Effectively Wild: A FanGraphs Baseball Podcast - Effectively Wild Episode 2081: Trophy Strife

Episode Date: November 5, 2023

Ben Lindbergh and Meg Rowley banter about the difficulty of watching Yoshinobu Yamamoto in the Japan Series, the last time an MLB pitcher threw as many as 138 pitches in a game, their hopes for Joey Votto’s next act, and the Brewers trading Mark Canha to the Tigers, then (32:13) answer listener emails about Silver […]

Hello and welcome to episode 2081 of Effectively Wild, a Fangrafts baseball podcast brought to you by our Patreon supporters. I'm Meg Rowley of Fangrafts and and I'm joined, as always, by Ben Lindberg of The Ringer. Ben, how are you? I'm all right. How are you? I'm all right. Excellent. You know, I was talking last time about how, all else being equal, I'm more excited by

an international free agent because we haven't had a chance to see them play on a daily basis. we haven't had a chance to see them play on a daily basis. And I really had that driven home for me on Saturday because I wanted to watch Yoshinobu Yamamoto in what will almost certainly be his final NPB start and a huge start. He was pitching in the Japan series game six, that's NPB's equivalent of the World Series, and his team was facing elimination. So Oryx had to win or else they would be going home and he was coming off the worst start of his career. And it's his NPP send-off and so much is at stake. They're playing Hanshin, who are still subject to the curse of the colonel, which we talked about hundreds of episodes ago, the curse that has supposedly prevented them from winning a Japan

series since 1985 because of a statue of KFC's Colonel Sanders that was immersed, sunk to the bottom of a river. And ever since then, Hanschen has not managed to win the Japan Series since that season. So a lot at stake. And I could not watch the game. I just, like, there was no way to watch the game. I mean, we think of this as a global society, you know, where we're used to having information and video and audio at our fingertips. We can information and video and audio at our fingertips. We can access any information at any time. And this is the best player in MPB on the biggest stage in MPB, about to be one of the most coveted MLB free agents, about to make an enormous amount of money. And as soon as he makes his MLB debut, we will have access to every move he makes on the field,

like literally, physically, you know, everything he does will be tracked. We'll be able to look up everything about all of his pitches and all the data and everything. And even now in 2023, it's like he's playing in another world or something. I could not watch it. Like the game is just, there's no way to stream it legally in the United States. Yeah. It's like I'm not accustomed to being deprived of information. It's always at my fingertips with baseball.

I'm spoiled. Yeah, we are definitely spoiled. And yes, it is an area where there seems like there is still a bit of work to be done to like give us the the stuff that we want because we give it give it to me yeah give me give me it you know give me it you know we don't want the only real exposure that we have to players in this circumstance to be

when they come to the u.s like npb isB is a real league, and it's got great players, and it would be nice to be able to engage with that sort of on its own terms. And, you know, who you target in that on its own terms is probably going to be dictated by who you might anticipate having an impact in Major League Baseball at some point. But, you know, there's stuff to appreciate and enjoy there on its own. And it's hard to it's it's irritating that it's so hard to access.

Right. Yeah. Yeah. And I guess that's maybe partly on NPB for not promoting their product better internationally and not giving me a legal way to watch. Right. I don't know that the market would be enormous with the time difference and everything. But still, for the sickos out there who want to wake up early in the morning to watch that, that would be nice.

There are some streaming service options for some games sometimes, like Pacific League TV and that sort of thing. But for this series, the broadcasting rights not available for those. Like with MLB, where you go from watching MLB TV to not being able to watch MLB TV in the postseason to see everything in real time. It's sort of a similar deal. And Nippon Professional Baseball has the broadcasting rights, I think, for the Japan series and doesn't distribute those to anyone. And not great, not great from a promotional standpoint. I mean, I guess they'd just be promoting a player now who's coming to MLB anyway in this particular case. But still, you'd think, and what if you're a Japanese person who has emigrated to the States and you want to follow your team and you want to watch the Japan series, you can't do it, I don't think.

And so the only options, I think, were if you use a VPN, you could pretend to be in Japan and then you could watch something. Although even with that service, I think it was only available live, not archived. So it would have been at 5.30 in the morning my time and 2.30 in the morning your time. Not ideal. At least for another day and a half, yeah. Yeah, right. And then the other option is just to find some sort of stream, right? Right. And I kind of attempted to do that. And it was not easy. The experience was not great.

I will quote a tweet from the sometime baseball writer Jackie Moore, who tweeted at 6.06 in the morning Eastern, watching the Japan series as it was meant to be watched, parentheses, on a Korean sports betting site where the stream constantly freezes and you can hear a dude complain over the stream mic when he has to restart it. So yeah, that's how you can tune in to watch Aomoto. Whereas next year, we'll be able to see him in crystal clear HD every pitch that he throws and we'll have the data immediately. And even with the data, you can look up standard basic NPP stats easily. But if you want the advanced stuff, you've either got to wade into some websites that might be tough to navigate because of the language barrier, or you have to sign up for a subscription site that will give you Fangraph-style stats. So, again, it's like the second highest level league in the world. And yet, even for me, a baseball diehard who just wants this information,

really tough to access it. But he pitched really well. He pitched a complete game and struck out an NPB or Japan Series record. 14 guys broke Yu Darvish's Japan Series strikeout record. So go into game seven, which I will not be watching unless I want to stream on the Korean sports betting site. I think that, I don't know if there's like a cause for optimism here. It's that there is precedent within sort of international league spaces to incorporate that stuff into MLB TV. And granted, like I imagine that if you're the league organizers of Lidl that your incentives for distribution on MLB TV are higher than they are for MPB I wouldn't be surprised if MPB is like we're like a you know we're like a real full season league as opposed to Lidl which is

winter ball right but like it's been so great to be able to watch Lidl just on MLB TV. And even prior to them doing that, they had an app like they had, you know, in 2020, we were able to just buy a sub for the Lidl season and just watch Winter Ball. And that was great. And so, you know, even if it were on their own sort of streaming platform, I'd spend money to be able to watch NPB, particularly if the games are archived and I can do it when it's not 2.30 in the morning. So, you know, like, I don't know. It seems like that should be something that can be figured out. something that can be figured out. And if, you know, NPB is understandably unwilling to sort of bring MLB into that distribution channel, but just has a service that you can stream like,

you know, I think there are enough sickos to make that worth it. So get on it. Right. Yeah. It's I mean, when we were kids, obviously, like before the Internet, this was how all of baseball was and all things in general. You could not access everything at any time. I mean, people who are older than we are are probably like, yeah, this was how all of baseball was when I was a kid. Like we'd have to, you know, get the box scores in the newspaper, get the weekly leaderboards to see what everyone's stat was. We didn't have fan crafts and baseball reference and you couldn't just stream everything. So I'm, again, spoiled. It's 2023 now. And so I expect to be able to see anything, have all the information and the video and everything at my fingertips. And in this

one specific case, it's like, oh no, this is what it used to be like. This is even before we were growing up and games were commonly broadcast. You know, there was a time when to see the baseball players, you basically had to go to the ballpark to see them. So it's like probably there were a ton of MLB scouts in attendance at this game, I would imagine. And you might think, oh, why did they actually have to be there? You know, just get the video, just get the data like they do in MLB. No, I mean, if you're a team that might be about to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on Yamamoto, you're like, I got to go to Japan because otherwise I cannot watch this game. I'm imagining like, you know, Brian Cashman tuning into the Korean sports betting site to check out the free

agent he might be about to spend hundreds of millions on, right? Yeah. I mean, we should say that like the the those feeds are available in other subscription services that teams definitely like you can see. Probably teams could. Yes. Yeah. You can see Yamamoto on Synergy like that exists. But I think that when you're getting ready to spend, you know, potentially hundreds of millions of dollars, even as teams have moved away from in-person scouting in some instances, I think that an owner would probably be like, go buy a ticket and go to Japan, please.

Like, let's, you know, let's get a sense of it in person. I don't know. That seems like a reasonable thing to do to me regardless, but particularly when you're thinking about the kind of money that might be involved in a contract to sign Yamamoto. I bet some owners like, yeah, no, I think we can like afford a flight and hotel for a little while for you to go see this guy in person. Yeah, sure. We could expense that one. He also threw 138 pitches. I heard.

That's a lot. That's also a throwback. That's like what year is it, right? So when do you think the next time Yamamoto throws 138 pitches in a game will be? Never. I think he'll never do it again. I think this is the last time he will ever throw that many pitches. Yeah.

I was looking to see when the last time an MLB pitcher had thrown that many pitches. And it's 2013. Wow. So a full decade ago, 2013, July 13th, Tim Lincecum, he threw 148 pitches in his no-hitter. There's something about that that's very funny to me, that it was like, it was Timmy. Yeah, it was Timmy. And even then it wasn't common. That was the first time in three years Edwin Jackson in his no-hitter threw 149 in 2010.

And then Lincecum again in 2008, he did it in a non-no-hitter. He threw 138 exactly. And then you have to go back to Levon Hernandez, who is the next five names on the list are all Levon Hernandez. He threw 138, he threw 150 pitches in a game in 2005. Wow. So, yeah. And if you go back to the postseason, I was actually thinking that it would be more recent because, you know, big stage and everything. And it's the end of the year and leave it all out on the line and all. But no, we haven't had a pitcher in MLB throw 138 pitches since Al Leiter in Game 5 of the 2000 World Series. Oh, my gosh.

He threw 142 pitches. So, yeah. So, not only will we be able to watch Yamamoto's starts soon, but also his starts will be subject to, I would imagine, much stricter pitch counts and pitch limits. Yeah. Yeah, geez. Wow. I wonder if that thought crossed his mind in the moment where he's like, oh, I never have to do that again. Yeah, I mean, good for him, I guess.

He wasn't like, hey, you know, I have hundreds of millions of dollars on the line here, so maybe you would take me out. No, he wanted to stay in that game. He was pitching well, so yeah. And I didn't do anything to dissuade anyone from signing him unless they're concerned about his workload, I suppose. But a little other bit of news. It's not really big news, but the pobo of the Reds, he put out a statement because the Reds declined the option on Joey Votto. It was, what, a $20 million option. So they chose the $7 million buyout instead. And Nick Kroll said, for 17 seasons, Joey has been the heart of Reds baseball

as a most valuable player, all-star, and respected clubhouse leader. His contributions to our team and his extraordinary generosity toward those in need throughout our region and beyond cannot be measured. At this point of the offseason, based on our current roster and projected plans for 2024, as an organization, we cannot commit to the playing time Joey deserves. He forever will be part of the Reds family, and at the appropriate time, we will thank and honor him as one of the greatest baseball players of this or any generation. So that's notable only because it seems to kind of close the book on the possibility of him returning to the Reds at all.

Yeah. Yeah. No one expected them to pick up that option. But there was also the option. There still is the option to sign him to a lower salary deal. Right. And it sounds like they're kind of— That's not going to happen. Yeah, it sounds like they're turning the page there.

Yeah. So what would you like to happen with Joey Votto? And I think probably both of us are—whatever he wants to do. Yeah, yeah. he wants to do. But what would make you happiest if it made him happy? Either just retire so that he can be a career red or play somewhere else or go on to do whatever he's going to do post baseball, which seems like it could be something fun and exciting for fans potentially. be something fun and exciting for fans potentially. I'm going to offer what might seem like a controversial take.

I know that like he has not had perhaps like the ultimate joy of like winning a World Series, right? He has won a World Series, right? I'm not forgetting. I'm not forgetting a Reds World Series that transpired over the course of his career. I don't think that has happened. No. But I don't think Joey Votto really has anything left to prove as a player. And I know that like his, it's not like he went out having had an MVP caliber season

or anything like that. And one could make the argument if one were so so inclined, that, like, you know, he had, like, 65 games. He dealt with injury. He didn't accrue positive war this season. He wasn't even a league average bat by WRC+. But I think that Joey Votto has, like, proven himself as a player. And he can be done now if he wants, you know? as a player and he can, he can be done now if he wants, you know, I would, I would be okay if he decides, you know, I'm, I'm entering my age 40 season. I've dealt with sort of persistent

injury stuff for most of the last little bit. I'm going to be done now. You know, I will have no trouble remembering his last full season as that like not out of nowhere but like really delightful you know he was like a four-win player in 2021 yeah that was fun yeah it was fun he had a 140 wrc plus he was and a different kind of player different kind of player he had 36 home runs yeah and so that was and then you know he had two seasons that were really compromised by injury so i'm good joey like you had an incredible career you defined in a very positive way in era of reds baseball you are you know one of the this is such a uh this is such a way to describe it, but like seemingly one of the good weird ones,

you know, so many of the weird ones we delighted in Ben, they ended up not being good guys. But that's not true, Joey. And so if, if he wants to kind of explore what a post playing career life is like for him, if that involves baseball,

great. If it doesn't involve baseball, you know, I, I'd be happy for him, if that involves baseball, great. If it doesn't involve baseball, you know, I'd be happy for him too. I don't need anything from Joey Votto. You know, I think Joey Votto has given us a good deal and I feel contented and just happy for him for the career he had. I don't know. Sometimes when a guy has a final two years that are as injury riddled as him, you could make the argument that there's something left still to be done. But I don't know. I just don't have that feeling for him. And particularly when you've had two kind of back-to-back that have had significant injury stuff i i don't know it feels like you

can be done now friend like you can i mean we're not friends i don't say that like we're enemies to be clear but like i don't know joey vato but um you know like he had the he had so much shoulder stuff and he had stuff this year and there's the biceps issue and all that. So it's just like, you know, Joey, you had a good one. I think he's a, is Joey Votto a Hall of Famer for you, Ben? Yeah, I think he should be. I think he should be too. I think other people probably would still consider him borderline. So you could say if that's important to him, then if he sticks around, I mean, he may be past the point of really being able to bolster his Hall of Fame case unless you're just talking about counting stats and milestones.

Like 2021, I think, really injected life into the resume in an important way for him. I think that he was more borderline for more people prior to that last season. Because, like, he had a good 2020, but it was a good 2020. What does that mean to anyone? We don't know. We don't know how people are going to sort of fold that into anyone's understanding of a guy's resume, right? Yeah, you could say that if anything, he's hurting himself

in case if it's based on rate stats, like after 2021, through that season, he was a career 302 hitter. So his slash stats through 2021, 302, 417, 520. So if he had retired, and people might have said, oh, you know, only 330 homers or whatever, but you could say, yeah, 300, 400, 500 guy. And because he's hit in the low 200s the last couple of seasons, he's now down to 294 career. I don't know whether Hall of Fame voters still count batting average against a guy. But but, you know, he's not like close to a big round number. I don't think that would really help him at this point.

close to a big round number, I don't think that would really help him at this point. So, but I would be all in favor of him playing if he still enjoys playing. And there was a, he said several years ago, like back in 2016, he said, I'd rather quit and leave all the money on the table than play at a poor level. So I don't think he wants to play if he'd be bad, of course, but he might convince himself that he wouldn't be bad. And he wasn't bad, to be clear, this year. He was just below league average. And that was after coming back from rehabbing and injury and long layoff and everything. So if he could convince himself that, hey, you know, a full healthy season,

maybe I have a little left. It would be fun to see him in like a late career Giambi role somewhere, just like clubhouse leader, veteran mentor, who, you know, pinch hits sometimes and like lefty slugger who still has some pop, that kind of thing. Because he does have significant splits on a career level. You know, he's hit righties better than lefties and not so much in the last couple seasons.

But like in 2021, he crushed righties. He hit 31 of his 36 homers against righties that year so so if someone said yeah you know if southpaw just bring him up every now and then pinch hit late innings spot starts be a star clubhouse character guy yeah i would be into that if if he were into that i would be into that if he were into that i would be into like and I don't know if he has any interest in doing this, but I feel like he would be a real asset to the Players Association in some capacity. something to give to the game yet if he wants to and i think that he might be like an interesting person to sort of serve as a liaison between current players and the association so like that was an idea that occurred to me i mean like i don't know how the i don't want to call his personality a schtick because that's like insulting but you know i don't know how how um over a lot of exposure i

would feel about like the personality yeah but i don't know like he i think he has a really interesting perspective on the game and i want to hear more about his thoughts about baseball if he wants to share them you know what i mean so that's kind of where i'm at but if he wants to share them. You know what I mean? So that's kind of where I'm at. But if he wants to like, you know, strap an airstream to the back of a vehicle and we not hear from him again for a while, like that would be fine too. You know what I mean? Yeah. Yeah. Well, there was a New York Times article about him. I think it was by Zach Buchanan, actually, in September. And he was talking about how he was just starting to enjoy what he does or playing. He said, this is the first time in my career I realized that I love what I do and that he's just kind of relaxed a little because he was so focused and kind of a baseball monk early in his career.

so focused and kind of a baseball monk early in his career. And he's really loosened up and been more, I don't know if gregarious exactly is the word for him, but just outgoing and shown people more of his personality. And also, yeah, changed his game a little bit more so from the extremely patient, take a ton of walks to actually going to swing and try to hit for power and also strike out a bit more. And so he's had this late career evolution that I'd kind of be curious to see

where it goes. I enjoy when someone has a career spent entirely with one franchise because it doesn't happen all that often. But I wouldn't say like I'd prefer for him to retire than to play in another uniform. It would be weird to see him in another uniform and probably it would turn into one of those things where like you forget that that ever happened and then you see a baseball card or something of that guy, that uniform at the tail end of their career. And you're like, oh, yeah, I forgot about when so-and-so was on that team. I just memory hold that because I so associate him with some other. So if he went to the Blue Jays or if he went to the Blue Jays, that'd be fun, right? Just to get into play in Canada and everything.

But if he went to some other team, probably we would all forget that that ever happened unless he had some incredible swan song there. But yeah, I mean, part of me just thinks like, if he were retired, he could just be a commentator, he could be on MLB Network, he could be on broadcasts, and he would have more intelligent commentary, more thoughtful commentary and well considered commentary than a lot of broadcasters and ex-player commentators do. So I would like that. I don't know if he's interested in that because there was also a quote in Zach's article where Votto said, truly, I fantasize about this. I dream about playing my last game and basically

shutting everything off, saying goodbye on social, saying goodbye to the media and just getting away. Like I'm done. I'm done with baseball, done with the public eye. And when I read that, I was sort of skeptical because he has been so out there for the past few years. Just the fact that he calls it social, just kind of like he was going all in on being an influencer for a while. For a minute, yeah. Yeah. And that's kind of along the lines of what you're saying, like would this get old? I did feel at a certain point that he was kind of clout chasing almost in a weird way. Not cleat chasing, clout chasing.

Just like, you know, he was like dressing up in all sorts of outfits and showing up to play chess and doing all these things that seem to be calculated to get attention in almost a thirsty sort of way, even though a lot of people appreciated it, I think. But maybe that was just a phase. On the whole, whenever he's interviewed, whenever he has thoughts on the game or what it's like to be a baseball player, an athlete, it's always a really interesting perspective. So I would be sort of sorry if we didn't keep hearing from him in that capacity. If he did just disappear and turn into Lumberjack Dexter and go out into the woods somewhere in flannel and we never saw or heard from him again, I would miss his thoughts on the game. So I don't know if he'd want to do it every day, but I hope he's a little bit in the public eye, whatever he does. If that's what he wants to do, then I hope for that, too, because I do think he has a really interesting perspective on the sport. But I also understand when people want to be like, leave me alone, you know, let me go.

I'm going to go be left alone now, please. Ben, we have breaking news on the pod. Oh okay yeah what is it troy tigers have acquired mark khanah from khanah khanah what am i who am i what am i saying mark khanah you know the guy you might be familiar with from milwaukee in exchange for a minor league pitcher. So I have to bother some people about the top 50. Oh, yeah. Well, it's okay. I mean, like, you know, the news, it doesn't wait. It doesn't wait, Ben.

But also, I imagine that that means that the Tigers will be picking up his club option for 2024. Yeah, I guess so. And I think that we're starting to get pieces of an answer to our earlier question about like what are the brewers going to do with themselves? How do they view themselves? And perhaps they are viewing themselves in a little bit of a rebuilding mode, you know, maybe. Perhaps, yeah. Maybe.

Because it wasn't a super expensive option. It was $11.5 million. Right. And there was a $2 million buyout. So I guess they get out of the $2 million buyout by trading him to the Tigers. So, yeah, if the Tigers are more willing to spend on that kind of— Like, Canna was good for the Brewers. Yeah.

So that doesn't seem like it would be a bad amount of money for a team to play and pay for Mark Canna. It doesn't. It doesn't seem like it would be a bad amount now, does it? No. Yeah, I guess that's disconcerting potentially. But I don't know. I have to look at their depth charts. But I don't know. I'd have to look at their depth charts. Like with the Reds, for instance, you could see why they don't really have a spot for Joey Votto because they just have so many infielders.

They have so many infielders. keep Votto around in a part-time bench capacity and maybe, but maybe, you know, you have a player who's been the face of your franchise and it can get kind of awkward, right? Yeah. You want to make him a platoon guy, really? Right. And I wonder maybe the fact that they put out that statement and did what they did, maybe that means that they've talked to Joey Votto because like, if he were ready to retire and hang him up, then they could have done a coordinated thing, right? Like we're declining the option and also congrats on your retirement, Joey Votto, right? So the fact that they didn't do that makes me think that- He still wants to play a little bit. Right. Yeah. Because they must have said to him, hey, you know, how are you feeling? You ready to

retire? And he was like, nope, not yet. So, yeah, maybe. And the allusion to the playing time that he deserves, or, you know, maybe that means he still sees himself as someone who could start regularly, play regularly. So, yeah. All right. Well, that's something to monitor.

So, yeah, I guess the Brewers, I mean, they felt like they needed Canna enough to go get him. But then, you know, they have Freilich, right? So he can play in the corner. And then I guess who's even like their first baseman now would be Rowdy Tolez, I guess. Probably Rowdy again. I mean, for now. Yeah, they went through a whole just merry-go-round at first base before they got Canna and Santana and everyone.

So, hmm. Hmm, Ben. Hmm. Man, we record on a Saturday and we're rewarded with news. Breaking news, yeah. Imagine if we hadn't been able to talk about the Mark Canna trade

until Monday or something. Everyone would have been like, where's Effectively Wild? Where's the emergency talk about the Mark Canna trade till Monday or something. Everyone would have been like, where's Effectively Wild? Where's the emergency pod on the Mark Canna trade? Look, I just think that we should be conscious of the fact that he's a foodie. He's a favorite. He is a, don't they smack their own behinds? And it's because of Mark Canna. They were doing that in New York.

So I just think that this is a man who deserves recognition. For you foodies out there, he caught the first pitch when Alison Roman threw out a ceremonial first pitch. So it's just a saying. a ceremonial first pitch. So it's just a saying, you know. And now he gets to go collect an absurd number of hit-by-pitches in a different Central's uniform. But, you know, everyone's sitting out there going, we need reaction from the guy who got hit in, one of the guys who got hit in the butt in a suggestive way.

And Mark Hanna's on that list, you know. That's part of our demo too, Ben. Mark Hanna seems like a delight. Seems like a great guy. He does seem like a delight. Yeah. Seems like a delightful guy. Okay.

Let's do a few emails here. This one's from Parsnip Pizza, or that's what Parsnip Pizza goes by on Patreon. Do you have a name in mind for a gold glove and silver slugger season? So a season where someone wins a gold glove and a silver slugger. Metal Man? Platinum Player? What are your thoughts? Let's think about that. I'm resistant to Metal Man because, I don't know, it feels like it doesn't evoke the quality that we are trying to muster, right? Because these are precious metals, right?

They're not just metals. Like you're not recycling your gold glove. That would be ridiculous. And there are awards that already use platinum. So I feel like if we do that, that's going to cause confusion. Yeah. Metal Man's kind of fun. But you said the word precious. I was going to suggest precious player. The precious player. Precious also has its own connotation, right? Like you're being a bit precious. And that's derogatory.

True. But on field, you are pretty precious if you win a gold glove and a silver sucker. So, hmm. Hmm. Hmm. Maybe maybe just MVP, because if you're a gold glover and you're the best hitter at your position, then you're probably going to be in contention at least. At least, yeah. You're going to be in the conversation even if you don't end up winning. But again, I think we want to stay away from designations that exist

and mean something specific already. You know what I mean? Baseball Almanac has a list of the players who won Gold Glove and Silver Slugger in the same season. So last year, no one did it in the American League. In the NL, Nolan Arnauto, Mookie Betts, and JT Real Muto all did it. 2021, Marcus Semyon and Max Fried,

when pitchers still hit. 2020, Mookie Betts did it. Mookie Betts did it in 2019 as well. Mookie Betts did it in 2018. Maybe Mookie Betts did it in 2016. This is the Mookie. Maybe you're just a Mookie. Maybe it's just the Mookie.

Oh, I like that. I really like naming awards after players. And it's fun when we can start to do it with contemporaneous players because so often we're evoking players from the past which is you know its own kind of special thing um but when you have a a recent example of excellence i i think it's nice to name um name awards after him And provided we don't ask him questions about former questionable teammates of his, we can do it without having any compunction. Actually, Nolan Arnauto did it not only last year, but 2018, 2017, 2016, and 2015. Maybe it's the Nolan.

Maybe it's the Nolan. And I like that because I will say, like, I certainly appreciate, like, when I think of, if you were to ask me to give, like, a snap reaction to what kind of fielder is Mookie Betts, good or bad, my instinct would be good. But, like, Nolan Aranato is, like, superlative, you know? Yeah. correlative you know and so maybe that's a better answer because you you really like can you think off the top of your head like what is the best like play that Mookie Betts ever made and maybe you have an answer for that in the outfield because like you know he's had some really good plays but like I you say like you know pick Nolan Arenado's best play at third base and I'm like I can't pick just one like why

am I always forced to make these terrible choices because he's gotten he's had so many that have just been so like incredible so maybe I like the Nolan although the Nolan is such a you know we got to come up with new names I think we need new names Ben because like we got too many of these and of course they get named after guys who were really great. But like, you got so many Nolans. We got a lot of, you know, first name. This is, you know, I'm not going to make you do it. But like, in terms of war concentrated in a first name, Nolan, probably high on the list, right?

Especially for a name that isn't common. Yeah. on the list, right? Especially for a name that isn't common. Yeah. The Baseball Almanac calls it the Silver and Gold Club. I guess that's an option. Isn't there a Christmas song, Silver and Gold? Silver and Gold, Silver and Gold. Yeah. Yes, we both like Christmas music and it's almost the time. Yeah, there's a Burl Ives song. Yeah. Yeah. Ben, it's not time to decorate for Christmas, but we are, we're in the month where I decorate for Christmas.

I'm going to do a brief stat blast later, but this will be a even briefer stat blast before the stat blast. So the all-time leaders in being the metal man or the precious player or the silver and gold club or whatever. We were just talking about Mookie and Nolan Arnauto, but there's a three-way tie at the top. Barry Bonds, Yvonne Rodriguez, and Ken Griffey Jr. all had seven seasons when they

won a silver slugger and a gold glove. Yeah, Mookie and Arnauto have had five. Kirby Puckett also had five. And then Mike Schmidt and Ryan Sandberg had six. I don't think you can name an award after Puckett because it sounds like you're saying a different set of words if you say it too fast. Yeah. So, there's that. I don't know. I like the Nolan. Yeah, the Nolan's pretty good. The Nolan's pretty good. I like that. Yeah. All right. Okay, next question comes from Jason, Patreon supporter.

Imagine that one day an average starting pitcher ends up in a time loop that just so happens to be on a day he is scheduled to start. to be on a day he is scheduled to start. Assuming Groundhog Day rules, so every other person's behaviors are set in stone unless the pitcher interacts with them differently, how many times would it take for this pitcher to reliably pitch a perfect game 50% of the time? There's no escape to this time loop. He must start the game in every loop, and he can only exit the game if the manager pulls him. So Jason wants to know, how long does it take until he's like a coin flip to pitch a perfect game? The idea being that he's going to get so good because the batter's behaviors will be so predictable after he makes the start against the same team and these same players over and over and over again. Okay. So here's the thing about it though. Wouldn't he want to do different stuff though? And then like, he would not know what the batters are going to do.

Well, there's always the part in the beginning of the, whether it's Groundhog Day or Palm Springs or whatever it is, when you realize you're in a time loop, at first you freak out and then you get like resigned or I guess maybe you enjoy it for a while. You know, you're like, I can do anything. No consequences. And then you really want to get out of there. And then you really desperately want to get out of there. Yeah. And then you get resigned to it maybe. So there will be a time where he will be so sick of this that he will just like what he doesn't have to make the start. Right. Because he could just he could just leave. I mean, he might be trapped in this day, but he could always just leave and not be a baseball player that day. Right. But yeah, I guess I don't know what could stop him exactly. Like the question says that he has to make the start and he can only leave the game when the manager pulls him.

But if he just flees the ballpark, I don't know what could stop him exactly if he refuses to pitch, right? But if he wants to say, well, I'm trapped in this time loop, at least I want to experience the joy of a perfect game one time. Like how how much better do you think it makes him that he is able to predict like what will work, I guess, kind of? I guess, kind of. I mean, I still think it would be tricky because like, okay, so, you know, if he has memory of what has already happened, you know, some of it might depend on the quality, the baseline quality of the start, right? Because he's a league average pitcher, but like league average pitchers have really good starts and they have starts that are real stinkers. So like some of it, I imagine, would depend on what is the baseline quality of the initial groundhog day start right and then like what is the complexion of that start because like if he is mostly getting all of his outs in that start via like strikeouts and then he gives

up a couple of home runs well it seems like it would be like a good it would be easier to elevate the start because he'd know okay i threw that pitch and that pitch then that hitter hit a bomb off of it so i'm gonna not throw that pitch i'm gonna throw a different pitch and then you know he still has to see what the hitter does in response to that or maybe he just varies the location ever so slightly or whatever like he knows like oh i'm gonna hang this one so i gotta but then are you in your own head about it you're like i hung that one in the last start and then i guess you get a lot of chances to just undo it yeah but this one is a hard scenario for like groundhog day type stuff because perfect games are dependent on often dependent on the behavior of others and he can only alter

his own behavior so like what if you know part of the problem is that like are you assured of being able to like throw a different pitch and prevent the second baseman from booting the ball you know and that's what did you in like i, I guess you can throw a different pitch, but then like, are you sure that it's going to be better than the outcome is going to be better when you throw a different pitch? I mean, I guess this is what you're going to find out, right? But I don't know. It's like, it's a, it is a collective project to a certain degree, but if you're like a big strikeout guy, maybe you're able to find your way toward something pretty reliable. Cause you're just like, I'm just able to find your way towards something pretty reliable because you're just like, I'm just going to strike them all out. Yeah. I don't think there's any point where he's

50% to pitch a perfect game. You could definitely up your odds, but you're never going to get there because yeah, it's not like being able to predict like, okay, I threw him that last time, and he swung and he missed. And so all I have to do, and then this time, I threw him that and he hit it. I mean, first of all, you can't throw exactly the same pitch over and over again, because your performance is still going to be a bit variable. And we already have scouting reports and tendencies. So you could already get a good sense of what is this hitter's weakness. Maybe you get a more personalized sense after if you start against this team hundreds of times, then you might know, okay, I can throw this guy this pitch. Like, I don't know that there's going to be a pitch that you can throw where it's just,

yeah, this is an automatic out and this is an automatic out. Right. Like you still have to execute, right? You still have to place that pitch in the perfect place. And it's just not going to be exactly the same pitch every time. So you're not going to be able to just get through a start by saying, if I throw, okay, curveball to this guy, all right, he's going to swing through that. And then if I throw a sinker, then he's going to roll over and it'll be a little tapper back to me and I'll throw him out.

You're still going to screw up. Your fielders are still going to screw up. So I think maybe the biggest benefit would be if you do this for years, then you could become a better pitcher. Right. Not just because you'd be able to predict what someone will chase or whatever. But you have a fresh arm every day. You have a fresh arm every day. And so you could get so much practice.

Yeah. I mean, and it doesn't matter if you stink because it's a time loop. So you could just experiment. You're not going to get benched. No. Or if you do, whatever, it starts over for that day and you go back. Yeah. I don't know if you have to do the entire day or if it's just the game is the loop. Right.

But you could say, I want to learn a new pitch. And I'm just going to tinker with it and I'll throw only that pitch in the start. And I'll give up a zillion runs and then I'll get taken out. But it won't matter. It won't matter. It won't matter. And ultimately, I will be able to throw every pitch, at least that my mechanics, my anatomy allows. And that would make you a lot better over time because you could just practice much more

than any other pitcher can practice because usually you have to allow some time for your arm to recover and your whole body. Whereas in this case, you still remember the previous day, but presumably your body resets and there's no additional strain on your arm. So that would be, I think, the big benefit. Do you, okay, I'm going to ask a question. How long would it take in his sort of stages of Groundhog Day grief before he just had one where he's like, I'm going to hit every single one of these powers.

I'm so sick of these stupid guys. Like how long until there's like a giant, hey, hmm. Yeah, that would probably still happen. I mean, because ethically, I guess it's not really that much more defensible for you to cause the people pain, even if you know that it's just going to start over again and they won't remember it. And the normal rules of time and space don't really apply. You're still causing suffering in that moment. But you'd just be so bored and probably so depressed at some point that to feel anything, you might just be like, yeah, I'm just going to plunk everyone.

I'm going to beat this guy. I'm going to plunk every one of them. How long will it take for them to throw me out I'm just going to plunk everyone. I'm going to beat this guy. I'm going to plunk every one of them. How long will it take for them to throw me out? You know, you just want to experiment with anything. Yeah, I think that that piece of it would be fascinating, I think. And your command would get better over time with just the practice, too. So you would be able to repeat your mechanics better and repeat your— Theory, yeah.

Yeah, unless—yeah. I was trying to think like, well, does muscle memory, is that not preserved? But I guess muscle memory is largely in your brain. So you would retain that even though your body is not really retaining the soreness or the strain or anything. So. So, yeah, I think you would become the best pitcher in baseball at some point, assuming that you're starting. Or at least the very, very best version of yourself possible. Yeah. Right.

Like, again, I know it is put as being league average, but like there are going to be, I imagine, like physical limitations to the pitcher and his profile that, you know, kind of put you in a weird spot. Yeah, because I guess you can't change yourself physically, probably. Like, if you spent that entire day lifting, like, you would not retain your gains. Like, you couldn't get stronger. Right, you couldn't get bigger and stronger. Yeah. Yeah. So you couldn't do like a velocity building program and throw weighted balls because all of that would be reset. So yeah, your physical tools, I guess, would be frozen and it would all be just about your wiliness and also, yeah, like what you can learn to, you know, a different grip or whatever it is, right?

Right, right. And so you would still be able to derive benefit from the experience, but the kind of benefit you could derive would be, you know, physically constrained to your current version of yourself. And then whatever sort of practice and mental acuity you draw from that experience that puts you in a position to succeed, which to be clear, like I think you would get I think you definitely would get better. would just reset in ways that would be beneficial to you because you'd never be exhausted from the prior day's start, but would also prevent you from, you know, undertaking a velocity program or anything like that. You know, you might find a way to warm up that feels better for your body throughout the start. So it's not like there are no physical sort of impacts that something like this could have, but they would I think they would be limited to So you could, let's say you experimented with certain substances that normally you wouldn't risk it because you don't want to get caught,

you don't want to get suspended. You don't have to worry about that here. So you could, and I mean, you're still going to get checked by the umps and everything, but you could find some way to circumvent that potentially. Or like what if you food poison your opponents or something? Oh, my gosh. Depends how devious you want to get here. But I feel like you learn a lot about your own moral boundaries. Probably. Yeah.

In a situation like this or like, I mean, everyone else is behaving exactly the same way. Right. So think about the sign stealing you could get up to. Oh, yeah. You know, you could do all, like you could learn the routines of security and you could sneak into the clubhouse and give everyone diarrhea and then they would be unable to perform at their high level. Not everyone is going to eat Brussels sprouts at five in the morning. You'd have to come up with something else. Yeah. But you'd have an infinite number of trials to do that. So, yeah, it might be more about sabotage than it is improving yourself or you could do a bit of both.

But yeah, you're never going to get to 50 percent. What if you develop a taste for inflicting pain on other people, though, and then you like get out of the time loop and suddenly you're a serial killer? Yeah, I don't know. I don't know. I think it's best to stay away from time loops. You know, you might come out of that really changed and not in a charming Bill Murray kind of a way. Okay. Well, I'm just thinking about how much just just how much facing a certain hitter day after day when you you learn things about them, but they don't learn anything about

you. Yeah. And so just knowing in a personalized sense, not just the generic scouting report or how they do against a certain pitch type, but how they do against your pitches specifically on certain counts and everything and what they're picking up that day and what they're not. That would definitely make you better. that would definitely make you better. It just, you're never going to get around just the randomness of baseball that you can't defeat the randomness really entirely, even in a time

loop scenario. No. Okay. All right. This is a follow-up to what we started last episode talking about, which was Chris Gilligan's post at Fangraphs about which franchise that has

never won a World Series will win one next. Jake says Chris's article about who will win their first World Series next got me thinking about a related but I think more answerable question. Who will win one first, the Rockies or any franchise that does not yet exist? Oh, wow. Given that we have no idea when the next expansion will happen and that it will be almost certainly in a fairly small market with a team that will be bad to start, it seems like the smart answer should be the Rockies. That said, I have zero faith in the Rockies given current ownership and generally given the challenges of their environment. So personally, I do think I'd have to say a franchise that doesn't exist yet is more likely interested to hear what you think. I wonder how many Rockies fans listen to our show, Ben.

And not because I don't think we try to be mean about the Rockies. But they do offer a lot of opportunities to express doubt about their future prospects, both literal and figurative, I suppose. aspects um both literal and figurative i suppose um and you know i wouldn't begrudge a rocky's fan just being like i know you don't mean to be mean but i'm over this so anyway that's the thing i think about well i guess ben how long do you think it's going to take before we get actual expansion that's an important question to answer in this in our consideration here Like in the next 10 years, right? Probably in the next 10 years, we'll have some new franchises, right? Yeah, the current CPA already allows for it, right?

And so if you get the A's and the R's situations squared away soon enough. Screwed away? That was a Freudian slip about the Oakland Athletics, right? Yeah, right. Maybe they have been screwed. They'll be screwed regardless. But yeah, I mean,

there was a report. I think it was in July. I think it was not even a report. It was Manfred said that MLB is going to be exploring potential expansion to 32 teams pretty soon. Yeah.

So I don't know what pretty soon means exactly. But, yeah, certainly within 10 years, I would think, and maybe quite possibly sooner. Maybe sooner. But, like, it's going to take them a minute to, like, build the— Yes. build the yes so like even if the even if we got you know um a mandate tomorrow that we're getting two new expansion teams like what do you remember i do not the time from like announcing the rays and the diamondbacks they're actually being raised in diamondbacks games i don't you think i'd remember because boy did they did they play the Arizona Diamondbacks

video a lot this postseason in Chase. I was like, I don't need to see any more of Budsie. Like, I am set. Yeah. I think it was a few years at least. It takes a little while. And then they have to do the expansion draft. They have to build a ballpark.

You know, I wonder where they, I mean mean where will they play hmm i mean not just like their actual games but like are these do you do it so that you have one new cactus league team and one new grapefruit league team things we wonder about i don't know either but anyway um so you figure like even if they were to announce tomorrow, which would be quite surprising, that, hey, congratulations, Nashville and Portland or whatever. I'm really skeptical of Portland as an expansion site. I feel like the Mariners aren't going to let that happen. But anyway. With the 98 round of expansion. Yeah.

So the MLB had an expansion committee in March 1994. Right. When a bunch of groups representing nine cities submitted bids and then march 9th 1995 was when they awarded the franchises so yeah it was it was a few years three years three years yeah because 98 was the first year for okay so so like we would be looking at at the earliest play in like probably like 2027, you know, 2028 if they announce it tomorrow. Yeah. And they probably won't.

So you figure that. Yeah, let's say like 2030 maybe. 2030. Okay, so fine. So 2030. So 2030. And then you think about, you know, some franchises have been in existence for a good while and still don't have a ring. Some franchises get rings very early and then have to wait a long time. I think that the smart money is probably on the Rockies, maybe, just because they already exist.

That is an important precondition to winning a World Series, existing. Existing. But I do think it would be closer, you know, if you wanted to take the expansion team, that's a, I don't think that's a fundamentally ridiculous assertion to make, I guess is what I would say, you know? It's not, no. I don't think that's a ridiculous thing to say. to it, but just about how long the effects of being an expansion team can linger, because it really is a significant disadvantage to be an expansion team and to not have all the resources that come with being a longstanding franchise in terms of the support from fans and the revenue and the relationships.

And of course, just having a whole farm system built up and everything, not having to do an expansion draft and just kind of, you know. Oh, boy. Oh, that's going to be so fun. Oh, boy. That will be fun. Oh, boy.

Oh, I can't wait. I can't wait for expansion draft. I am kind of looking forward to that whenever that happens. But as Sam said, like, it really is kind of a historical institutional disadvantage that lingers maybe even after you don't really realize that, oh, yeah, you don't even think of that team as an expansion team anymore, but the disadvantage of that can linger. And arguably the Rockies are in that boat, even though they've been around for 30 years, they're still an expansion team. Now, I don't think at this point it is primarily the fact that they were an expansion team that is holding them back. I think it is the environment and its ownership,

right? And ownership can change. So you have to factor that in too. If you said that the Rockies were forever going to be owned by Dick Monfort and nothing ever was going to change about their leadership and ownership, then maybe you might take the expansion team just because it's almost certainly going to be better. But by the time we get an expansion team, who knows? Maybe the Rockies are run completely differently too. They are still going to be mile high and the expansion team is not. So they're not going to have to figure out how to deal with that unless, you know, they're in Mexico City or something. But otherwise, they're probably going to have an easier time of figuring out how to win in that environment maybe than the Rockies have had,

at least to this point. But yeah, I think you still got to go with the Rockies because they currently exist and because there is potential for change and because, hey, they have had decent seasons. They have made the playoffs. They haven't won a division, but they've made the playoffs. And that's all you have to do to be in the running for a World Series. And whatever the expansion team is probably will not be good for a while. As you said, there are some exceptions to that.

But most expansion teams are bad for a while. So you're looking at 10, 15 years. I mean, until that team is even like a credible contender. And you got to figure the Rockies will probably have a decent team at some point in that period, right? Even if they're not a favorite in any year. So, yes. So, yes. Take heart, Rockies fans.

We're saying that you are more likely to win a World Series sooner than a team that does not yet exist. I hope that Rockies fans who listen to this podcast find this cathartic when we talk in this way because they're probably pretty frustrated too, maybe, if they follow the team closely. For sure. I just, you know, I want us to be honest about things. I want us to be clear-eyed. But I don't want anybody to come away feeling like they've been given a hard time for no reason, you know. Like, that's cheap, Ben. And we're not cheap.

We're, you know, we're metal men. We're precious podcasters. Yeah. Hey, more breaking Tigers news. Oh, boy. Eduardo Rodriguez has exercised his opt-out. His opt-out? Okay.

So, like, the least surprising news that one could possibly break? Yes. Hey, I don't have to do anything with the top 50 for that. So like the least surprising news that one could possibly break? Yes. Hey, I don't have to do anything with the top 50 for that. So good job, Eduardo. Yeah. You already predicted that that would happen, huh? I mean, yeah, we had that one kind of figured as a staff. I'm not saying that I am the sole brilliant mind. I'm saying that a lot of us came to the same logical conclusion at once. Well, I mean, he vetoed that trade to the Dodgers, so it could have been that he's just,

he's so enamored of being a Tiger that, yeah, he didn't even want to get the leverage, explore his options, just loved being in Detroit. No, he's going to test the market. I mean, he might have loved being in Detroit and still think that it's prudent for him to test the market. So, you know, those things are not mutually exclusive. Again, we're not trying to give anybody a hard time. No, he could resign,

presumably, if he wants to, if unless they wouldn't be interested in him, unless exercising the opt out was the only way he could remain a Detroit Tiger. But that's probably not the case. All right. And another follow up question. This is from Citar, Patreon supporter. So we answered a question about having a lottery to determine who's in the postseason, except it's just that one team that qualifies for the postseason doesn't get to go, and one team that didn't qualify for the postseason gets to take their spot. Yeah. get to go and one team that didn't qualify for the postseason gets to take their spot.

Yeah. So this scenario, instead of swapping out a bad team for a good one, it's all a lottery system. Win your division, you're in. Don't, you've got a shot. So for every win above a threshold, let's say 88 wins, you get one entry into the lottery. In 2023, the Rays get 12, the Blue Jays 2, the Rangers 3, and the Mariners 1. Select three unique winners. They all play the division winners.

Or if there are not enough teams that hit 88, you select one and skip the wildcard round. Philly just automatically advances to play Atlanta. You could dynamically tweak the win total, set it just before the trade deadline perhaps to tweak the competitiveness. Every game is high stakes at the end. The Mariners thought they were done on Sunday, but instead they played for and won a single entry into the lottery. Texas losing on the final day cost them a fourth entry, which might have been pivotal. Philly coasted in, but in 2022, they lost the last two to finish with 87. Just missing, meaning the Mets would have had 14 entries to San Diego's two. The benefit of this is the chaos of the last week as teams try to shore up divisions or maximize win totals or simply get to win totals. If you're at 84 wins with six games to go, every game is potentially huge.

The drawback is calculating playoff odds would be a nightmare. Oh, yeah. Geez. If that were the only drawback, I'd be fine with that. But I think my issues with this can probably be summed up thusly. I think it's really important important for competitive aspiration within the league for teams to feel like they have as much direct control over their fate for as long as they possibly can. Because once you introduce the vagaries of a lottery system, however it's configured, however high the threshold of wins. I think that clubs whose owners and povos perhaps want to impose restriction on resourcing, you got to keep that door closed shut. You know, any little crack that you open to say,

well, you could say it's not your fault, that's dangerous. That's a dangerous gap in the i'm we got doors i'm about to use an armor metaphor you know you don't want any breakage in the chain that they can attribute to a force outside themselves i think it is it is important for teams to feel like they are in the driver's seat so that any, I got so many metaphors and just a rapid fire, so that any veering off the road to the playoffs is something that we say is their fault as the driver. I think that's really important to maintaining a maximally competitive, ambitious ecosystem.

And so, you know, this would put a lot of perhaps even more incentive on teams to win their divisions to lock in that spot. But I think that the buy is a sufficiently forceful incentive for clubs to stick with wanting to win the division. I think you don't want any lotteries because you just don't want some pobo being able to say, well, you know, it's just really too bad that the lottery broke that way, you know? Yeah. What could we have done? Po-bo-bozo.

Yeah. Yeah. We don't want to, we want to disincentivize the existence of any Pobo Bozos. Although being able to say Pobo Bozo, Bozo Pobo, that's delicious, Ben. That's, that's very good. If you did have this, I think you'd have to set the bar lower than 88 wins, right? And then what are you doing, you know? Yeah.

Because 88 wins gets you into the playoffs at this point, basically. I mean, the Mariners, no. But in general, yeah. And yeah, if you're not in, you're at least so close that you're in contention until the last couple days, right?

Yeah, I guess there was one day when the Mariners had to play a game when they were out of it, but that's only one day. So you're not going to set up a whole system just to do away with one dull day. So I think you would have to set it lower so that more teams would be in the running for the lottery who are not already going to be playoff teams or in contention until the last day anyway. And then you're just watering down the playoff field even further. Even more. Yeah.

I like the idea of just maintaining some stakes up until the very end. But we already do that, I think, for enough teams. I wouldn't want it to be for more teams. I'd want it to be for fewer teams, if anything. Okay. All right. Just a couple last playoff related questions before we kind of turn the page on the playoffs. Jeff says,

let's assume that the MLB PA wants MLB to follow suit with the NHL and soccer. So when a championship is won, the trophy is handed over first and foremost to the team captain rather than the team owner. Love it. Maybe I'm over first and foremost to the team captain rather than the team owner. Love it. Maybe I'm attaching too much value to the moment, but let's assume that the owners aren't raging megalomaniacs and are open to discussing the issue. Let's also assume that they're less than magnanimous and require that the MLBPA bargain for the honor. What, if anything, would or should the players be willing to concede for this change to be made? What would it take, if anything, for the owners to give up that moment in the spotlight with

the hunk of metal slash commissioner's trophy? I think that they should give up zero things because while I do think that there is symbolic value to that moment and it does rankle every single time that it is handed off immediately to the owner, I think that it would be silly to give up anything of real substance to secure that moment. And I am skeptical that it would be something that owners would even allow to be bargained. I think that they just assume it and so would say, what are you talking about? Like, it's my trophy. Right. I would so, it would be so nice, even if it wasn't a player, if it was just the manager, it should be, if we were to rejigger that system and we could pick,

like having it go to a player would be nice. But like not every team has a team captain. You know, some teams don't do the captain thing. Right. Some teams do it and then we all have to hear about it because we have to know about the vagaries of the Yankees. So, which is fine. But I do think that if we were able to choose, like, the manager seems like a fine option absent a team captain. And you don't want to give it to the MVP because then you step on the MVP moment. And, you know, there's often not a lot of surprise associated with the MVP, like, but it still is its own moment that should, but maybe then every team

should have to have a captain and it should go to the team captain. Yeah, you'd have to designate one for that purpose only. Yeah, you want it to be a member of the roster or the field staff. No, no owners and no po-pos, you know, I say no pobos because I think that part of the power of the imagery is it's really nice to have someone in the uniform holding the trophy you know

for like the picture to make a nice picture I think that's what you want and so I'd be fine if it was the manager or like maybe I don't know maybe everybody loves the bench coach you know and they want it to be the bench coach. That'd be fine too. But give up no stuff for this. But also maybe start, you know, asking. I'm sure that the broadcast, maybe that's the sneaky way to do it, is to have the broadcast be the one, you know, the rights holder be the one to be like, you know, I really would prefer

to see like this go on a boat first than the Crypt Keeper, the Texas Rangers. I'm confident he doesn't listen to the podcast, so I think it's fine to say that. Wouldn't it be weird if we got an email? He's like, no, I in fact do. And I resent that. And I will not listen to your suggestions about a Pride Night. Dick Monfort emails fans all the time. Seems like you can email Dick Monfort. He'll email you back. He'd have to win a World Series to be the one

in this scenario. We just answered an email about that. Symbolically, I think it would be nice for the optics, for the players to have it confirmed at that moment that the players are the ones who win the World Series. They do it. It's not congratulating the person who paid them.

It's the people who did the thing on the field. It would be nice, but it's already a great moment for the players. They just won a World Series. And it's not like, you know, people are giving the owner all the credit or anything. And it's not like, you know, people are giving the owner all the credit or anything. So it probably wouldn't be worth giving up anything of real value to get this. But it would be nice. Yes. It would be nice.

Well, and it's so funny because there are years where I don't want the owner to take it first. But like this year, okay, I want to be very clear about my feelings on the Crypt Keeper. Maybe me calling him the Crypt Keeper kind of gives it away. But like I'm not a fan of the Rangers owners, like a human person with influence. And I would sure prefer that they have a Pride Night. I do think that in this year, like when Chris Young is like, you know, I want to thank him for like the resources he brought to this club. Like that was a useful thing to say within the broader landscape of baseball, even if I don't have super warm feelings toward him as an individual. But generally it's just like, they're like, we want to thank the owner.

And I'm like, yeah, but like, but maybe going to the network is the way to backdoor it. You know, maybe they're like, the first shot, it would be better TV if it were, you know, the manager or it were the team captain, you know. Imagine a world where the Yankees won the World Series this year. If you're Fox, wouldn't you rather have Aaron Judge hoisting that thing? You would. That's better TV. Of course. Yeah. Yeah. I think in that moment, you want to see the players. If I were making the devil's advocate case, I would say that obviously an owner is pretty important to your chances of winning or not winning, as we were just talking about the

Rockies, right? So I would say having a good owner doesn't guarantee you a championship, but having a really bad owner almost guarantees that you won't win one. Yes. Or really significantly lowers your odds. It's a hell of a headwind to have to work against, yeah. Right. Because it's not even purely the payroll or the level of support. Like the Rockies aren't the cheapest team in the world. They aren't.

of support. Like the Rockies aren't the cheapest team in the world, but it's just who is that owner going to entrust with running the team, right? And the culture of the team and the expectations of the team. So in that sense, the owner does, I mean, it does help put that team in that position to win more than any individual player does. It's just that in that moment, I think, when the players just won on the field, you kind of want to hand the trophy to them. You know, you want to see the players skate around with the Stanley Cup and get to bring it around. You don't want to see it handed to the owner, even if the owner ultimately like is you know responsible i guess as much as any other individual for for the win i just had an incredibly ungenerous thought should i share it it's a little mean okay um what if the owner did skate around with the stanley cup but the he was required to fall

well that's not a nice thought i it would be much more likely that if you handed one of the older owners in the league a Stanley Cup and said skate with this. Yeah, that seems to be clear. I am not either a franchise owner or especially old. And I would, gonna do is where i would eat on the ice if i had to skate around holding the stanley cup aloft there's no way i don't get out of balance and just like make a scene probably fall on it injure myself somehow then there's blood on the ice and i gotta do a whole thing you know i would but um yeah maybe if they had to fall down but in a funny way not in a in an injury kind of way. Because, like, I would hurt myself.

Yeah, just a pratfall. A pratfall, yeah. Funny, for comedy, not for spite. What they could do if MLB, if Rob Manfred didn't want to hand the trophy to his bosses, which I'm sure he's fine with. But they could just make the commissioner's trophy much heavier. Because apparently it weighs about 30 pounds now. It weighs 30 pounds. he's fine with, but they could just make the commissioner's trophy much heavier because apparently it weighs about 30 pounds now. It weighs 30 pounds.

I guess that makes sense. How much of that is the base though? Yeah, I don't know. But if you made it extremely heavy, then an owner would not. It needs to be heavy enough that only Adolis Garcia can lift it. And then you've solved so many of your problems. Oblique or no, you just got to get up there, Dolly. Even if it were just heavy enough

that the owner was like worried about not being able to or might lose my balance or I might look weak in this moment. And then they would want someone strong up there to support them. So yeah, maybe just like maybe year by year, just add a pound, you know, just make it gradually heavier and they won't even notice.

But then it'll get to be 50 pounds, 60 pounds. And they're like, I can't lift that. Right. I've got to call over my star player here who is strong enough to lift this. Yeah, that's the solution. And that way you save face like it doesn't become an issue. No one realizes what happened. It's not like we're stripping this away from you and handing it to the players physically and figuratively.

It's just, oh, wow, this is actually pretty heavy. I need some help here. I need some help. That's the way to do it. It is kind of surprising to me that there hasn't – and maybe there's been an instance of this and I'm just not remembering it. So I will allow for the fallibility of my own memory here but it is sort of surprising to me that we haven't had an owner be like you know how i can like foster some really good will i could be like this isn't my trophy to lift it's the guys and then have them kind of come up and

do it i don't think we've seen that um but it would be, you know, we like, we do like to be pandered to, I think is the thing. One thing I've learned from the Phillies is that we enjoy being pandered to. And I think that's fine. You know, I really do. Right. So I wonder if you'd be nice if there was an owner at some point just as a gesture who would, who would say, yeah, my players should have this moment. I'm sure the owners like having that moment. Sure. Because it's like, hey, this is when I get to brag about owning this team.

Right. You know, teams are a pretty good investment, but also you do it because you get the value of the fame and people know who you are. Because you get the value of the fame and people know who you are and people will appreciate that you spent on the team and delivered a championship to that city and everything. So they probably would mind if this were taken away from them. But I wonder if it came down to would they make an actual sacrifice? Like if the players were willing to give them something financial, some kind of concession, maybe when it came down to actual dollars. Like, you know, that's how you become a sports team owner is that you care a lot about that stuff. So maybe if something actually were at stake and it's like, hmm, I could lift the trophy or I could become slightly richer than I already am,

then maybe that would be enough for them. And we do want them to want that moment, right? Oh, yeah, that's true. That is the tension of this whole project, because we, you know, we want the swell of the crowd, the lift of the thing to be a powerful, you know, pull for them um because it does seem to inspire a lot of you know like if i think that some of it also depends on like who the owner is like people probably would have less issue with like john middleton hoisting the trophy in that moment even if they'd still prefer that it be you know harper or whoever um because like that guy has actually done stuff to try to like build a relationship with the fan base that in his case is like it does seem kind of sincere and his comments on like what the purpose

of being an owner of a major league franchises are like in line with what we want to hear owners saying when asked that question so some of it probably does depend on the owner and like i will you know even when the phillies win like i'll i'll begrudge him that moment less than others you know there are owners out there where um like just to pick one that like might be near and dear to my heart, I have viewed John Stanton as something of an obstacle to the Mariners' postseason aspirations because of what I perceive to be his unwillingness to spend. And so if and when they win, if he is still the face of the ownership group and is still the principal owner i'm gonna i'm gonna you can't see it ben but i'm making a little face right now i'm making a little like face and i will make that little face when if and when that happens but like when if the phillies win i'm gonna be like

yeah good job john like you get it dude like you you're not one of us to be clear um but you you get the purpose of this thing in a way that aligns more closely with my understanding of it than seemingly anyone else. So. Yeah. Yeah. I guess maybe it's just because I'm reading a New York Times article from this summer about it that points out like this is a very American thing. So this is not the case like in international soccer. The article says the franchise model gives U.S. team owners collective decision-making power in their leagues, ensuring that they're infinitely more powerful than anything comparable in Europe. So that could be part of it. So like when the Red Sox win a World Series, John Henry gets to hoist the trophy. But when

Liverpool won the Champions League and the Premier League, he was not there. The players got to do that. Oh, interesting. Yeah. So it's kind of an American thing, but it goes back a long, long way. And this article only had one example of it not happening, at least in the sports where it does typically happen. I guess at the end of the 2019 and 2020 season in the bubble, the Lakers owner, Jeannie Buss, said that the players could come get the award before the owners. But Buss had been at a bunch of past title ceremonies

and I guess maybe felt like, I'll give them one. Yeah. Wow. Americans valorizing capital in a way that other countries don't. I don't know, Ben, you're going to, you can knock me over with a feather with that assertion. I know. Sometimes I have to play cosplay as Bauman a little bit just to keep you on your toes. Yep. All right. Let me wrap up with a brief stat blast here. Realize it for us in amazing ways. Here's to day still past. Okay, so we are still sponsored by Tops Now.

And as I speak, you can still get Tops Now cards. In fact, I'm looking right now at the Tops Now site, and you can get one of Evan Carter hoisting the trophy. And you can get one of the Texas Rangers as a whole holding up the trophy and celebrating. I do not see one of Ray Davis holding a trophy. So it appears to be only the players. So that's some consolation, right? You might not get to hold the trophy first, but you do get a Tops Now card. Whereas if you're the owner, you do not get to be on the Tops Now baseball card. So that's nice, I would say.

That's nice. Yeah. So for now, at least if you're hearing this shortly after we post it, you can still go get some Rangers holding the trophy. And soon enough, I suppose there will not be new Tops Now cards because we're in the off season now. But of course, you can go get a selection of many other Tops cards. But you can find all of the offerings at Topps.com, and we will link to the page with Topps Now specifically. And I think it's kind of fun just to look at the page, just to see how many Topps Now cards certain players and teams got.

But our stop last today. So here's a question from Sam about being the best pound for pound player. Sam says, I think I stumbled upon the perfect, effectively wild question. After Jose Altuve's game five home run, my dad said, you know, pound for pound, Altuve is the best hitter of all time. I, of course, said, what are you talking about? No way. He said, no, I mean, literally, Altuve is the most valuable hitter per pound of his body. I was blown away by this thought. I naturally wanted to dispute it, but I kind of saw his point. Who do you think is the most valuable hitter and pitcher of all time per pound? Obviously, interpret this how you see fit, maybe war or jaws per pound or by inch. I know players'

heights are disputable. So are their weights, by the way. Oh, yeah. I think the weights are even less reliable than listed heights. Yeah, right. And Sam says, P.S. If you answer this, I will finally stop freeloading and sign up via Patreon. It's not why I chose this, but thank you. I don't know if I'll have a satisfactory enough answer for you to get you to sign up for Patreon. Although if you do, I appreciate it. But I went to some trouble to do this because it's kind of hard to get a And so I have war per inch and war per pound and broke it down in both ways.

And I can tell you the answers, I guess. Would you? I know you hate guessing things. I hate guessing. Let's see. I mean, I imagine Altuve is like pretty high on that list i don't know if i would put him at number one but maybe i no no no spoiler no no um who are short kings you know like who are the are the shortest kings?

This is almost a trick question in a way. And so I feel bad torturing you. So I will stop because the answer for the leader in War Per Inch is Babe Ruth. It's not a short king. It's just a king. Babe Ruth is number one on the war per inch leaderboard and on the war per pound leaderboard. Barry Bonds. Oh, sure.

Yeah. So it's still just the best players, basically. It's still just the best players. The problem with this question is that the variation. If you have a lot of war. Yeah, right. Yeah. There's more variation in war than there is in height and weight, I imagine. Exactly. Yes, right. Because all players, I mean, you know, they're within, what's the range, like a foot and a half or so, right? I mean, you know, almost every player is within a fairly narrow range, like on a percentage basis, right? So in terms of percentage, like,

yeah, Jose Altuve is a lot shorter than some other players who were, you know, a foot taller than he is, but he's still most of their heights, right? Whereas with war, you could be many multiples, the total of someone else's, right? So there's just so much more variation that it doesn't actually produce that much difference, unfortunately. So it's just not a very fun answer. And it's still the overall war leaders are also the, so, you know,

it's like Babe Ruth was worth 2.26 war per pound. And Barry Bonds is directly behind him. And then Willie Mays is directly behind him. It's like indistinguishable almost from your normal, you know. And Barry Bonds worth 0.89 war per pound. I mean, to try to make it a little more interesting, I looked for, like, ranks. So I did players' ranks in just War and then also their rank in War per Pound or War per Inch or whatever to try to see if there was a difference in ranks maybe that might be kind of interesting. But it's not really all that interesting, unfortunately.

Yeah. I mean, Altuve is listed at 170 pounds is the thing, which is not that much of an outlier. That's still on the light side for a major leaguer, but he's well built. He's a muscular guy, yeah. Yeah. And also his listed height is, I'm pretty sure, significantly taller than he actually is.

What is his listed height? He's at 5'6", I think, right? Yeah, that's definitely a lie. I mean, like, he is—he—a lie puts such judgment on it. I think that's inaccurate. on it. I think that's inaccurate. I mean, like, he's, I'm 5'5", and he, I believe

he's 5'6 in spikes, but I don't think he's 5'6 as a, as, you know, flat feet on the ground, standing even just like a normal, with a normal posture. Yeah, like, he's taller than I am in spikes, but

only maybe by an inch. Yeah. He's really not, I mean, I've seen him pictured taller than I am in spikes, but only maybe by an inch. Yeah, he's really not. I mean, I've seen him pictured next to Ken Rosenthal, who, again, declares his height in his bio to be five, four and a half. An actual short king. There's not. Yeah, there's not much of a difference there. So so so that's part of it is that the outliers are are kind of going to minimize the degree to which they're outliers, right? They're just going to add an inch or two or subtract an inch or two or maybe subtract some LBs potentially, too, if they're tipping the scale at a high number. I think that they are more likely.

Here's my assertion. I think that they are more likely to just not update them than they are to fib about them actively. And I guess that's a way of fibbing about it. But I think that in general, they just don't get updated very often. And so you end up with guys. Yeah. And see, you know, here's the funniest thing. It isn't even it isn't even Jose Altuve's's height that's funny. It's Alex Bregman's height that's funny. Because my guy, we can see you next to him and you are not six feetve, he's obviously still playing and a productive player. He's still adding on to his career war total. But he is 177th among position players in career war, but 136th in war per inch. So he's 41 ranks higher on that leaderboard, which is actually a pretty big difference, at least when you're talking about like that close to the top. So the only guy above him who has a bigger disparity is Willie Keeler, who, of course, is known as Wee Willie Keeler. So, yeah, he's got a difference in rank of 44 spots that I think is the highest for a player that good and productive. And I did look who has the biggest difference in rank of anyone.

And I guess not a surprise. It's Eddie Goodell, the true short king of Major League Baseball, right, who walked in his one plate appearance and produced positive war. You know, just if you go out to some decimal places, he was above replacement level. So if you do a war per inch with him, then it boosts him up the leaderboard. Right. But for most guys, it's just it's not going to make enough of a difference. So I know what Sam's dad means. Like, it feels like it should be a good question. And maybe there's some other way to slice and dice the data here that would produce a more interesting answer. But yeah, pound per pound, it's still just going to be the best hitters, basically. Yeah. And yeah, that makes sense. Like, you're right. The distribution of heights versus the distribution of war. It's not, we don't have 50 foot tall people, you know.

We don't have, there's no person that would yield the Home Depot skeleton, you know. No. Like, that guy doesn't exist, which there's a Jack Skellington on my block now, Ben, you know, and they put it up pretty late. So I hope they just leave it and put a like Santa hat on him and just lean into the, I just sent you a link to a, uh, a tweet that has that, that is not, there's not six inches of difference between those two men. Oh, Bregman and Altuve. No, definitely not. Definitely not. Like he's five 10 and". And you know what? Alex, just say, just say, just say. It's very funny because the tweet I found that has the best picture is

about them like right after the sign stealing scandal. And I'm recasting these apologies as being about lying about their eyes. That would be a funnier, less morally devastating scandal because it's like, yeah, you're just a man. A lot of you seem to have a need to fib about this. I don't know. Yes. Yes. Yeah. And if I were going to be really rigorous about this, probably I'd want to have like a height plus and weight plus that adjusted for era because players have gotten so much taller and heavier

over time that it's like it's more impressive like era adjusted pound for pound like yes at an earlier era Altuve's size wouldn't have been so extraordinary but now it is so that might be something you would want to factor in and, obviously the heights and the weights are going to be inaccurate. And especially with a weight, yeah, you're dealing with one number for a guy's entire career. It obviously fluctuates, you know, sometimes quite a bit. So yeah, we're limited by the data and the granularity that we have here, unfortunately. Yeah. Like i think they do adjust them um on occasion and they tend to do it like i bet okay so like there was a time when he was a seattle mariner when like itel marte was not 210 because he was a skinny little young guy who just had mono and so like he wasn't 210 pounds and then he went to arizona and he stopped. And, you know, he added good like muscle so that he could hit for more power.

And now he's listed at 210. But I bet when he was a mariner, like that was probably not true. He was probably not listed at his mono weight, but he was probably also not listed at 210. Right. Yeah. Yeah. One thing I wish people sometimes ask, like, what data do we wish that we had? It'd be nice if we had really accurate height and weight data, but also it'd be nice if we tracked that over time because we don't, as you said, it might get show that one number. He was 210, yeah. Right. It'd be great if we could look up the way that we have like an age line, you know, on the stat page. It'd be cool if we had like a weight line so that we knew what did you weigh that year, you know?

And then we could see like what's the weight aging curve, you know, how much weight do players typically put on or take off and how does that correlate to performance? Because sometimes players will be like, I'm in the best shape of my life. I lost a lot of weight. And sometimes players will be like, I'm in the best shape of my life. I gained a lot of weight. And sometimes they will go back and forth where it's like, I put on a bunch of weight last year and it was too much. I felt fatigued or bulky or whatever. And then sometimes they'll be like, I took off a bunch of weight and actually that was too much. I felt weak, like I lost some stamina. I ran out of gas. So it'd be cool if we had the way that at Baseball Reference you have a number of headshots and you can look up, oh, that was his headshot that year. That was his headshot this year. Be cool if we knew your weight for each year instead of it just being your last listed weight is your listed weight forever. Forever. And it's, you know, it's an imperfect measure because like what we're really interested in when we're thinking about like, we're trying to think about body composition more than anything else, right? And weight isn't necessarily like a good, always a good proxy for that because like sometimes guys add what we call good weight which and what we really mean is they've added muscle and so can hit for power is generally

and with and with pitchers what we generally mean is their ability to sort of endure right that they are going to be less prone to being buffeted by fatigue and you know might be able to sort of stand up to the rigors of a season right this has been the concern with tristan mckenzie right it's like oh my god tristan like you look like you're just gonna snap in half because you're generating big velocity from this like tiny frame you know and he's always been like a lanky guy so it's not a perfect you know as it is in in many aspects health, like not a perfect proxy. But it would be interesting to sort of track over time and see how it might especially inform like power generation on the hidden side. Yeah. Yeah.

And then I'll leave you with this since I wasn't able to provide the most satisfactory answer there. That question was inspired by Altuve. I was inspired by someone at the opposite end of the height-weight spectrum, Frank Howard. So Frank Howard, he just died. He was 87 years old and he is listed at 6'7", 255, just a giant. And especially in the era when he played coming up in the late 50s with the Dodgers, he was enormous. People were like, I didn't know they made baseball players this size. You know, it's like when Benyama comes along, that was kind of what it was like, right? Which it's different in baseball, I was thinking, because like someone being bigger is not automatically a good thing.

It can be a good, like the thing that's so special about Benyama is that he's really big, but he has the skills of a smaller player. Like, yes, he has point guard style skills, even though he has center type size, like even, you know, big for a center. He's 7'4", but he's also able to dribble and pass and shoot for threes and do everything. Right. But but like his cheat code, his life hack is that he is like as athletic as smaller guys but he's a bigger guy and the the hoop is still at the same height for him as it is as every but in baseball it's it's not the same because you're bigger well your strike zone is also bigger now and maybe your swing is longer and there are ways in which it's a disadvantage yeah relationship right so like maybe otani is the wembanyama like people call wembanyama a unicorn longer and there are ways in which it's a disadvantage. It's a more complicated relationship. Right. Yeah, for sure.

So like maybe Otani is the Wemba Nyama, like people call Wemba Nyama a unicorn just because he's able to move so well, even though he's so big. But it's not like his skills are different from everyone. It's like he has the same skills at a bigger size, I guess. Whereas a baseball player like Otani just has different skills. He's not bigger than everyone. He is bigger than most guys, but it's not his size so much as what he can do. And his size helps with that, obviously. But if someone came along who is seven feet tall, it wouldn't be like, oh, he's better than Otani now because he's bigger, unless he was also a two-way

player. It's not, it's not as clear a correlation between all else being equal, height is good. But Frank Howard was a really good player and especially a really good hitter and just a real slugger and masher and raker. And I think probably underrated, if anything, because a lot of his good years came during the year of the pitcher was maybe his best offensive season. He had a 170 WRC plus that year. But if you don't do the adjustment, he had 274, 338, 552, which you look at that now and you're like, it's okay. But at the time, that was amazing to hit that well. But the thing that stood out to me is that he had a huge disparity in how good he was at hitting and how good he was at everything else. He was an enormous man. I guess the

Wemba Nyama baseball would be like if you're Frank Howard size and you're also like extremely fast and good at defense, like, you know, you had kind of like speedster skills, but you were also enormous. That might be the Wim Benyamakom, which is like kind of Aaron Judge being Frank Howard size, but also being a good defender. Right.

Now he's not like a great stolen base guy or anything, but yeah, if you had someone like that who was like stealing tons of bases and winning gold gloves and also so huge that he could hit the ball to the moon. But, you know, Judge is more well-rounded than you expect someone his size to be. Frank Howard was not well-rounded as a player, but he was really good at some things and not so good at other things. He was an average base runner, but but so his batting runs at fangraphs 325.3 so that's that's

really really good right that's above average so you know 325 wins runs above average on on as a batter but then negative 111 on defense and then another negative 94 with the positional adjustment. Okay. Because, you know, he was an outfielder, first baseman, corner guy, right? And so overall, Fangraffs has the offense and the defense stats. So offense is, you know, just your batting performance. And then defense is defense plus the positional adjustment. So his offense plus 325, his defense negative 205.

So I wanted to know who else has had that kind of Frank Howard, Hondo style split. And by the way, his other listed nicknames at Baseball Reference, Hondo was the one that he really got called and, you know, inspired by John Wayne. He couldn't be called Duke because he came up with Duke Snyder. So it was like, OK, let's name him after a John Wayne character and he'll be Hondo. But the Capitol Punisher and the Washington Monument, also pretty excellent nicknames, too. Yeah, wow. And so here's the club. names too. And so here's the club. It's a sweet 16 of players who had at least 200 offense and at least negative 200 defense. Okay. Here's the club. Frank Howard is one member. Frank Thomas.

Okay. Yeah. So Frank Thomas plus 653 offense, negative 267 defense. And then Jim Tomei. All right. 554 offense, negative 200 defense. Just makes it in there. Willie McCovey. All right. 498 offense and negative 206 defense. 206 defense and Manny Ramirez. He's in the club. He's at a 624 offense, negative 276 defense. Gary Sheffield is in the club, 575 offense, negative 300 defense. And with Sheffield, that's why he's not a Hall of Famer yet. Right. I mean, maybe PD stuff too, as with Manny, but that's a big part of it. Dave Winfield, who is a 4.06 offense, negative 2.43 defense.

David Ortiz, who is 4.07 offense, negative 2.47 defense. And those are all the Hall of Famers. Wow. Actually, there's one more. But Jason Giambi is also in the club that's 431 offense negative 223 defense Rusty Staub who is

282 offense negative 216 defense Carlos Delgado who is 368 offense negative 209 defense some of these guys yeah that's what keeps you out of the hall. People will be like, oh yeah, Sheffield

or Delgado. Oh yeah, but look at the defense. He only played this position. Then you have Frank Howard. Then you have Harold Baines. I forgot he was a Hall of Famer for a second. 243 offense, negative 235 defense.

Then Greg the Bull Luzinski is on the list. He's at 260 and negative 201. Don Baylor is at 205 and negative 233. Adam Dunn is in the club. He's at 240 and negative 252. And then Danny Tartable, who was at 223 and negative 202. So that's the Frank Howard club, the sweet 16 of players with at least 200 batting and negative 200 defense. And I like that kind of player. You know, it's fun. You kind of, I guess the disadvantage for

Hondo, it's, it's, he retired in 1973, the first year of the DH, you know, like he would have been a perfect candidate for that probably. So it's a cruel irony, I suppose, that he retired in the very first year of the designated here. He never got a chance to do it before then. It's a shame, I guess. He had 76 games as a DH in his last season, but came along a little too late. But he had a great career and was very well liked and went on to manage and coach and everything else. And you always knew when you saw him, even if it was in a coach's uniform or something. It's like, oh, yeah, there's Frank Howard.

He's huge. He still is. Wemby. Now I'm just thinking about Wemby. Yeah. A lot of people are these days. Yeah. Well, even if you didn't vow to support us on Patreon, if we stat blasted your question, you can support us on Patreon by going to patreon.com slash effectively wild, as have the following five listeners who all signed up to pledge some monthly or yearly amount

to help keep the podcast going, help us stay almost ad-free, and get themselves access to some perks. Nathan Frishberg, Wilson Hamilton, Oliver Williams, Josh Ballack, and Peter Armstrong. Thanks to all of you. Patreon perks include access to the Effectively Wild Discord group for patrons only, monthly bonus episodes, priority email answering, whether on or off air, discounts on merch and ad-free fanraphs memberships and so much more. Patreon.com slash Effectively Wild. If you are a Patreon supporter, you can also message us through the Patreon site.

But anyone and everyone can contact us via email at podcast at Fangraphs.com. Send us your questions and comments. You can rate, review, and subscribe to Effectively Wild on iTunes and Spotify and other podcast platforms. You can join our Facebook group at facebook.com slash group slash Effectively Wild. You can follow Effectively Wild on Twitter at EWPod. And you can find the Effectively Wild subreddit at r slash Effectively Wild. Thanks to Shane McKeon for his editing and production assistance. We will be back with another episode early in the week.

Talk to you then. Baseball podcast. The stat cast is that blast. TOPS plus when it's stats, the contrast. Zips and steamer for the forecast. Coming in hot, big boss on a hovercraft. No notes, minor league free agent draft. Burn the ships, flames jumping for a nap. Cal FEMA, boning on the bat shaft Makers on the butt feet Never say your hot seat

Games are always better with the pivot table spreadsheet