stuff. And it's like, you have to take the broader context of the league into account. And in much the same way that like, and I think we've talked about this on the show before, you know, in 2019, if you were like an established big power guy and you hit a bunch of home runs, the size of the asterisks that I applied to that total was smaller just because it's like you're already planting

home runs like 15 rows back. Like we've, we know that you can do that and that that is a part of your tool set. Right. And so are you getting some that you maybe wouldn't have hit before because the ball is Yeah, probably. Cause everybody's getting some of that, but like the percentage of your total home runs that we can account for based on the ball is probably smaller than it is for, you know, a guy who's like been a slap hitter his whole career and suddenly has 15 home runs. It is for, you know, a guy who's like been a slap hitter his whole career and suddenly has 15 home runs, right? If you have superlative speed, are you able to run more often because of the pickoff rules? Sure, maybe.

Are you getting a better sort of league-wide stolen base environment? And is that redounding to your benefit? Yeah. But like, Corbin Carroll has 80 speed. So, you know, he was going to probably steal a bunch of home runs. Steal a bunch of home runs, Ben, you know, he was going to probably steal a bunch of home runs. Steal a bunch of home runs, Ben. You know, like you do. You steal a bunch of home runs. Sure.

Does he have an inside the park home run? I'm going to look that up while you're talking. I feel like he has to, right? Corbin Carroll. Oh, Eloy De La Cruz robs Corbin Carroll of inside the park home run. This is that. Yeah, that's right. This is that throw.

This is that throw, Ben. Yes, that infielder outfield throw. He's had them in the minors, it seems, but not maybe as a big leader. Anyway, it's exciting. It's nice to have races that aren't just like done and dusted, whether it's the playoffs or the awards votes, because it seems like we often have less controversy. I don't mean that in like a takey way,

but just in a like being able to make compelling good cases for multiple guys. Like that's a nice thing to be able to do. You know, it makes the it makes the season feel away. That's good. So yeah. Yeah. And I don't want to take anything away, as they say, from Mookie Betts, who is fun in his own way, in part because of his multi-position play and the fact that the Dodgers are just like, hey, we need a middle infielder. Want to play shortstop? Sure. I would love to play shortstop. That's my dream, actually. And I can hold my own there. I can kind of fake it as a shortstop and I can play second and I can be a great defensive outfielder, too, while also being maybe the best hitter in the league overall. All these guys are batting well over 300.

I mean, Acuna or Freeman could end up winning the NHL batting title because Arise has been slumping. He's only got like a 10, 15-point lead over those guys at this point. So the fact that they're having such extraordinary seasons and Freddie Freeman is about to turn 34 years old and he's having arguably his best full-length season, right? I mean, aside from the 2020 year. So that's really impressive too. So much that he's overshadowing the incredible year that Matt Olson, his replacement in Atlanta, is having. I mean, he's having an incredible power year, too, but nowhere near the overall value that Freddie Freeman has provided.

These are just some satisfying slash lines, just some nice, just robust 300, 400, 500 type slash lines. And just really fun players, likable players, perennial stars and potential future Hall of Famers. Like, it's just a good race. Can't go wrong with any of them. Yeah, I can't believe that you were like, he's almost 34. It makes it so much more impressive. I'm just sitting here and I got like sideswiped out of nowhere. Ben, jeez Louise.

Sideswiping myself too. I'm right there with you. But yeah, I mean, Mookie's basically having his 2018 with a lower BABIP, I guess, more or less. And fewer steals. It's sort of the same. He's going to be right around 60 war

by the end of this season. This is his age 30 season. Mookie's just ridiculous. He's so good. He's incredible. You sit there and you're like, who would trade that guy? Yeah, right. Well, Red Sox fans were recently reminded of that when he returned to Fenway and put on a bit of a show, as he does. They were sure nice about that, though. Yeah, they were. And plus, Mookie could win an MVP award in both leagues. Storyline going on here, which is something I've been rooting for that to happen, too. Yes.

So I'm going to be pleased with whoever wins this award, I think. Yeah, it's one of those things where, you know, for us, it would be hard to go wrong, you know, and maybe it will feel, to your point earlier, maybe it'll feel more settled by the time the playoffs roll around. You know, a lot can happen in a month's worth of play. But for us, it feels like we just get to, we're getting to watch some really good special seasons.

And it feels particularly nice to be reminded of that after losing Otani as a pitcher. Like, you know, I was really down, Ben. I know you were, you know, you were being brought low. And more honestly by that than by the COVID. But to be able to look at these leaderboards and be like, you know, baseball is really great. It's nice. It's a good thing.

You have Mookie doing the Frank Robinson over here and then also just picking up shortstop all of a sudden. And you have Freddie Freeman having just an unbelievable year. At an advanced, I mean, barely able to walk age, you know. Yeah. Should be decrepit by now, but somehow he's kept it together. He's batting 340. He's just getting better with age. And then you have Acuna and the special fun sort of season he's having.

So, yeah, very fun. And hopefully no fans will, will charge Ronald Acuna in the outfield anymore. We know he's really fun and we all like watching him. I didn't care for that. Yeah. You guys want to get a selfie with him. That's nice,

but, but don't do it in the middle of the game and don't like tackle him because that can be very scary for players because you don't know why a fan is charging you in the outfield. So yeah, he handled it with grace and forgiveness, but we cannot condone the fans charging players in the outfield. Absolutely not. It was, and I sent you or I asked you if you had seen the video of that because I was aware that there had been an incident and I had seen Acuna's quotes after the fact, which you're right.

Like he was very gracious in a way that I would have struggled to be, but I had not seen the footage. And then that started to make its way around because, you know the fans in the outfield like films this all happening don't do that like such an obvious thing to say but you just don't know you don't know like what intent people have and to be clear like even if your intent isn't malicious you just want a selfie like still don't do that like that's not a good the intent being good is not justification. Like it was, it was intense. I did not, I hitters in baseball. And we were like, well, this can't continue. And then we talked about him in mid-July and it had continued at that point. He'd still been amazing over the ensuing month. And then I was like, but this really can't continue to continue. And finally it has not. So he is finally kind of cratered. So since the last time we talked about him, I think this was July 20th.

So since July 20th, and this is even with a three for four on Monday, he has hit 224, 248, 344. That is a 53 WRC plus, which of the 189 players with at least 100 plate appearances over that span, I think that's eighth worst. So he has been one of the worst hitters and sub-replacement level overall over that time. So it turns out that swinging at absolutely everything is perhaps not the best long-term strategy.

But he made it work for longer than I was expecting. You know, if you're a player, it probably never feels good to hit the way he's been hitting lately. I think, you know, there's only really cold comfort to be had. But I will say, if you played for the Angels and you wanted to pick a stretch to be god-awful, like, this is the right stretch to have picked if what you're hoping to do is avoid notice. Right. Because they have much bigger fish to fry. I don't want to forestall any further follow-ups.

That was hard to say. But Ben, can I briefly say a little something about Julio Rodriguez? Oh, sure. Can I? Because last night I sat and I watched my Seattle Mariners. You know, the Mets, they weren't helpful. You know, the Red Sox, they weren't helpful.

And so I sat down to watch the Mariners going, you know, the Mariners, if they want to stay in first place in the ALS, they're going to have to do it on their own. They're going to have to lift themselves up. And luckily they're playing the AOS, they're going to have to do it on their own. They're going to have to lift themselves up. And luckily, they're playing the A's. So, you know, it made it easier to lift themselves up because they're playing the Oakland A's. And the A's are famously not very good. But upon the conclusion of that game, or rather I should say after Julio hit another home

run, that was now the third game in a row where he had hit a home run. I tweeted that he is so cool and we should talk about him every day. And I meant that sentiment so much that I not only tweeted it, I also posted it on Bluski. And now I sound Russian when I'm saying it. I no longer sound like a Midwestern dad. I just sound Russian, I guess. But I double posted. Like that's, you know, I really mean it. And so I have to put my money where my mouth is.

And I have to talk about Julio because he's so cool. And I just want to give a little August stat update. It's still sure something, Ben, you know. His line, 429, 447, 724. He has a 232

WRC+. He has a 501 Wobb. Now, does he have a 494 Wobb? Like, yeah, he does. He does have that. But he also has 11 stolen bases. He's got seven home runs. He's got 30 RBI. He's got 45 hits, you know?

And 17. 17 of his hits are extra base hits. I just, it's been incandescent, you know, resplendent. I'm going to think of another fun word in a minute, but it's sure been nice, you know. It's been great fun. And I hope that these first place Seattle Mariners, when we recorded last, they were not by themselves in first place. And now, Ben.

All alone. They are, you know. And I found myself rooting for the Mets last night. I was like, go Red Sox. I was constructing theories about like Trevor Gott and what what are his motivations you know do you want to do well for yourself do you want to you know inadvertently or or at least um tangentially secondarily spite your former team that traded you so they could get salary relief for Chris Flexen like what are what do you want? And then he blew it. So it didn't matter.

And then I am given to understand that while the Red Sox were temporarily ahead in their game, that they got really trounced later on. So, you know, they had to do it themselves. But they did. So here we are. Yeah. I still have the leaderboard open that I was looking at with Moniak. And Moniak was toward the bottom over that period. So here we are. outrageous case and i'm going to back to you know that combined war leader board at the very top you're the love of your life otani bets freeman acuna and then julio and look i'm not saying that

julio is the al mvp he is not he is not it's still otan but we were experiencing Julio's sophomore season as something of a disappointment because for a while it was. And then he had a two-month heater. And now he is, at least by our understanding of war, the second most valuable player in the American League and the most valuable player non-Ohtani division. league and the most valuable player non-otani division now is cory seager mere fractions of a win behind him such that they effectively have the same war yeah that is also true and we should acknowledge that man good for bobby wood jr and for that matter who is for bear jr like two teams that have been bad but two guys who have been good anyway that has been meg reacts to stats you know like here I am reacting to stuff. The nice thing about the NL MVP race is that

those three players are all on two great teams. We don't have to have that part of it. Whereas in the AL, if say Otani said, okay, I'm done for the year now and Julio finished extremely strong and Sigurd did too, I guess you could

have someone say, yeah, Otani still has a little war lead here. But his team is not going to the playoffs and these other players play for his division rivals. And at least one of them is going to the playoffs. And that player was a big part of that. But the NL race, we are mercifully, blissfully free of that aspect of things. free of that aspect of things. Yeah, and I will say, and I say this as a proponent of my Seattle Mariners, to anyone out there who has an AL MVP vote, which is importantly not me, I would just say resist that urge.

You know, if you come away with a good case just on its merits for Julio at the end of the season, okay, fine. But don't make it about the playoff team thing. That remains bad reasoning to my mind. Yeah. Joe Posnanski actually just proposed that we have an alternative award called the Willie Stargell Award that's named after when he tied for the MVP in 79, even though war-wise he didn't have such a great year, but he was the heart and soul of the We Are Family Pirates and everything. Like an award for that type of player who had that kind of Stargell in 79 team spirit, fan favorite type season.

And Julio could certainly win that sort of award if you said, hey, look at the Mariners' comeback. It's incredible. And Julio was powering that and no maybe he hasn't been as valuable as otani on a full season level but he's a star drill award winner if i ever saw one so maybe some like a an outlet for that impulse for like oh you you captured the imagination and the hearts and minds yeah you help propel your team to success. Like that aspect of things that has fallen out of MVP voting and most award voting, in my mind, for the better. But maybe there is still some way to recognize that because it is still kind of cool that that happens, even if it's not directly reflected in your war, let's say. But yeah, that's a possibility. Also, you mentioned the Red Sox

just getting crushed in that game, right? Crushed. The person who wore it for the Sox in that game was Kyle Bearclaw, who I used to think was like the avatar of effective wildness, right? He was just lots of strikeouts, lots of walks. But Kyle Bearclaw in this game,

he pitched four and a third in relief in this game that the Astros won 13 to five. He gave up 10 earned runs, 11 hits, five walks and a strikeout. And this was the kind of line that you just don't see anymore. I don't know if you ever really see that line anymore where you just like leave someone out there to wear one like that. Like Andrew Mearns wrote about this at Baseball Prospectus and he found there's only a small group of players in the years that we have pitch count data

who have had a game like that where they've just been left out to throw that many pitches. He threw 94 pitches because he was just like saving the bullpen. And so he found a list of only six games that meet that definition since 1988 when the pitch count data begins. 90-plus pitches and 10 earned runs in relief.

And it was most recently, Bearclaw, Ryan Weber did this in 2021, I guess also for the Red Sox. So this was a Cora special. Jordan Yamamoto, I remember that game. He did that in 2020. And then you have to go back to Frank Castillo, Red Sox, 2002, Bob Forsh, 1989, and Tom McCarthy, 1989. So you don't see guys left out there to wear one as much maybe just because you tend to pull pitchers more quickly anyway and yeah you feel for these guys and maybe you just have so many arms in the bullpen you don't need to do it as much yeah man he was just he was out

there taking one for the team big time yeah this is like when i play uh i play in a sim league, I don't do fantasy baseball, but I play in a sim league. And sometimes, yeah, you just leave a guy out there or you have to put him in and the computer will say, he's tired. Do you still want to throw him? And you're like, yeah, I do want to do that. I'm really sorry, but I do need to do that here. I think it's good that we don't see it more often because, you know, I don't think that we want managers to be like cavalier with a guy's arm just because he's less good, you know. And those things aren't always, you know, sometimes they're cavaliers may be too strong. But and I don't mean to say suggest that this was necessarily cavalier. Cavaliers may be too strong, but, and I don't mean to say, suggest that this was necessarily Cavalier, but like, I think the instinct to be just careful with arms in general is, is good. We, we want that because you don't want a guy to get hurt and miss time because he happens to be

the dude who can just, you know, he's the, the pitching staff sin eater for that day, right? Like you don't, you don't want that especially you know there's an argument to be made that you especially don't want it for those guys because they're likely to make less money over the course of their careers anyway you know and so losing time to an injury could be you know more damaging to them than it would be for like a good pitcher who happens to just blow out. But I hope that the combination of concern and then this is the less good part, just like so many pitchers is driving that. But sometimes the guy's got to wear one.

You just got to wear it, you know? Yeah. Also meant to mention this when I brought up Moniak before and you said that that was kind of under the radar because the other angels woes are taking more attention. Alex, Patreon supporter, wrote in to say, not sure if this is a question, a comment, or merely commiseration, but another consequence of the simultaneous injuries to Otani and Trout is re-highlighting what we might have known to be true already, that the best baseball moment of 2023, both when it happened and also now even more so in hindsight, was the end of the WBC, which I guess is kind of true.

It's bittersweet now in retrospect, knowing what was coming for Trout at least this season. Obviously, Otani's have an amazing season, even though his arm is hurt now. But yeah, that's true. Yeah, man. It just goes show. It's like we talked about last time. Gotta appreciate it when it's in front of you because you don't know how long it's going to last.

All right. So let's bring in Tanner Swanson here now to talk about catcher defense. So for anyone who didn't hear our stat blast last time, basically the mystery, the puzzle, the enigma, the conundrum here is that for years, wild pitches and pass balls were becoming more and more common. And there seemed to be obvious reasons for that. The pitchers are throwing harder than ever. They're throwing more breaking

balls than ever. They're throwing more pitches outside the strike zone, trying to get chases and strikeouts than ever. So it was getting really tough to block these wild pitches and pass balls. And we were also seeing more walks sometimes, but definitely more hit by pitches, etc. And then all of a sudden in 2022, and even more so this year, that reversed itself. And we went from having one of the highest rates, at least in recent decades, for wild pitches and pass balls, to one of the lowest, even though pitchers are still throwing hard and they're still throwing lots of breaking balls, etc. And so we were trying to puzzle out why this was. Did it get easier to block for some reason? Or did catchers just get better at blocking?

Or is it a factor that we didn't even mention? Pitchcom, which came in and reduced cross-ups starting in 2022. So maybe it's pitchcom related. So after that episode went up, I exchanged some messages with Tanner Swanson, who is the Yankees quality control and catching coach. And though the Yankees have had some issues this year, I wouldn't say catcher defense has been one of them. They actually rate very well in catcher defense despite the absence of Jose Trevino recently. So they're the highest, according to Fangraph's defense rating, after the Pirates who had Austin Hedges for most of the year. That doesn't take into account blocking. I think they don't do quite as well in blocking if you look at stat cast. But framing wise and overall, they're a good defensive team. And Swanson, who was formerly with the Twins and then was working with catchers in college, he's been very much at the forefront of the knee down catcher stance that has become common.

has become common. And so he has a lot of thoughts about the effect that that has had on wild pitches and pass balls, which, as you noted, J.J. Cooper has written about multiple times and apparently is writing about again. So I think we can hear from Tanner and he can talk to us about what he thinks

the effects of catcher technique and instruction improvements have been and also pitchitchcom. And then we can reconvene briefly after that. And I will mention some other hypotheses that have been bandied about and some other data that I have. But here is Tanner Swanson, who I should say has been much celebrated for his work with certain individual catchers. Much celebrated for his work with certain individual catchers and how he seems to have helped them improve their framing in particular by advocating this style change. All right. Well, Meg and I are catcher defense enthusiasts slash obsessives, but I can guarantee that we have not considered that subject more than the man we are bringing in right now, Tanner Swanson, who is the New York Yankees quality control and catching coach. Tanner, welcome.

Hey, Ben. How are you doing? Hey, Meg. Happy to join here. This is obviously a topic I'm extremely passionate about and one that gets kind of a lot of noise, so happy to contribute here if possible. Yeah, happy to have you, and I'm not surprised that this was on your radar way before it was on ours. So you have heard our discussion from the other day, but is this something that

has been talked about in professional catching circles going back to last season? The fact that we seem to have seen this reversal in wild pitch and pass ball rates? Yeah, I think this is one of the more misunderstood aspects in our game currently that seems to be very controversial, which is somewhat disheartening to me. There's public perception. Obviously, the industry is, in terms of the catching style and techniques that have been adopted recently, professional baseball has acknowledged that there's benefits. Obviously, has acknowledged that there's benefits and obviously many catchers it's not most of kind of evolved over the last several years you know yet the public narrative hasn't necessarily evolved at the same rate and there's still a lot of i think confusion about what is happening it's

just solely just to steal strikes are there other benefits and i think now based on this conversation that you guys have sparked up, we're seeing that there's real benefits on the blocking side as well, and that's turning a lot of heads, I think. And I think that the perception is actually, and this is one that we tried to correct in our conversation, and that J.J. Cooper at Baseball America has tried to remedy in his own analysis, that catching from one knee can actually worsen a catcher's

pass ball rate, while pitch rate, we kind of lumped those two things together in our prior conversation. And the data doesn't really support that. In fact, it doesn't seem to be true at all. The guys who catch on one knee are more prone to struggling with blocking. So you've obviously helped a lot of guys make that transition to a one-knee approach, at least situationally. And so as you're thinking about how you marry the one-knee approach with blocking, what are some of the things that you're encouraging guys to think about so that they can still be nimble and get to balls that might be prone to skidding away from them in the dirt? Yeah, I think what's happened is we've kind of merged the two positions together or the

two skills where I think for a while, especially kind of towards the beginning of kind of the velocity revolution where there was a clear uptick and not just velocity, but movement and stuff and, you know, maybe even a reduction in command in terms of you know what we were seeing with zone rates so i think the blocking environment was getting increasingly difficult annually right and i think it reached kind of a tipping point in 2018 2019 where we started really looking at this problem differently and the first step to try to summarize quickly was you know my initial goal was to try to figure out, you know, how can we better optimize the framing piece? And it wasn't about blocking at all. It was about, you know,

we knew the value of a strike. I think the industry at that point acknowledged how valuable that skill was. But I think up until that point, everybody was just trying to figure out how to acquire it as opposed to try to maybe better train it or optimize it. And so when we started kind of digging into the data, this is, you know is when I was a coordinator with the Twins, we found a huge discrepancy in framing metrics with the introduction of the skill of blocking. So a catcher's framing ability with the base is empty compared to their framing ability with a runner on base.

Like almost universally throughout the league, every catcher got worse. And that was kind of the first eye-opening moment for me that, okay, what's the common denominator here? And it was the stances that catchers would get in traditionally. They'd get higher, they'd get wider, you know, which was perceived to be more athletic and a better position to block and throw from. Yet a majority of the time when they were in these positions, the block or the throw outcome still rarely showed up and so I thought there was a mismanagement in how catchers were using stances and kind of set down this path to try to figure out if there was a better way to

do it and and initially I'd be lying if I didn't say that you know once we committed once we started studying knee down stances and saw the receiving benefits and committed to it full-time i thought that our blocking would actually get worse that was my initial hypothesis that but i believe that by sheer frequency the net gain would overcome you know any deficit and blocking kind of similar to what was happening with the shifts like you're clearly going to take away more hits than you give up, but it's that loss aversion when the ball sneaks through a hole where an infielder normally would be positioned.

You tend to overvalue the loss more than the gains there. But over time, obviously, clearly, there's a benefit. And so I kind of looked at it the same way. But what I quickly learned, like as we started experimenting in the minor leagues with these different knee down variations, that not only like were these positions not detrimental, but they were actually could be advantageous. And almost every single one of our guys that we put in these positions actually got better at blocking, not worse. So I wasn't a catcher. I wasn't a catcher, so it was a little counterintuitive to me that if a catcher was trying to control balls in the dirt better, that they would actually take their center of mass further from the ground, which is how it was being done previously.

You'd get up in this tall stance, and you'd take your center of mass further from the ground. And now with faster breaking balls, that transition to be able to get to the ground was becoming, I think, increasingly difficult. And so by starting in this position, we've now like merged our blocking stance and our receiving stance into one, and there's no real transition needed. And therefore catchers could, they committed to the actual reception much longer. And I think the block then just became kind of an extension of the reception. It wasn't a completely different skill that was kind of competing against one another. Yeah, and it's really fascinating how quickly this has just swept the sport.

I think the fact that catchers are in front of our faces constantly on every pitch, we're looking at them. I think they almost go unnoticed. You take it for granted. But now it has switched so quickly that it's almost like when you see a traditional crouch, it's the outlier now. It's old school all of a sudden, right? And I don't know whether there's been an equivalent mechanical change in any other position. It's like if every other pitcher started throwing sidearm all of a sudden, or I don't know, I guess you could say some of the changes in hitting mechanics and launch angle and that sort of thing. But visually, that's not as obvious as what we're seeing with catchers. And I know it's not unprecedented. People cite Tony Pena, for

instance, back in the 80s with his extreme one knee or one leg down style. But I don't know that anything has been as quickly embraced as this. So how would you sort of chart the progression of this across the league? Because it's gone from just a couple guys doing it. When I interviewed Tyler Flowers back in 2018, he talked about how everyone was getting on the knee-down bandwagon. And now it's just so pervasive, it's almost universal. So how has this spread? It's become incredibly contagious. those santiagos and i mean there were guys getting in these positions with nobody on base and we didn't have data to tell us that yes this was good this was optimal but i think intuitively these guys understood that it could get them into a lower position they could take their center mass

closer to the ground which is where the strike zone is most susceptible but for some reason that became you know lazy and there became a stigma around that specific technique and it was just outlawed or not allowed with runners on base. And we held this assumption that you couldn't block and throw from these positions, but I don't think anybody had really tested that assumption. And I think the minor leagues is a great testing ground for these types of things. And I happened to be in an organization where they were really encouraging us to try things and to test things and to, you know, before we knew with 100% clarity or evidence that it was effective. I think I was fortunate to be in that environment where it kind of allowed us to experiment. And so once we started experimenting with the blocking and the throwing, it became pretty clear to me that this had real value beyond just the receiving component other things i think come into play here i think around this time too like the value of quality

receivers is now like it's universally accepted by i'd like to think every organization and and so you've seen organizations start to value this skill more, not just at the major league level, but even below. So if catchers don't possess this skill, I think they're just catching less or maybe not even at all and moving to a new position. So I think the population of catchers has changed, right? And the talent gap has certainly shrunk as everybody's,

there's an arms race to try to optimize the skill and I think with that you know we have better receivers generally across the board that have greater glove skill greater pocket skills and I think that has contributed to the blocking piece as well like the skill level based on how players are being evaluated scouted drafted developed but also trained I think the training aspect is completely shifted where like there is a clear emphasis on being evaluated, scouted, drafted, developed, but also trained. I think the training aspect is completely shifted where there is a clear emphasis on trying to improve a catcher's framing ability. And I think that has had carryover effects in the blocking. You're seeing many of the best blockers in our game right now

are not blocking balls off their chest. I mean, they're utilizing their hands and their gloves really effectively. And I think, again, that was a teaching point that was not really promoted by coaches. It was you had to get your body in front of everything. But I do think in combination with getting guys in better positions, getting them grounded in these neat-out setups, it's allowed them to actually track pitches more effectively and utilize their hands which we have more motor control over our hands than any other part of our body so rather than

take that away like it's now being promoted I think somewhat by the positions catchers are in so I think a few other things have obviously come into play here and converged but the blocking environment has never been more difficult. And catchers are blocking pitches despite public opinion better than we ever have. And so I think it's an exciting time for the position. As you're working with players and trying to get them to sort of buy into that approach, I'm curious if it has been, I don't quite know how to put this, but like at some point we are going to have the strike zone either by virtue of a challenge system or a full automated zone sort of diminish the value to some extent of framing. As you're presenting catchers with this approach, are they

excited about there being sort of a new frontier of them being able to establish and retain value for their clubs? Because if receiving doesn't matter quite the same amount as it did if you're a really great blocker you're still going to be defensively valuable even if it's to a lesser degree than framing presents so is that a part of the conversation when you're talking to guys and trying to get them to buy into this approach i mean not necessarily i think the buy-in is actually really easy, I think, currently. Now, it was really challenging initially back in 2017, 18. Like, there wasn't really, the automated strike zone wasn't close, right? And it wasn't really part of the conversation. It was like, this is going to increase your value exponentially.

If you can become a better receiver, you know, this is what the industry either currently values or will be valuing here in the in the very near future and and so that was kind of the the selling point initially and I think over time like when you put guys in these positions I think they immediately they're like yeah like I've wanted like this feels right and and they look across the league and this is what the best guys are doing so the art of the sell sell has become certainly a lot easier. Now, I have been asked the question a lot, like, you know, if the full automated strike zone were to be implemented, like, will catchers then revert back to what the setups looked like,

you know, previously? And my gut says no because of how effective we're actually blocking from these positions. Now, obviously, I could be wrong. But my intuition says, yes, the blocking value increases drastically. But if these are our best blocking positions, then I wouldn't anticipate a lot of change. So my initial reservation when we were corresponding about whether an improvement in catcher technique is responsible for this reversal in the wild pitch and pass ball rates was just the timing of it, right? Because we were seeing increasing wild pitches and pass ball rates as velocity kept going up and as pitchers were throwing more breaking balls and fewer strikes, etc.

And most of that stuff is still happening, right? And so what I wondered was, well, why did we see this suddenly flip from 21 to 22? Now we can put aside pitch comm for a second. I'll ask you about that next. But just pertaining to the technique, I thought, well, if it was related to that, then wouldn't we have seen a gradual increase or at least plateauing in those rates as more and more guys started to adopt that Nidan style and get used to it? But you had, I thought, a pretty interesting explanation for why you think that that could still be true, even though the early adopters were getting in on this several years ago, why maybe we didn't see the full fruits of that until just these past couple seasons. So can you explain why you think this has really shown up starting last

season? Yeah, I think you touched on it there. Typically, the earliest adopters, when there's some new innovation, there's risk. So the high-end performers generally aren't quick to, you know, there's no need for them to try some radical new technique. And so I think initially in the major leagues, what we saw was like the guys who needed it the most, the ones who were really struggling, who had to do something different, were much more accepting or willing to try getting in these positions. And so I think that's one part of it. And the second is like, not only were they willing to try, they were vulnerable enough to try and experiment, you know, largely within a major league season. It's not like they had years of training behind the scenes to kind of refine these techniques. They were trying to kind of largely figure it out, not just players, but also coaches. I think this kind of swept the scene so quickly that there were also a lot of instructors or coaches that this was really challenging their ideology and that they had to try to figure out quickly, which I think has now happened. I think across the league,

there are a lot of people teaching this very, very well, probably better than I am. And it's evolved a lot since its initial stages with different variations. And so I think the instruction has really improved. I think people have figured out how to individualize it to the player's strengths and how it can work within their own kind of strengths, I guess, as a player. And so it's evolved beyond just the earliest adopters who were maybe less skilled. And now your most skilled players are are largely utilizing these techniques and they've refined this process now over a period of several years with off seasons and spring trainings and in some cases private instruction and and so i think

overall it's a much more refined process than we saw in the early parts of 2021 when when guys were essentially kind of just thrown into the pool and trying to figure out how to swim for the first time. So let me ask about the Pitchcom factor because the timing is certainly suggestive. We see this reversal in wild pitch and pass ball rates in 2022. That's the first season of Pitchcom in the majors. And now, of course, even pitchers can use pitchcom to call their own pitches. And we've seen this further reduction in wild pitch and pass ball rates. So the timing matches up really well there. But it did seem somewhat unlikely to me that if we've had, say,

a 20% or so reduction in wild pitches and pass balls, that that could be explained by a lack of cross-ups alone. I wouldn't have thought that cross-ups would account for that high a percentage of wild pitches and pass balls. But what have you seen with how Pitchcom has improved communication, minimized cross-ups, and what effect do you think that's had on these rates? Yeah, I think we'd be lying if we didn't acknowledge that it's certainly a relevant factor. When we talk about blocks, we generally think about balls that bounce in the dirt, but really anything that gets away from the catcher is a blockable pitch, right? So we have balls that are errant pitches over our catcher's head that

are considered missed blocks if not, you know, if they're not handled. You have pitches kind of within the framework of the catcher's body that if aren't handled are generally scored as pass balls. And then you have balls that actually bounce and so when you actually separate those three different skills like you know dirt ball blocking has actually improved as well notably so i'm not certain that that pitch comp can explain how you know pitches that bounce in the dirt you know why catchers are more effectively being able to corral those pitches. Now, the other ones that I think certainly like the pass ball rates, you know, pitches that are within the catcher's framework that they should reasonably handle,

you know, the reduction in those certainly I think makes sense that, you know, better enhanced communication from pitch comp most certainly has a role in some capacity. I wanted to ask about one other trend. I don't know whether it's related, but it does seem like we've seen catchers creeping closer to the plate, right? And Tom Tango published some StatCast data on that recently and showed that the closer the catcher is to the plate, the better the framing numbers. Not clear exactly whether that's correlation or causation, but it seems like it would be at least partly causation, right? And he found it's something like the, you know, you get an inch closer to the plate, you're one red and better at framing, or that's basically the relationship. And so we've seen that catcher's

interference calls have skyrocketed, right? They're still very rare in the grand scheme of things, but we saw a record number last year, 74. There have already been 86 so far this season. So I guess two questions about that. One, do you think that's at all related to what we're talking about with the wild pitches and pass balls? Does that make it easier or harder to intercept those pitches if you're a little bit closer to the plate? Which I guess, you know, could be partly for framing reasons,

partly also because you've got so many runners going these days, you might want to get as close as possible just to be closer to the second base bag. And then the other thing is that if catchers are doing that, how do you instruct them not to make contact with the bat, right? Which is bad because

that costs you value as well and also potentially endangers you. So how do you get closer without getting too close? Yeah, I mean, I intentionally was avoiding that topic because he's spot on. Yeah, it's out there. It's public. Depth certainly has value. Tom, I read his piece. He acknowledged the framing value there, but there's also blocking value, right? The closer you are, the balls that bounce,

you've reduced the hop, and now it's maybe they're kind of glove blocks as opposed to getting up high into your chest. And so I definitely think there's a role that depth has played as catchers have slowly kind of crept closer and closer to the hitter. You know, and I think maybe initially the intent was to largely center it around framing, but I do think there's certainly blocking value there too.

And I don't know if this is giving away anything, but if you instruct a catcher to be a little bit closer to the plate, is there anything you can do to minimize the risk of being too close, of making contact? Because that's bad on multiple levels. I mean, being strategic or tactical about which hitters you're targeting, for one. But I think the other component here is, and probably more importantly, is how efficient your actual receiving mechanics are.

And if you're working from below the ball, as opposed to on the same plane as a pitch, you know, if your glove is up early and on the same plane as an incoming pitch, the bat is also going to arrive on that same plane. And so being able to work from below the ball efficiently, you know, so there's certainly, you know, technique that helps mitigate, you know, the increased risk of getting closer. Yeah. And then I guess big picture, Meg kind of touched on this earlier, but it looked a few years ago like catcher might really be losing a lot of its value potentially or at least skill and technique that set it apart from other positions. My MVP machine co-author, Travis Sachik, wrote a piece for FiveThirtyEight in 2020. He called catcher baseball's most endangered position,

and you were quoted in that piece. So it looked at the time like, gosh, guys aren't running as much, so the throwing game isn't as big a deal. And then you potentially have robot strike zones and ABS coming in and taking away framing value and then maybe we weren't even aware of pitchcom at the time but there was some talk about well maybe you have some sort of electronic pitch calling system and then now when pitchers are calling their own pitches does that take game calling value away so it's a really seismic sea change sort of time for the position and i guess an exciting and also daunting time for a catching instructor and coordinator like you to roll with all these changes but it does seem like

with the surge in the running game right and then also increasingly it seems like we're likelier to get a challenge system than full-blown every pitch abs and so framing will still matter and also challenges will matter right there's a whole strategic element to that that catchers will be directly involved in so even if they've lost a little bit of the game calling responsibility i'm encouraged i think as a catcher defense fan that it seems like there's a better outlook maybe for the position remaining important than there was a few years ago. Is that how you're looking at it too? Is this, I guess it's good for your job security too?

Yeah, it's, you know, I went through a phase where I was like, man, like catchers are getting really good at this skill. Like, and now the industry is going to make rule changes to devalue that. But I've kind of shifted my mindset to those kinds of things are out of our control. And ultimately, like you look at the rule changes that have been implemented recently. And I think, you know, I think most people could take a step back and say, you know, it's, it's led to a better product. And so whatever those changes are,

like I think it's my job and our job as instructors to just continue to adapt and evolve and figure out where's the next competitive advantage. But to your point, I think the increase in running game has shifted the dynamics. It's certainly an increased presence in terms of takeoff rates, etc. And being able to mitigate that is a skill that I think was devalued at one point and is now kind of returned. So, you know, in terms of the challenge system, you know, I would support it. I think probably, you know, if we can eliminate the egregious missed calls, you know, from a challenge system, I think ultimately that's probably better for our game. And I think the best receivers will continue to have value because, you know,

they'll get all the marginal pitches that likely won't be challenged by hitters because they're too close to call in real time. So, you know, I think that would be my preference if I got a vote, which nobody's asking me for my opinion. But that seems like a more likely scenario in the near future than a full-blown automated zone. We like to hear that our preferred approach to this has support from people who know more about catcher defense than we do. And are even more invested in it, I suppose. Although I guess it's probably been pretty tough to instruct younger catchers not knowing exactly what the position will look like down the road, right? Especially as, you know, pitch comm was tested first in the minors and the new stolen base rules and pickoff rules, step-off rules, etc.

And then, of course, ABS, it's all tested down there. So you haven't really known it. You worked with minor leaguers and major leaguers. You haven't really known it. You worked with minor leaguers and major leaguers. So sometimes it seemed like by the time some minor leaguers get to the majors, the position might be completely different. Christian followed our minor league coordinator, but we're in lockstep together in terms of what's happening. And we've talked about, like, what people have asked us, should we prepare for this? Should we be doing things differently? Should we be prioritizing blocking?

And the answer is always, like, we're trying to do everything well. Like, that's really, I think, the beauty of this system is catchers don't have to pick, like, we're going to really sell out to receive at the expense of blocking, or we're going to really sell out to receive at the expense of blocking or we're going to really sell out to block at the expense of receiving. And I think for a long time, that was, that was true. Like the best receivers were generally poor blockers, you know, up until 2018, 19,

and the best blockers generally struggled to receive. And they were, I think now that based on the positioning, it's allowed these skills to be complimentary and we can be effective at all of them. And that's the end goal. Like we're, we're trying to be good at all these things. So as opposed to having to pick and choose which one we want to value. So we haven't really changed course at all. And I don't know if that's the right plan, but that's kind of where we're at currently. Until the environment does change, we're going to continue to operate within the rules in place.

It seems like it's working, and I know things have gotten harder for catchers. Not that it was ever easy, but working with more pitchers over the course of a season or in any given game, I guess the load lightened a little bit by PitchCom now, potentially, but it's harder to hit stuff today, and obviously it's tougher to catch it too.

Just last question, you seem like sort of an unlikely candidate to have been one of the trailblazers in this area. Because as you mentioned, you didn't catch in college. You played in college, but weren't a catcher, right? And then you're part of this trend of teams kind of dipping into the college coaching ranks and looking for new ideas and hiring coaches directly from college. Although I guess you were sort of working with catchers prior to going to the Twins, but not exactly a full-time professional college coach. that got you into this? Because I know that Travis has written about you a few times and mentioned you in our book, The MVP Machine, as sort of an example of unorthodox ideas coming from people with unorthodox baseball backgrounds. I honestly, I'm not embarrassed at all by the fact that I didn't play the position.

I think it's really actually benefited me because it's allowed me to kind of provide a perspective, a different perspective, and maybe ask questions that weren't being asked previously. When examining why things were being done a certain way, I didn't carry these biases that this is how I used to do it or this is how my catching coach told me this was the right way like i didn't have any of that i had i was really naive to how this should be done and i think i just looked at it very not solely objective but largely driven through kind of the data and and what it was telling us and and i think just questioned a lot of things and was also like i said in an environment where that kind of experimentation was demanded really and so it was a fun time i i really loved player development for for those

reasons that that you could whatever you could dream up at least in my experience you had the freedom to to test and to and to expand on and and there were no limitations um in that regard so yeah i think a little bit of luck there too, I think, where the industry was accepting of somebody of that nature who didn't maybe carry the resume that was once required as a player, which I think will change. There was a window of time where that was needed maybe or at least valued from the industry. And now I think just by nature, you know, players are now coming up in, in a,

in a data driven environment where, you know, they, I will probably be replaced at some point with somebody who did play in the big leagues who has all these same maybe skills because that was their experience as a player. And, and so I think I was, uh, in some ways a by-product of this gap where there was a shift and new perspectives were welcomed. And it's kind of how I look at it. Well, we appreciate you sharing those insights with Mitch Garver and Gary Sanchez and also

Ben Lindbergh. So thanks very much. Now, next time someone says, how do these guys think they can block balls down on one knee like that? I'll have a podcast episode to send them. Yeah. Well, good luck. I look forward to reading the comments and there will still be dissenters no matter how strong the evidence is. That's human nature, I think. Yes. Well, it is strong evidence. Just look at those wild pitch and pass ball rates. I can't argue with that. Or you can, but the data probably won't be on your side. Yeah.

All right. Great talking to you, Tanner. Thank you. Thanks so much. Thanks, Ben. Thanks, Meg. Okay. So Tanner acknowledges that this may very well be partly PitchCom related, and I think

it probably is. But I got to think it's about more than that. Yeah. I think it probably is, but I got to think it's about more than that. Yeah. Because, again, it's just hard to imagine that cross-ups could have accounted for all those wild pitches and pass balls that we're not seeing suddenly. And it seems like there's been an improvement on just balls in the dirt, just however you slice it. So a few other explanations or theories that our listeners have advanced or that I've already seen people advance online, that it could be just because there aren't as many runners on base. You don't get wild pitches and pass balls if the bases are empty.

But it turns out that doesn't seem to hold water because this season, last season, there's been a higher percentage of pitches with runners on base than there were the couple seasons prior to that. So that doesn't seem to account for it. I've seen people suggest, well, there are more stolen bases and steal attempts now. And so if you have a wild pitcher pass ball on a steal attempt, that just goes down as a steal, not a wild pitcher pass ball. So maybe it's that. as a steal, not a well-pitched or passed ball. So maybe it's that. But again, this happened last year, really,

before these rules changes, before everyone started running. And we're looking at it on a per-pitch basis. You can break it down by batter or by game or by pitch. But however you break it down, you see the same sort of trend and effect there. So could it be Pitchcom, the original question asker who prompted the stat blast the other day, Andrew, he looked at this and he found that as I had analyzed by month within 2021, that it seemed like there was some improvement in wild pitches and pass balls

as 2021 went on, which I had thought maybe that was related to sticky stuff. Maybe when they cracked down on the sticky stuff, in fact, pitchers, when there were all the fears about wildness after that, that if anything, the opposite's been the case and that maybe if you don't have the confidence of the sticky stuff, then you're taking a little movement off or, you know, you don't have it stick to your fingers so much that you throw it wildly or whatever. He looked at that in the minors where they started testing pitch calm in 2021 at some levels, and he found some slight improvement at that point, but nothing really obvious year to year, 2021 to 2022. However, he did find that the rate of wild pitches and pass balls seems to have improved even more with runners on second specifically lately, which might suggest that it's pitchcom related because that's when you would have gotten the most cross ups because you've got a runner on second, you're changing up your signs and everything. So that's some slight evidence there.

But I don't think that can solely explain it. So I went to two other sources here. I went to Tom Tango of MLB, who works with StatCastData. And then Tom also pointed me toward two researchers who were in college at the University of Minnesota, Jack Rogers and Kai Franke. And they actually just presented at Sabre Seminar recently, which I was not able to attend, but I saw their slides. They presented on catcher defense and blocking and wild pitches. And so they used their model that they used for that paper. And they also work, I think, with the Minnesota baseball team, or Kai does, and they're the president and vice president of the sports analytics club at their school. So Tango and Jack and Kai, they all looked at this. And it seems like, as is so often the case,

that it's probably a bit of both, that it's multifactorial. So Tango was able to look at this and according to the StatCast model, which takes into account the expected block rates and the difficulty of blocking based on many factors, the location and type of the pitch and the count and the catcher positioning and all of that, that it does seem like the blocking opportunities have gotten easier, that there were fewer expected blocks last year than there were, say, a couple of years before. And so he thinks that it's probably something that has made blocking opportunities easier. I talked to Jack and Kai, and their model also seemed to suggest that, but also showed that catchers have improved their performance that even relative to the expected block totals, even though maybe those have decreased a bit, the catchers have still performed better relative to blocking. That based on their video and statistical analysis, that totally backs up what TJ has found and what Tanner was asserting there. That actually those catchers who have switched, they have been better and more of them have switched and gotten more proficient at that. So it does make sense that catchers would be better now. But I think also it looks like the blocking opportunities have gotten a bit easier.

So that then raises another question of why have blocking opportunities gotten easier, right? Because that's puzzling too because velocity is higher than ever. Breaking ball usage is higher than ever. So look, it could be that perhaps sweepers are easier to block than regular sliders. And there have been more sweepers lately. It could be, we speculated last time, it might be the ball that there might be just a better grip with the newer, deader ball. But also, maybe deader ball pitchers are more likely to throw strikes, throw pitches in the strike zone because they're less wary of those balls getting crushed now that the ball doesn't carry as far.

So that could be it. It does seem like there's been a higher percentage of pitches thrown in the strike zone this year and last year. It does seem like there's been a higher percentage of pitches thrown in the strike zone this year and last year. Or it could be, and Jimmy, our Patreon supporter, wrote in to note that we've previously talked about how some teams' catchers have just decided to set up more over the middle and have not said, hey, try to hit the corner here, but just try to throw it over the plate. Trust your stuff, right? Like the Orioles have had success with that. The Rays have had success with that. So maybe it's pitchers just trying to be a little less fine, just to trust in their stuff and throwing strikes and catchers setting up in the middle. And maybe that's part of it too. So maybe the blocking opportunities actually have gotten a bit easier, but also the catchers have gotten better. So as usual,

with these very puzzling questions, it's like, is it this or is it that? Often it's more than one thing happening at once. So that's the best I can come up with. Yeah, probably PITSCOM has played a part. Probably the blocking opportunities have gotten a bit easier. And also probably the catchers have gotten better because of the knee down, because they've moved closer to the plate. They're getting better bounces, whatever it is. So it's all this stuff combining for what was to me a pretty surprising result. I'm just envisioning you with like a cork board behind you and a bunch of red string and pretty much. Yeah, it's it's a word document, but it's definitely it's a metaphorical cork board. You know, it's it's full of metaphorical red string. Yeah, definitely. Upstairs. That's what

it looks like there. Where is the CBS procedural about the pitcher slash detective? He could solve baseball crimes or baseball mysteries. They don't even have to be crimes. They could just be it's baseball meets unsolved mysteries and the unexplained, which I am not going to go on a tangent about, but is a fascinating document. Also, William Shatner, way older than I thought. Oh, yeah. He looks great.

He looks great. He's like 93. Yeah. All right. Well, I don't know if we've completely cracked the case here, but this is as close as I can come. People can certainly continue to send us more information. People can certainly continue to send us more information, but I think there's good evidence that there are a few factors that are playing into this to produce a surprising result. And I'm always amazed when players, after the decades and centuries that we've played baseball, that they might realize, oh, actually, we should have been doing it like this all along. We should have been throwing more of this type of pitch, or we should have been throwing this type of pitch higher or lower

or actually, we should have been swinging up more or actually, we should have been catching with one knee down. And often, their predecessors and their people who intuitively sense this, whether it's Tony Pena with his catching or Ted Williams with his swing or whatever it is, but often it's not embraced by the league as a whole, even though you would think like players would know this intuitively. They're so good at what they do and they're so experienced and wouldn't they be able

to tell? But sometimes it takes an outsider to come along and say, I not do it this way instead. Maybe that would be better. And sometimes conditions in the sport change such that it makes sense to do something differently that it might not have made sense to do before. But always fascinating to me when something can change even at this late date in baseball history that we might realize, oh, no, there's a better, different way to do this. Yep. All right. Well, we can close with the future blast and see what else is different and better or worse in the future. So this future blast comes to us from 2052 and from Rick Wilber, an award-winning writer, editor and college professor who has been described as the dean of science fiction baseball. 1952, the largest North American earthquake since 1965's Anchorage quake changed the course of the Mississippi River south of St. Louis and the course of millions of lives affected by the massive quake.

It also brought the red hot start of the season for the Cardinals to a temporary halt. I guess that was a lesser effect, but still significant from a baseball perspective. It was the bottom of the fifth with the Cardinals on their way to their A straight win when InBev ballpark began to tremble and sway in time with the gateway arch visible in the distance as the 9.2 quake on the Richter scale struck the northern extremity of the New Madrid fault. The tumbler went on for 10 very long minutes as the player stood on the field and those fans who could scrambled onto the

field as well. The ballpark's upper deck was an especially terrifying place to be, as it bounced up and down and seemed to twist. Visible cracks in the superstructure were apparent afterward, and the ballpark was abandoned for the remainder of the season, but the structure did not fall, much to the relief of the terrified 40,000-plus fans in attendance, the Gateway Arch built in 1965 swayed well past its 18-inch design limits, and portions of the outer steel shell broke off and fell hundreds of feet to the ground. Miraculously, no one was killed by falling debris. Aftershocks were felt for weeks. St. Louis and much of the Midwest suffered billions of dollars of damage from the New Madrid quake of 2052, which was magnitudes larger than the famous New Madrid quakes of 1811 and 1812. The death toll was mercifully low at 450, mostly

in collapsed housing. The major buildings in St. Louis and nearby communities stood firm. The Cardinals, led by an all-star infield, the top designated runner in the league, two fine pitchers, and the hot bat of Ernesto Del Delgado moved their home games to Taylor Stadium at the University of Missouri in Columbia. Temporary stands enlarged the stadium seating to 18,000. And as the recovery from New Madrid went on over the summer, Cardinals fans found their way to Taylor Stadium to remind themselves that life and baseball would continue despite the horrible earthquake. The cards ultimately lost in the NLCS, but the season was memorable for their managing to play at all. Wow. Yikes. All right. I will leave you as my increasingly froggy voice allows with a bit of feedback we got from listener and Patreon supporter. Now I only want to triumph

about the preceding episodes future blast, which was about the centennial of Bobby Thompson's shot heard around the world. He writes a thought on that future blast. Not only could the shot heard around the world not happen in 2051 because of the clock that limits games to two hours and 15 minutes, it couldn't happen in 2023 either. Thompson's home run came in the third game of a best of three tiebreaker series. And even the one game playoff has been excised to the history books under the

most recent CBA. Under current rules, since Brooklyn won 13-of-22 against New York that year, the Dodgers win the pennant, the Dodgers win the pennant, the Dodgers win the pennant, the Dodgers win the pennant. And yet, that's not even the most historically notable thing lost by retroactively striking Games 163. In 1995, the Angels beat the Mariners seven out of 12 times. So when they finished tied atop the AL West, California would have won it on the head to head. No tiebreakers would have meant that the Angels faced the Yankees in the 95 ALDS, which means that Edgar couldn't have hit a double, which means the Mariners might no longer exist in their current form. Young Meg would have

been very sad about that. Young Ben would have been happy. If you're wondering why we didn't discuss the Angels' waiver madness on this episode, well, all of that went down after we finished recording. However, we will be back tomorrow to talk about that. If I'm capable of speaking at that point, I thought I was getting better. And I think we will also have a guest who will allow us to extend Meg's streak

of mentioning Julio every day. So stay tuned for waiver talk and more Mariners talk. Also, I've got to let you know anytime anyone else tackles the question about whether there's a conspiracy about errors and official score decisions and batting average and whether official scores are being more lenient and classifying things as hits that once would have been errors in an effort to boost batting average. J.J. Cooper of Baseball America and Tom Tango, both of whom were mentioned earlier,

have taken their own looks at that topic and reached the same conclusion that we did in our stat blast and that Russell Carlton did at Baseball Prospectus, that it doesn't seem like there's anything historically out of line happening this season, and that even if the change in the error rate, the minute change in the error rate, were a result of an instruction from the league, that it wouldn't have actually changed batting average much anyway. So I will link to their analyses on the show page in case you haven't yet been convinced. And if you haven't yet been convinced to support Effectively Wild on Patreon, maybe I can convince you to do that. The following five listeners have already gone to patreon.com slash effectively wild and signed up to pledge some monthly or yearly amount to help keep the podcast going.

Help us stay ad free and get themselves access to some perks. Mitch, Peter Clemens, Mahara Bamaria, Will C, and Yo-Yo. Thanks to all of you. Patreon perks include access to the Effectively Wild Discord group for patrons only, monthly bonus episodes, playoff live streams, discounts on ad-free Fangraphs memberships and merch, and so much more. Patreon.com slash Effectively Wild. If you are a Patreon supporter, you can message us through the Patreon site. But anyone and everyone can contact us via email. Send us your questions and comments at podcast at Fangraphs.com.

You can also 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. I'm going to go on vocal rest now. And assuming that I don't still sound like Harvey Fierstein, we will be back to talk to you very soon. If baseball were different, how different would it be?

And if this thought haunts your dreams, well, stick around and see what Ben and Meg have to say. Philosophically and pedantically, it's Effectively Wild. Effectively Wild!