Effectively Wild: A FanGraphs Baseball Podcast - Effectively Wild Episode 2117: Sports Shouting

Episode Date: January 27, 2024

Ben Lindbergh and Meg Rowley unleash another rant about the Orioles’ inaction (prompted by Mike Elias quotes about their aggressiveness) and banter about the David Robertson and Joc Pederson signings and baseball in Masters of the Air, then (33:51) answer listener emails about whether the Diamondbacks still qualify as a young franchise, injury stoppage time […]

Nothing less than Effectively Wild. Oh, why, oh, wild. Oh, wild. Nothing less than Effectively Wild. Hello and welcome to episode 2117 of Effectively Wild, a baseball podcast from Fangraphs, presented by our Patreon supporters. I am Ben Lindberg of The Ringer, joined by Meg Raleigh of Fangraphs. Hello, Meg. Hello. Meg, I'm angry about the Orioles again. Oh, okay. My blood pressure subsided after we got that rant out of our system the other day.

Seemed to have been cathartic. We heard from some Orioles people about our Orioles rant. The fans, I think, were pleased that we expressed some of those sentiments and shared their frustration. And my frustration has been renewed. I did not get it all out of my system because I saw a new story this week in the Baltimore Banner quoting Mike Elias. new story this week in the Baltimore banner, quoting Mike Elias. The headline says, Orioles are, quote, as aggressive as any team out there, end quote, in search for starters, Elias says. No. Yeah. Already doesn't really ring true because they haven't signed any. So that seems to preclude the possibility that they've been as aggressive as anyone because they're a bunch of teams that have signed some starters.

Right. Don't see the Orioles doing that. They haven't done anything since our last rant. They have not taken it to heart. They've been linked to Michael Lorenzen. And, hey, I like Michael Lorenzen as much as the next guy. But come on. Right.

So here are the quotes from Elias within the body of this story. I don't think there's any bones about it. We're better equipped to bring in impact starting pitching via the trade route. So we've been exploring that pretty heavily, Elias said. There's some really big signings of starting pitchers that have happened, and they have, by and large, gone to really large market teams in really large cities. And it's just a reality of baseball. It doesn't mean we're not talking to those people or checking on them, but I think we have an advantage with the trade firepower that we have. And hey, they have trade firepower. They could absolutely make some trades. They could go get Dylan Cease if they wanted to. But are they better

equipped to bring in impact starting pitching via the trade route, given that they have almost nobody under contract, given that the Pirates competitive balance tax figure is higher than the Orioles right now, that only the A's are lower? They seem to be pretty well equipped to go spend on some impact starting pitching in my mind. That's just how I see it. Yeah. done some impact starting pitching in my mind. That's just how I see it. Yeah. I think that your instincts are pretty good there, Ben, because, you know, they have the room, right? They have room. They have, even if they are not demonstrating it as something that is actionable, they should have the motivation, right? Because as we have discussed, like, that's a good little ball club they have over there.

There's some very, very talented players. And one would think that given how inexpensive those guys are relative to the values that they are likely to generate for their club, that as we noted last time, no time like the present to surround them with good starting pitching, even if that starting pitching is pretty expensive. I mean, they haven't even, here's the thing, Ben, you know, here's a thing about them. They haven't even brought back their missing Kyle, you know. They haven't even brought the band back together again, you know. They just haven't.

And so I don't find it particularly persuasive and in moments like this i always wonder like you know like i think michael ice is a smart guy and i know that he's um aware of the the tools that are at the modern fans disposal right like this isn't a question directed exclusively toward him, but is being directed specifically toward him in this moment. It's like we can check, though. Yeah. You know, like we have the means of tracking all of this. There's a great site called Raster Resource. Yeah.

Where we can look all this stuff up. And look, do I think that our stuff is like the best? Yeah, I do. But we're not even the only game in town, Ben, you know. So it suggests an assumption of a lack of curiosity on the part of their fan base that I just don't think is borne out by what I know of Orioles fans, if anything. Once they get a bit in their teeth, there are Orioles fans, Ben, who will never forgive us for projecting their team to not be a 100-win team last year. They call all of our projections into question every day because of that. So people remember, they're trying to be excited about their club. And I pity the person who stands in the way of them doing that because they get very worked up in your menchies if you do. And the insinuation that one reason the Orioles haven't signed a starting pitcher is that all the big market clubs are signing them.

Hey, I know the Dodgers have signed a bunch of starting pitchers. They haven't signed all of them. Are we really crying porn playing Orioles small market blues here? Come on. There are plenty of starters out there. Also, as far as I've seen, it's not as if the Orioles have been linked to all these top guys. It's like, oh, darn it. Yeah, just missed out. Snapped the fingers. Oh, we made a competitive bid. How many teams have we heard? The Red Sox, the Blue Jays, the Giants, right? They're in the running for everyone. And you never know if that's serious or if it's a

face-saving thing. Oh, yeah, we almost had him, I swear. The Orioles aren't even doing that we almost had him, I swear. They're doing that we didn't even try. We didn't even consider having him. So that kind of puts the lie to the, you know, they're all going to the big markets. I mean, it's not as if they have been boxed out by the Dodgers here and they were really in the running for all of the top pitcher candidates. Right. Come on. Yeah. It was not as if, as far as we know anyway, Yamamoto was like, I love Old Bay.

Bring me home. That doesn't seem to have been the reality. And it's a particularly galling kind of thing to say when, look, to your point, it takes two to tango. Free agents famously get to decide where they want to work. And a lot of them are proactively choosing other clubs, including the Dodgers, because they are excited about what that club brings to their career and future trajectory, independent of anything having to do with Baltimore. But it sort of sounds like he's saying he's done.

And it's like, well, Blake Snell is still unsigned, Mike. Yeah. You know, let's imagine for a moment that Blake Snell isn't your cup of tea. And like, as I have established on this spot, he's not my favorite pitcher to watch. But you know who I do enjoy watching, Ben? Jordan Montgomery. You know who would be great for the Baltimore Royals? Jordan Montgomery.

Really would be. Perfect fit. Perfect fit. Perfect fit. I'm sorry to say, the quotes continue. There are more quotes where that came from. Elias, we've got good options, but like I said, there's always room for more pitchers. Okay. Agreed. Particularly on this team. Yes. Every team is looking for

more pitchers. The Dodgers keep signing pitchers again, blame it on the Dodgers. So it's just something that everybody is on the prowl for, which makes it tough. Yeah. Okay. I mean, it's a tough league. It's a tough job. I get it. You know, it's not always easy, but we're no exception to that. And we'll take more if we can get the right guys in the right deals. Right. You know what that's code for? That's money.

It's about money, Ben. I think it's about money. Get a steal. If we can get a bargain, if we can get some low dollar option out there, then that would be the right deal, right? That just seems to be how they see the right deal is a low dollar deal. He acknowledged that there's pressure all the time when he was asked whether there was pressure on the Orioles to overspend on a pitcher. Just spending would be sufficient at this point. That'd be progress. He then also said, you can look back and teams make aggressive

trades and it can really set the franchise back if the guy shows up and he gets hurt, or if you trade guys and you miss out on their long careers. There's been examples with the Orioles where that's happened. We're aggressive. We're in a win mode. We want to make the team better. We're looking for these things, but it would be very irresponsible for me to not measure the cost of anything that we're doing. And we've got a lot of really talented young players with really bright futures, and we're excited about them too. Hey, I'm excited about them too. We're all excited about them. That's why we are urging you to sign some other starting pitcher to pair with those exciting young players. Mike Elias, trade a single prospect challenge. You can't keep them all.

They're just going to spend the whole season in Norfolk. They're not Pokemon. Yeah, no, they're not pals. Everyone's playing Pow World these days, man. I've heard about Pow World. It's like a really big controversy. I know a video game thing, Ben. I'm so proud of myself.

Even you've heard of Pow World. That's the level of fame that Palworld has reached. Well, conveniently, I just finished recording a podcast about Palworld. So you can go check that out later if you want to know more. You're very aggressive right now. My goodness. You can't keep all the prospects. No. Or if you do, then they can't all play for your major league team. Right. Or if you do, then they can't all play for your major league team. And I get that it must have been fun to collect all those prospects and build this great farm system and see your farm ranking climb up and totally turn around and hit on those draft picks and develop some players.

Totally understand that it's nice to stockpile prospects when you are not in win mode. When you are in win mode and you have redundancy at multiple positions, then you got to pull the trigger at some point. I get that you can be wary about that because you might make the wrong choice. You know, it might happen. There's always some risk inherent in trying to compete in Major League Baseball. It's tough. As Michael I.S. said, maybe he'll trade someone who goes on to be better than the guy he kept. But you can't just sit on your hands and make no move because you're worried about the consequences of the move that you might make. Right.

If you're any GM, I think that you have to meet the market where it is. And once you've made the decision that, you know, we're good now, you know, and we're going to try to go compete in the postseason. We're not just building for the regular season. We want to play playoff baseball and advance out of the first round of that. It costs something to do that. And if what you have decided is that the free agent market is too rich for your blood, and maybe some of that is a mandate from ownership, and some of it is that ownership hired you because you're okay with that mandate. Okay, fine. So then you have to look to other resources at your disposal to improve the big league team. And to your point, like they have, they can only play so many of these infielders, right? Like they just have a lot of these guys. And so you got to go

and get one. And if that means trading a guy you're excited about, well, I think a thing that will help you feel better is winning the division and some postseason games. If you look back a couple years from now and you're like, oh, well, you know, that guy turned out to be an all-star. Guess what? Sounds like you think you're good at player development.

That's probably gonna be true. You know, that might be a natural consequence. But if you're forever forestalling the improvement of your roster until every guy can be a young cost control guy well it's just like a fool's errand and the fact of the matter is that like and i've seen this phenomenon with mariners at times like sometimes if you're a club that is not been playing in that space um that maybe is still on the edge of being really good sometimes you do have to overpay a little bit for free agent right you have to convince someone to say come to our club be the difference maker i think there's a lot about the orioles to recommend them they play in a beautiful ballpark they have a really exciting

young core they have an an incredibly committed fan base. You know, Baltimore is a great city. So, like, there's stuff to recommend the Orioles, but what are you proposing to do? Are you going to not spend an extra 15 million or whatever to bring in the guy who's going to be a difference maker and then be sitting at home come October, well, that's a lousy way to run a franchise. And if you're really fundamentally unwilling to do that or you can't get ownership to budge on it, you just got to pick amongst your dudes and be like, look, I'm really excited about Dylan Cease. Let's go get him. And I'm not saying Dylan Cease is necessarily the guy they have to go get. Maybe they want to go get a different guy maybe maybe they hate Dylan Cease you know maybe they hate him Ben but even if that's true you you have like not a full rotations worth of dudes and the reality is we all know you need you need even

more than the guys that they have right you gotta go you can't you can't get through an entire big league campaign with just five starters. Like, that's not how this works. They break, Ben. They break in half. some of the top contenders that they're going to be going against. I think however rosy your own personal outlook for the Orioles rotation is, it could be better. And there's no real opportunity cost except the cost to John Angelos, which is perhaps too steep for him. But there's a risk to not trading your prospects too. Not just that you might miss the playoffs and squander this incredible cord that you have, but also prospects don't stay prospects forever.

Not to describe them as if they are milk that's past its expiration point, but sometimes they start to turn. Sometimes they lose a little bit of their prospect luster, right? Sometimes you hang on to them too long, and it turns out that if you do eventually ship them out, you did not sell high, right? So I really encourage Michael Ias to part with some of his precious prospects. They are very talented. They are very promising.

But some of them got to go. And you know what? If he wants to keep them, he can keep them forever as far as I'm concerned. I'm not even saying trade your prospects. I mean, yeah, do if you're not going to spend any money. But keep your prospects. Hang on to them. your prospects. I mean, yeah, do if you're not going to spend any money, but keep your prospects,

hang on to them. You got all the payroll room, payroll flexibility, sustainability, whatever we're calling it in the world. It is embarrassing. It is disgraceful for the Orioles in their competitive position with their roster is currently constructed to be down in A's pirates territory. So, and look, if he were just saying, hey, I like what we have, then it might not anger me as much. I would be flummoxed. I would be confused. I would disagree with his evaluation.

But I think what really is kind of getting a rise out of me is another quote in the story. They're probably being as aggressive as any team out there. No. Yeah. No. Clearly not. No. Yeah. Unless. Clearly not. No.

Yeah. Unless it turns out that they are just so anti-leak, they run the tightest ship. They've actually been in on everyone, and they've had a number of close calls, and between now and opening day, they sign Snell and Montgomery, and everyone says,

oh, we underestimated you. You were playing the long game here. Fine. Then I will accept that. But if they stand pat while they're going on about how aggressive they are being, then that's the thing that gets my goat. And look, if the real target for my ire here should be John Angelos, if Mike Elias is calling his boss every day and saying, hey, John, could I possibly pry your wallet open just a smidge so we could

go sign someone? And that plea is falling on deaf ears. And Mike Elias is just running interference for his boss because that's what baseball executives do. And he doesn't want to throw the person who employs him under the bus. Fine. Okay. I don't know who is at the root of this rot, but whoever it is, get your act together.

Wow, Ben. Yeah. Who knew? I'm not an excitable boy. I'm glad you have this in you. It takes a lot to bring this out in me, but this is doing it now multiple times. I feel I'm having a kind of a Costanza reaction.

Ben is getting upset. So please just Orioles, make a signing, make me calm down again, bring me back to my usual level headed and level voiced self. I'm using different headphones than I typically do because I've had a series of headphone failures, cascading failures, you might say. And I was reduced to using the ones that plug into my mic. I'd say. And I was reduced to using the ones that plug into my mic. And so, in addition to you being worked up, you are so loud compared to how you normally are. I'm like putting them on the side of my head like a pitchcom device so that I'm getting like a cranial, like bone transmission of your Orioles rage. It's like really, it's an interesting auditory experience for me.

Sorry, I picked today to be louder than I have in years. I mean, look, you feel what you feel, dude. You know? The Orioles rants will continue until morale improves. There you go. All right. So hopefully we will not be going back to the Baltimore well until it's to talk about someone they signed. There have been only a couple of signings since we last spoke.

Don't know if you have any thoughts about either of them. David Robertson is now a Texas Ranger. Jack Peterson is now an Arizona Diamondback. I think that continuing to reinforce the bullpen for Texas is a good idea. So, okay, good. Yeah. I do have like, concern is too strong. But like, I have curiosity about how long David Robertson is going to be an effective reliever. Because like to say that he was bad last year would be incorrect, because he was not bad. But he was markedly better before he went to Miami. markedly better before he went to Miami. Although, you know, the gap between his peripherals was minute. But I do wonder about him. He seems more blow up prone than he used to be. I don't know if my sense of that is right. He gave up more home runs with the Mets when his numbers were better than he did with Miami. So maybe I'm just, you know, but I know that he had some blown saves, maybe including his very first one with the Marlins.

That seems bad. He is almost 39 years old, so there's certainly some collapse risk there. I hope that he continues to pitch productively for a while because I just still have a soft spot for him. He's sort of one of the few players who dates back to maybe the tail end, the last gasp of my fandom. I remember really rooting for him, following him as he was coming up, just salivating over his strikeout rates and the peripherals and his Houdini pitches and how he would freeze opposing hitters and just really flummox people with some deception, get a lot of looking strikeouts, just really enjoyed him. And I believe that he is the first active player I ever interviewed. I could be wrong about that,

but back when I was doing a summer gig for Yankees magazine while I was still in college, I think I did a little item for the magazine on David Robertson and talked to him. And as I recall, he was not a great quote, but you know what? I just still feel some fondness for one of my first forays into the clubhouse was to talk to David Robertson. I think he was the first active player I interviewed. I think Chili Davis was maybe the first player period I interviewed. I did like a alumni, where are they now kind of thing for Chili Davis. I think that maybe that was the first time that I had actually interviewed a major league baseball player, possibly. I don't remember the sequence there, but they were among the first. So I like the fact that David Robertson is still

kicking around because Ian Kennedy retired, right? And so David Robertson is one of the last links for me. So I hope he hangs around a lot longer. And quite a career he's had. Quite a long and accomplished career. Yeah. He's been very good for a long time. And, you know, as we saw maybe in more at times spectacular fashion in the postseason, but just their entire year last year, like the Rangers need bullpen help. And it would be good if they had another guy to throw out there other than Jose Leclerc so that his arm

doesn't fall off. Cause there were times last postseason where I was like, I'm pretty worried about Jose Leclerc's arm fall and just clean off his body. Yeah. 145 career ERA plus for D-Rob. Yeah. Pretty impressive. K-Rob as we called him. Hot diggity. That's a big number. Hot diggity. You're just full of feelings today, huh? Yeah. So those are my thoughts. For the D-backs,

I think it's fine, would probably be the way that I would describe it. Jack Peterson isn't really a viable defensive outfielder anymore, but the Diamondbacks aren't going to ask him to be because they are lousy with viable outfielders, even if some of them don't have very good arms. So I imagine he will DH a fair amount,

and that will be useful to them because they could use some more thump in their lineup, and he can supply some of that. So I think that for what it is it's fine because it's pretty hard to have a bad one-year deal that's for less than 10 million dollars but i would have liked and i wonder if um there would have been interest on the player side like you know like jd martinez or justin turner would have been much splashier for that diamond backs team but i think it's fine.

You know, like I think it helps address a potential need. And hopefully he's good and, you know, is able to just DH a whole bunch because it's not good out there anymore, Ben, you know? Yeah, yeah. You were absent for the year-end episode when I talked about stories that we had missed. And the story for the Giants, Jack Peterson's former employer, was that he reportedly introduced Filipino poker to the Giants clubhouse, or at least was one of the main Filipino poker practitioners. And there was some reporting to suggest that it so swept the clubhouse and so consumed him that Giants players were not prepared, that he was not doing his homework and studying the scouting reports because he was so obsessed with Filipino poker, Pusoy Dois, which I thought was perhaps unjust given that his stat cast stats, his expected stats were essentially the same. His surface stats, his results, his outcomes were worse in his second year in San Francisco. But the underlying numbers, batted ball quality seemed to be similar. So I don't know if we can pin it all on Pusoy Dos,

but that is a concern, I guess, for the Diamondbacks. Maybe that was in the entrance interview. It's, hey, how are you doing with the Filipino poker these days? Are you still playing poker? Is that interfering with your preparation? Are you thinking of introducing it into the Diamondbacks clubhouse? I wonder if that came up. He has such a fascinating clubhouse presence. Yes.

Yes, he is. I mean, like, we hear a lot about him in the clubhouse in a way that is, like, really interesting for a guy who's, like, never had a season where he's been worth more than three wins, right? Like, he's not a star player. He's a good player. But, like, he's a, you know, like, what? Why do we know so much about Chuck Peterson in the clubhouse? What? Why do we know so much about Jock Peterson and the clubhouse? And I'm happy to hear about some things that are positive because his most famous clubhouse incident is not a good story. Well, I was going to say. For anyone involved. I guess they're not bringing Tommy Pham back, huh? Yeah, the Diamondbacks, as the saying goes, have the potential to do the funniest thing, right?

Yes. Bring back, unite Tommy Pham and Jock Peterson, the slapper and the slappy again in the same clubhouse. Slapper and the slappy. Put them together in close quarters. Can they resolve their differences? Could they put this behind them? I don't know. Or does this become the Filipino poker of the 2024 Diamondbacks?

The ongoing ramifications, the reverberations of the slap heard around the world. This is the fantasy football story. If anyone's like, what are they talking about? Filipino poker. I want to know the human person who listens to this podcast but doesn't know that story. Not the Filipino poker one because I didn't know that because like, okay, sure. Like, you know, but doesn't know about the Tommy Pham fantasy football kerfuffle incident, if you will. Like, who is that person? I want to know about your media consumption habits.

Well, hey, I assume that we have a first time listener every time out. You know what? Fair enough. Fair enough. Me too. I hope just for audience acquisition purposes. Yeah. Right.

That's why I always flashback. Yeah, Joe D., the Yankee Clipper, saying he's got to go all out every game out there because some kid could be coming to see him for the first time and some kid could be listening to Effectively Wild for the first time and thinking I'm a much angrier man than I usually am. I love this idea because I do not want to, you know, I don't want to say it's the same every episode, Ben. And I think that we are both, you know, we're human people with complex personalities full of feeling and ideas.

But I would imagine that if you were to poll our listeners, they would tell you and they would mean this in a not ungenerous way. Right. They wouldn't mean this in like a yucky way, but they would probably say that I am the more emotive of the two of us. And that first time listener is like, you know, that Ben guy's got a lot of feelings. He's got so many feelings. Yeah, right. I'm looking forward to the two-star iTunes review. Tried to get into this podcast, but that Ben Lindbergh, just a hothead. So emotional. Just so emotional. You know how men are so emotional. Yeah.

Just typical sports yelling, right? The 30 Rock Sports Parody Show, right? That's us here at Effectively Wild. I think that was Effectively Wild episode 1862 for anyone who wants to go back. Well, no, that was one of the times that we talked about Tommy Pham and Jock Peterson. But there was one episode where I explained it to you initially, right? Because I think I was on vacation or something. Yeah, right.

You had avoided this forbidden knowledge somehow. 1856 title, Slapped Silly. That was the one where I attempted to explain the Peterson fan fantasy football dispute saga, slap saga to you. That was a fun one. It's sure something. I have one other banter observation, which is that I have been watching Masters of the Air. Okay. I am always quick to embrace. You're such a dad, man. I'm such a dad and I'm also such an Apple TV plus partisan, despite my mostly derogatory feelings

about Apple in general, but love that streaming service. Love the content they keep pumping out there. Love that they, unlike the Baltimore Orioles, are willing to spend inordinate amounts of money on producing entertaining TV, whether or not anyone is watching. So they have pumped out Masters of the Air, nine episodes, which is a follow-up to the previous excellent HBO 10-episode limited series, Band of Brothers and the Pacific. And this one is Band of Brothers with Bombers, as I headlined my Ringer review. So it's more of the same, which is exactly what I wanted, just in a different setting and some slight updates because it's been almost 14 years since the Pacific came out, let alone Band of Brothers,

which was 22 plus years ago. Anyway, the point of this is not just a general recommendation for Masters of the Air, although I do recommend it, but it's a baseball show. Oh, okay. Maybe that's not surprising because we're talking about early to mid 40s here. But what really struck me is that baseball at that time was really the lingua franca, or at least that was how it was portrayed on this series. Right. Baseball's coming up constantly because baseball is the common language. Everyone could talk about baseball. You have a new recruit in your unit. You don't know anything about him.

You ask where he's from. Who's he a fan of, right? And you could just sort of assume at the time, at least according to this portrayal, which generally they prize accuracy on these series, you could just assume that, yeah, that was water cooler conversation, right? Everyone was a baseball fan. You could just sort of, hey, who's your team? It's got to be someone. You're probably paying attention to this. flip side when someone gets captured in Masters of the Air and they are undergoing interrogation or they are maybe being screened if they're picked up by the resistance and you want to make sure

this isn't some Nazi double agent here who's trying to expose your escape route. It's an actual American, right? Well, how do you test? How do you see whether they're a real American? You ask them about baseball. You ask them about their favorite baseball team, about their favorite baseball player. You have a baseball conversation with them. Nowadays, that wouldn't work so well because a lot of the answers would be, yeah, I don't pay attention to baseball. Sorry, I don't know. And then you'd be shot on the spot as a double agent. No, that just wouldn't be the question anymore. It would probably be a football question, if anything. It would be a Taylor Swift question. It would be a PAL World question. It might not be a baseball question. I don't know that it would be a PAL World question.

I think you're overstating the cultural prominence of this Pokemon ripoff. The fact that you have heard of it, that is just the best yardstick, I think, that I can... Well, the Loading Ready Run people talked about it on Checkpoint this week, fact that you have heard of it that is just the the best yardstick i think that i can well the the loading ready run people talked about it on checkpoint this week so that's why i heard about it so i do like your your streamers i do like some i do like some of those streamers ben even when they're talking about video games i don't know anything about but see it gave me water cooler

talk so yeah so if that came up in the interrogation room have you heard of pow world you would be able to say yes you might not be able to say much more than that, but you were generally being aware of them. And I was more of the opinion that they did rise to that level. And Sam was sort of taking the counter position. But even if you take my position that there's still some mainstream artifacts of how it used to be, that kind of gave me that sense of nostalgia for a time that I was not alive for, right? Just thinking how that must have been nice. Now, maybe there's something to still being into a thing that is not quite as popular as it once was, right? So you can sort of pride yourself on your more esoteric knowledge of that. And when you do encounter someone who can have that conversation with you, maybe it's even more exciting and rewarding because you can't count on it.

But man, it would be kind of nice, you know, and I think that I have old man taste in a lot of ways, not just my general interest in World War II, which preceded my becoming a dad. I had that one for a while, but just my interest in media in general and music, sometimes I think wistfully, wouldn't it have been nice if I had been around when that stuff was popular, you know? Right. And popular, not just among very old men, mostly. Right, right. I have old men musical tastes and media tastes in many ways, but wouldn't it have been nice if

that was hot and hip and the youngs were listening to that, right? If the youngs were talking about baseball, it would have been kind of cool. I mean, also would not have been cool to be drafted to fight in a world war. So pluses and minuses, right? I'm not saying that I would exchange those things. I think I'm more pleased with the present, definitely content staying where we are. But that is one thing that it would be nice to experience that, you know, just walking around the world knowing that everyone else knows and cares about this thing that we know and care about.

It's nice to feel a part of community, right? And that's really what you're getting at. Exactly. Yeah, I get it. But it also can feel exciting to have things be, you know, like a special secret kind of thing, right? Like, I think people enjoy being a sicko, you know? Yes. And I experienced this more with football than I do with baseball, because I think people's expectation of how much I'm engaging with baseball is like a lot you know professionally and also personally but sometimes you're sitting there and you're

watching you're watching two NFC South teams play each other on Thursday night and you're like this is this is sicko you know this is for the people who really need to contemplate their life choices so that can feel fun too even though you're like, this is bad. Why am I doing it? But I love it. Okay. I have some emails supplied by our listeners. A bottomless well of content.

Major League Baseball does not supply when Mike Elias does not supply. Actually, he did supply a firm of content today. But our listeners always come through with some excellent questions, including this one from Jeff, a Patreon supporter of ours, who says, In episode 2079, Meg described the Arizona Diamondbacks as a very young franchise. I did a double take, but resisted intruding on the post-World Series buzz with my pedantry. But maybe now, in the depths of the offseason doldrums, I can ask this question. The D-backs have played 26 seasons. Does that still count as very young? Or as young, even? Absolutely, Phoenix and Tampa are MLB's youngest teams,

but they're on the back halves of their third decades. No matter their ages, do they just remain in our minds the babies of the league until expansion? Relatively, compared to 19th century relics like the Cubs, Reds, and Pirates, the D-backs and Rays are but young whippersnappers. But for nearly half of the franchises, team histories only stretch from the early 90s to the early 60s, so at most a generation or so longer than Phoenix and Tampa. With the D-backs and Rays, we're talking about a quarter century already to establish themselves with their community and fans. Businesses might be considered startups for five years generally, maybe up to 10 at most. But if you're still around after a decade, you're probably established to a fair degree. Now, sports teams are a seasonal business with

a product on display only half the year for the most part. So maybe that is deserving of a longer leash to set down roots. So say we push it to 15 years. I'm thinking that feels about right as the end of a franchise's usefulness. And the question also continues, as a follow-up, does winning matter in this equation? The D-backs winning it all in their fourth season didn't make them any less young. In fact, in my mind, it made them less young in the sense that that was an old team that did that. So it made me think of them as more established. And also, I guess when you win a World Series, you seem less like an expansion team. Anyway, I'm interrupting the questioner here.

Nor did the Brewers not winning in 55 seasons stop them from being quite old. From my experience as a Jays fan, I came on board in their 10th season, and they certainly still had the feel of a young franchise. fan, I came on board in their 10th season and they certainly still had the feel of a young franchise. Winning the World Series in their 16th and 17th seasons helped wash away any remaining gloss of youth. But I think that feeling would already been waning around the time of their 15th season. So I'd put the end of a franchise's young period at 15 seasons with an allowance for that feeling to linger maybe to 20. But beyond that, and with the D-backs and Rays at 26, they're past being young in my mind. So when do you think that new franchise smell starts to wear off? Okay. I think this is a great question. And I'm going to defend the use of very young. If you

want to just call them young instead of very young, I would allow that as a note. And I want to apologize for not being able to attribute this thought to a specific person because it is not an original thought of mine. But I think that when we contemplate, like, how long does it take to establish a fan base, right? To establish a real sense of fandom? you need at least two generations right and like the first d-backs fans i think are in a position to pass it on in a real way either because they are like say um taking grandchildren to a game or because they are themselves having kids i mean you don't have to have kids to be a fan to be clear but like you know we have this sort of we have enough time having passed to really have a second wave of d-backs fans coming up you know people who uh got to know the franchise in its infancy and now are able to be stewards of that fandom into a new generation of diamondbacks fans and i think that you need,

I think you need like 20 to 25 years for that to really start to take root. I do think it helps to win. And so them having won a World Series, them having recently appeared in a World Series, will certainly be beneficial to those like roots taking hold in this desert heat as it were but um i i think they still count as a young franchise and part of it is how they stand in contrast like the the yankees have been around for more than a hundred years right like they were around before there was like you know a lot of electricity and homes that's wild wild, right? They like have been,

they saw the... There are teams that have been around since there was any electricity anywhere for just about, yeah. They saw the birth of the nuclear age. They saw, you know, a couple of wars. They were fans of some surprising people

in some of those wars. This is a note about them mourning Kissinger's passing. I'm not like attributing anything else to them. Just in case we have another first-time listener who's like, what the hell is Meg talking about? But, you know, like, they've been around for a minute, and, like, the Diamondbacks are just able

to, like, rent a car without penalties, you know? So, like, that's young, right? Like, they are newly of an age where if they told me they were taking psychedelics, I'd be like, well, your brain is pretty much formed, so that's fine. But they are only recently to very young, depending on how weighty you think that very is. But they are passing into sort of maybe young adulthood. Like how do franchises age? It's not in dog years. It's in like, they're like tortoises.

What's something that lives a long time? Trees. Not always. But sometimes, you know, when they get really big, they're like, you have to cut them open and count the rings to figure out how old they are. Don't do that. That's self-defeating because then like they die. The bowhead whale. Right.

Sure. Exactly. That's precisely it. So I think that having at least the capacity for a tradition of fandom is important to designating a franchise like sort of mature or not. And I don't think the diamondbacks are quite into that territory yet but they are into that territory where if they told you they were getting married you'd be like that might last you know i'm just making them a person you know um so anyway uh did you crack open an alcoholic beverage no i during that No, I cracked open a tangerine LaCroix. It's only

2.47 here, Ben. I was going to say, it's that time. It's Friday afternoon, effectively wild. I know. Sometimes I do drink a beer during our Friday show, but it's actually been a long time since I've done that because, you know, it's like we record pretty early these days. And I'm trying to be a person, a no longer very young person. I was wondering because your answer was getting a little looser as you went on. I was wondering whether it was already taking effect. But no, I don't think of the Diamondbacks as really recent arrivals. I'm not like reminding myself that they exist, right? But they are the youngest siblings, right?

Yeah. They and the Rays. Them and Tampa. They're the franchises come lately, and that's going to be the case until someone else is the new team. So, no, I don't think of them with kind of a sheen of newness, a patina of newness, but they are the newest. They are the youngest. And you're right that those roots take a long time to put down. Sam wrote about that in his annual essay last year about the Rockies, headlined, The Colorado Rockies are still an expansion team, at least at BaseballPerspectives.com.

They're older than the Diamondbacks. But his point was it takes a long time for teams to establish themselves. There's sort of an institutional disadvantage when you're an upstart and that can last for decades, right? So what this really drives home for me is that we are overdue for expansion because if the new kids on the block are 26, it's probably about time that we looked into some new major league baseball franchises. So, yeah. I tend to, I tend to agree with that. And again, I'm not saying that they're like, you know, teenagers. I'm not saying that they're toddlers. I'm just saying that they're, you know,

they're young, they're, they're still vital. They're idealistic and open to psychedelics. Their uniforms seem young to me, or at least some of their uniforms have. You know, they're still experimenting with their fashion sense. Right. Their sense of style. Right. Whereas once you get, you know, into the like the meat of your 30s, you're like, where does anyone buy clothes? Yeah, at a certain point. It's just I'm a person who wears pinstripes now, and I will always wear pinstripes, right? Right, yeah.

But they haven't been quite at that stage. Yeah. Okay. Question from Benjamin. I'm a longtime Ultimate Frisbee player. In Ultimate, when a foul or other infraction is called, there's a fairly complicated set of rules as to how play is stopped and restarted. However, when an injury is called, all of those rules don't matter. Play stops immediately, and the priority is safely getting the injured player off the field. back to whomever had it at the time of the injury, and play restarts from there after the injured player has been replaced by a sub. The other team is also allowed to sub out one player if they wish, so the team with the injured player doesn't gain an advantage from bringing in a fresh player in

the middle of a point. That's nice. How considerate. How fair. It has always bothered me that baseball doesn't have a similar rule. I never liked that when a player is seriously injured, other fielders have to come take the ball out of their glove or whatever and complete the play before the injury can be attended to. However, it is indeed a lot more difficult to realistically restart a baseball play from the time of the injury, since a particular batted ball can't be easily replicated. since a particular batted ball can't be easily replicated. Is there any way to accomplish this in baseball in a way that is fair to both teams and can't be easily gamed by a fake injury? And that last stipulation there, that's pretty important. Yeah, and the sticking point, I would imagine. Yeah, that's the one that I don't know that I could think of a way around because can't get to that one.

Oh, my leg. Great. Oh, I just, I pulled up short, right? Ooh, there goes my Charlie horse. There goes my hamstring, whatever it is. You'd have flopping basically going on in the field, you know? Ooh, I didn't get to that ball cause I tripped and fell flat on my face. And now we got to restart that whole play over. So yeah, I like the concept. I like the question. How do we have injury stoppage time, soccer style in baseball or this, where we just do a mulligan,

do a do-over pick up from where we left off. I just don't know that I can engineer a way that that would work and be fair and not be easily exploited. Yeah. And like other sports, you know, they'll one way they might address this is to be like, well, you have to you have to sit out a play, you know, like in football, depending on the circumstance, like sometimes a guy won't be eligible for the for the next play. I won't be eligible for the for the next play um but like it's a different thing right because you have like you have the concept of a down you like run a discrete play like I guess you could if it were a fielder you could say you have to be off the field for the next at until the conclusion of the next plate appearance but as a disincentive for flopping, I guess is the point, right? But then it's like, that's a pretty dramatic, like, that might be too stiff a penalty where what you're trying to do is

afford people the opportunity to exit the field safely and have someone, you know, tended to when they need it. And it's like, is that too much to have to sit out? It's just like a, I don't know, it's tricky, dude. Yeah. Well, this is probably why it doesn't work this way. Right. Do you remember when like seemingly every member of the Blue Jays outfield collided and then like the Mariners scored a bunch of runs in the postseason? And it was just like George Springer was just lying there and like seemed like he might

be concussed and they just had to keep going. You know, I i feel bad most obviously for the injured player and then like secondary to that you kind of look like a little bit of a jerk you know running around and scoring and all of that but like what it's a clear an athletic contest there can only be a one winner like what else are you gonna do yeah you want to do the look back at least like oh i'm kind of concerned for your welfare, but market forces dictate that I continue rounding the bases right now. But I'm worried about you. Hoping for the best.

Fingers crossed. I am always impressed by a fielder who gets injured in the course of a play and completes the play and then collapses. Yeah. Yeah. and then collapses. Yeah. Yeah. That's, granted, maybe it takes a little time for the shock to set in

or for the impulses to be passed from that part of your body to your brain. But it's just, you see that sometimes. Sometimes it's a comebacker, a line drive at the pitcher and they somehow manage to retrieve it and throw it. And then they fall before they probably even know

if they're seriously injured right yeah that's just i mean that tells you a little bit about pure adrenaline yeah adrenaline and competitive grit and priorities right and just instinct and and reflex you know gotta complete the play right before i even see to my own welfare it's it's like you know when the the oxygen mass comes down on the plane and you're supposed to put it on yourself, they always say, you know, which I always felt like, would I do that? Like, I'd feel bad, you know, if I were on a plane with my daughter, let's say, and the oxygen, you know, the Boeing window blows out, right? And we get a depressurized situation.

I've just been watching Masters of the Air, so my head is in the clouds. But, you know, that happens. Like, will I abide by those instructions? Will I have the presence of mind to say, got to make sure that I'm okay, that I have the steady flow of oxygen secured so that I can make sure to tend to my dependent here? Or would I do the parental impulse of, you know, got to put their welfare before mine, you know, got to save them first. But that's that same impulse, I guess, for a player. They don't put the mask on first and then figure out what's going on. They complete the play. They put the mask on everyone else. And then maybe they will put the mask on themselves.

Yeah, maybe. But then sometimes you're right. They just, sometimes they're so hurt that they can't mask on everyone else and then maybe they will put the mask on themselves yeah maybe but then sometimes you're right they just sometimes they're so hurt that they can't do anything but collapse yeah occasionally yes right and that's when you know it's serious those are the worst ones and they always have like i'll just never forget the look on kyle seger's face after he hit a ball and like it dinged matt shoemaker and he was bleeding everywhere and it was awful. And I think he still has a metal plate in his head? Oh, God. It was so awful.

And it's just like a freak thing. This is one of the risks of playing baseball. And he got to first base and then just looked like he was going to throw up on the field. It was so bad. And, you know, like I'm sure worse for Matt Shoemaker, but it was really not, not the best, not the best. Question from Andy, subject line, removing risk from baseball broadcasts. Your interview with John DiMarsco episode 2097 increased my appreciation for baseball broadcast directors and the job done on Mets broadcast in particular.

It was also disheartening to imagine how many safe choices are made to avoid risks. The risk of taking the wrong camera, the risk of losing the ball, etc. But these risks are only risks because they have to do it live. It made me wonder how much better a baseball broadcast could be with a little retroactive post-production. How many camera shots that are typically reserved only for replays would have been the best choice in the moment if you knew what was going to happen? hadn't fumbled it. You could watch a pitch from over the ump's shoulder once you knew it was a high fastball not put in play.

You could use the ghost runner split screen once you knew there was a play at the plate. This is not a hypothetical about an all-knowing director who sees the future. Although that would be more in keeping with the Effectively Wild email episode. This is a question about

what the production team could do between innings or for an hour after the game with the benefit of hindsight. Could they clean up the broadcast for the on-demand audience that didn't watch live? An unintended consequence could be that the audience learns the visual language of the broadcast in a way that creates spoilers, like the appearance of the pitch clock on screen can't tip the fact that there's about to be a violation. And if the broadcast switches to the high home cam before the pitch, it might be obvious to the viewer that

there's going to be a line drive at an infielder. Can't have that. So we can give our thoughts on this, but I did forward this to John DeMarsco at SNY because I was curious what he would say. And he said, ha, that's the first thing he said. Do you know how many times we mess something up and we all joke that we'll fix it in post? In a perfect world, that would be a great idea, but I also wouldn't trust anybody else to edit what I cut live, so it would end up on my plate and the season is long enough. Plus, if I miss something, I'm perfectly content showing the replay. Also, part of the SNY charm is when somebody messes something up, we have a little fun with it.

It's certainly an interesting concept to think about, though, to be able to take all three hours of footage shot by each of the 20 cameras and make a game day movie out of it without it feeling just like a highlight. That would be kind of cool. Yeah, it would be cool. Not for every game.

No. It sounds very intensive. And also, I don't know how many people watch After the Fact. Some people do, obviously. But live sports, we call them that for a reason. Some people are watching on delay, obviously, time shifted. But most people, the vast majority are not. So, all of that work would go to waste for much of your audience. audience. It would be nice for archival purposes, I guess, but I could see it working really well for a premium game, a classic of your franchise. A lot of networks, teams that own their own regional networks. You're always

getting Yankees classics on Yes, where they're replaying some notable Yankees game. And if it were for recent years and you still had that footage, I don't know that they keep it forever. But if you knew that, oh, that was a classic game. And I guess you do sometimes see more documentary style revisiting a great game or a great series where you might get behind the series stuff that was left on the cutting room for the first time but that would be cool instead of just the regular replay of the original broadcast i mean keep that for historical purposes that would be nice but it'd be really cool to pair that with the director's cut essentially the premium version of that game that gets you

the best look at everything yeah i think that there's a like a your franchise's first world series win like that would be a really cool that would be really cool but i think i don't know in general people just want to watch sports live and you know part of the i think that there's like an amount of looseness that we're we're willing to accept i bet that the thing that holds broadcasts back from optimal angles, the place where they maybe exhibit the greatest risk aversion actually doesn't have anything to do with what the broadcast looks like, but how it sounds. They probably are real worried about swears. They're really worried about swears, Ben.

Yeah, it's true. I like when a swear creeps into the baseball broadcast. I know it's very funny. And it's very funny to hear, like, to hear the broadcaster have to figure out how to be like, oh, we're so sorry. It's fine. We've, you know, we actually hear those words at the ballpark a fair amount. Yeah. The fans don't say that they're going to do a swear. No, they don't. They just do them. Have their finger on the bleep button. Sometimes there's maybe a five-second delay or some number of seconds, but not always. Not always. That's the one thing maybe we miss about the pandemic year on the baseball podcast is hearing specifically the profanity of the players in particular because there were no fans, not counting the cardboard people.

Yeah, you could really. Oh, boy, What a terrible time. Question from Jamish, Patreon supporter, who says, this question is inspired by the discussion on episode 2113 of A Baseball Mercenary. I'm sure I'm not the only one with follow-ups. No, you were not. No, we're not. Nice thing about a good email episode question is that it spawns so many more, so many spinoffs questions, good spinoffs too, not just terrible TV capitalizing on IP type of spinoffs. How different would baseball be if at the end of each regular season

series, the visiting team had to leave a player from the 26-man roster behind to join the home team's 26-man roster. The home team takes that player on their next road trip and then has to leave a player behind when they leave town and so on. What kind of players would teams leave? Would players try to sabotage their new team? Would players contend for a record of most leave-behinds? Or I guess fewest leave-behinds, right? Maybe it would be seen as a badge of honor never to be left behind because you're so indispensable. Or, ah, I should have continued to read. Get some level of pride of never being left behind. That was exactly what happens when people listen to the podcast and

email us mid question or mid segment and then they press play again and we say the thing that they emailed us and then they sheepishly email us that's what just happened i did that to jamish this question of leaving behind a player kind of paying forward a player perhaps or the analogy that came to my mind was sort of like a little free library situation. Take a book, share a book, that kind of thing. But my objection to Jameesh, I suspect I said that this would just cause the 26th roster spot to become kind of a ceremonial mascot position. Yes. Which would effectively bring rosters down to 25 again because you wouldn't want to leave a productive player behind, right? Or you would just park a AAA replacement player there, right?

Some sacrificial lamb, basically. Yeah, probably. Someone who's not going to get into games anyway, which maybe sort of spoils the spirit of the question, but that is probably what would happen. Yeah, I think you're right. Or like a really tired reliever. You know, if you had a really tired reliever who was on the AAA shuttle, like that person might get left behind because it's like you're not going to be able to use them for a couple of days anyway. Yeah, right. And Jimmy said that he had thought of that too and didn't want to go too far initially. He said, always go as far as you possibly can in the question. Give us all of the scenario here so that we don't have to concoct it ourselves.

constraints that would up the fun factor. For instance, say a starter has to be left behind. I don't know how you would define that exactly, but some sort of playing time minimum or no player could be left behind more than once a season. Yeah. So that, that would kind of work. I mean, if you had that, that would be a strict kind of loophole closer, no player left behind. So then you'd have to be- What does this accomplish? would be a strict kind of loophole closer, no player left behind. So then you'd have to be. What does this accomplish? That's a good question. Jimmy did not specify that important part of the question.

I don't know. Maybe it's just kind of a collective. Hey, we're passing players around. Everyone gets to know some people. It's a nice little meet and greet or some strategic implications of who you're going to leave behind. It is hard on the players, although obviously they're used to being traded willy nilly, but this is making that a standard part of the season that you're just, okay, you're not on this team anymore. You're just, I mean, it could be a, a nice little field trip for them. Could be a break from the routine. They get to sightsee in a new city, uh, get introduced to some new fans and teammates. Everyone knows everyone,

but beyond that, I don't know. Yeah. I, it feels like it would be terrible. Like I would, I would hate it. And like teams would hate this they wouldn't want even with the even with a shuttle guy you know even with a glorified roster like mascot roster spot that teams would hate this because no one would leave anyone worthwhile behind i mean worthwhile what a rude way for me to describe another human being but you know what i mean like it's not like you're gonna stumble into you're like it's so weird we were playing in new york and now aaron dredge is on our team like that would never happen it would be a weird salary dump uh loophole right like do you have to pay the player is they is that guy just on your roster for the rest of the year if you don't leave him behind the next

stop right does the team that leaves the player behind, are they on the hook for this? Or is it like when you release someone and then you're still paying their salary, but the team that picks them up is paying them the minimum? Like, does this become a salary dump sort of situation? Right, this is my question. Yeah. Yeah. Hmm. I don't know. It seems tricky. I don't know. It seems tricky. Yeah, but it seems like the upshot would be that you would just be constantly leaving behind the player you feel like is contributing the least to your team. I mean, it would be an insult. It would be a slap in the face, not in a Tommy Pham, Jack Peterson way, but psychologically speaking, it would stink too. And you'd have to mandate probably that you couldn't just

leave the guy who started the day before, right? Like it couldn't just be a, this guy is active, but in reality, in practical terms, might as well not be on the roster right now. Yeah. So it would always just come down to, well, what can we get away with? If they force us to leave a good player, well, we're going to leave our least good player. I mean, that's what it's going to be. It's just going to be constant insults, essentially. It would be like being intentionally walked to get to a better batter. It would feel like that over and over again for someone on each team at the end of each series. feel like that over and over again for someone on each team at the end of each series yeah i think that this would be bad for morale because like the other thing is people get attached to the mascot guy they'd be like we left sam hagerty behind just to pick a random player you really have it up for sim i don't have anything against sam hagerty and he walks up to the godfather theme like i want i he's fine it's fine I'm just saying purely on a performance

basis I'm not suggesting it's something personal I'm just saying and look as your bench guy it's fine he's fine Ben but when he is the starting DH you're trying to make the postseason something has gone wrong with your roster construction that's all I'm

saying it's not about Sam Haggerty. It's about Jerry. It's always about Jerry. Sam Haggerty can't hurt you anymore. He is safely on the bench for now, at least, until he gets left behind at the end of a series. It would be kind of cool if it were good players getting left behind just because you would get to have a superstar for a day, you know,

or for a series, right? It'd be like, oh, this guy's moonlighting on our roster for a while. That's fun. I mean, it would be weird from a rooting interest perspective for all the reasons that we discussed when we were talking about our mercenary scenario. But in this case, it's not the player deciding to hop from team to team. You know, I always think it's weird when a player gets traded to another team and then comes back to the original team and gets booed. It's like, he didn't spurn you. He didn't decide to leave. They shipped him out, right? It's like, you're in this together. You

liked rooting for this guy. Maybe he liked being rooted for by you, but you didn't have a choice in the matter. It's not the same as when someone leaves via free agency, which, you know, still sort of silly taboo. Sure. But I understand it a bit more when at least the player had to make the active choice to leave as opposed to having that taken out of his hands. Anyway, it would be kind of cool if it were prominent players just so you could, you know, it would be like a career day or it's like I get to try this thing for a day. Like I get to try rooting for this player for a series. That's fun. And then he'll move on and maybe eventually go back to his old team. But it was a nice little interlude, fun while it lasted. I guess. Maybe. But yeah, it would ultimately just end up being a slight, I think is what this would

basically boil down to. You'd have to pack so much more for every road trip. What if you get left behind? Oh, yeah. You'd have to have a contingency plan. Like you're talking to your significant other. It's like, well, I'm going to have a homestand. I'll see you soon unless I get left behind. It's like being raptured or something.

It's just like without warning. Because I'm not coming home after all. Okay. Question from Patreon supporter TPKI, who says, to express my seriousness, how badly I've always wanted to hear this topic discussed on the show. I've increased my Patreon contribution 400%. This is not pure payola. This is not pay for play. Although we do give priority to email answers, not necessarily on the podcast, but at least when we answer them for certain Patreon supporters. But we don't answer emails on the show unless they're ones that we want to talk about, unless we think that they will make interesting, compelling podcast content. However, I think this might. So TPKI says, I'm a Denver native and lifelong Rockies apologist. They should be apologizing to you. Not the other way around. I know that Rockies ownership is willing to spend. They aren't greedy or malicious, but simply incompetent. I mean, they might be greedy, you know, baseball owners just in general, but by the standards. But Ben and Meg are very competent indeed. Thank you for the vote of confidence.

Oh, boy. Therefore, in a Freaky Friday style incident, you have switched bodies with Dick Monfort. The only way to change back is to make a series of decisions that will lead to the Rockies winning their division within six years, which infamously they have never done to this point. You do not need to wait those six years to change back. The curse can see the future. So you need only set success in motion. You have full control of the Rockies franchise and the Montfort fortune. How do you finally swoop down upon the Dodgers from a mile above to crush them like the mere mortals they really are?

Thank you for graciously considering this as content for your program. So, how do we fix the Rockies? That's a tall order. I don't know, Ben. I mean, like, first of all, like, I don't want to overstate my credentials. Like, I run fan graphs, but I'm not, I don't know if I, I shouldn't run a front office. That's wild. That would be a wild thing.

I mean, you should, but not me. I don't know about that. It's a hard problem, right? I think that, well, okay, so here's how we would do it. We would just hire a lot of people, you know, like that. If we had like the authority to like really commit resources i think that that would be the way that we'd go about it that would actually potentially have some effect right like let's and i want to be fair to the rockies because sometimes

we are um we have a little fun at their expense you know they have hired more people um in recent years but they are still behind i think think, in terms of the size and sort of sophistication of their front office operation, which is not meant to be a slight on the people who are working there, but it's just like a statement of reality of where they stack up relative to the rest of the league, right? So, I think that the first probably couple of years of us running that team with an eye toward contending would not bear fruit in a way that other people would necessarily notice right away right it would be about recruiting a lot of other very smart folks to supplement the group that's there and then see

what can be done right view it as this great fun problem of trying to put together a good team, particularly on the pitching side that has to play on the moon and see what we could do with it. So I think that investment in the front office and the infrastructure and technology that would support that group would be sort of the first order of the day. Let's really dig in on that. And, you know, maybe have hard conversations with folks who have been there for a long time about, like, how they are going to help the organization move forward. So, I think that that would be the, that's like the cop-out answer. But I do think that that would be a big part of it is, like, bringing in a bunch of folks and being like, let's see if we can, you know, you know, put this puzzle box together in a way that that makes sense, you know? Right.

So. Yeah. My question, my clarification here was, are we allowed to simply sell the team to someone who isn't Dick Von Fort while we're inhabiting his body? Can we just divest ourselves of the Rockies and rid the Rockies franchise of the scourge of bad ownership by finding a new owner and then just sail off into the sunset and give Dick Monfort his body back and stop possessing him and return to our flesh? And then the Rockies will be just fine, live happily ever after. I said that would go a long way. Now, the response was the team has already been effectively sold to you, which I guess is true, right? We're the operating partners here. But to simplify, we can just assume he will

learn his lesson and change his ways to be a competent owner at the end of the exercise. Learn his lesson and change his ways to be a competent owner at the end of the exercise. Because that's the thing. If we were to make a bunch of changes and then say, OK, we will relinquish the reins here. Dick, do your thing. We'll set you loose. And then he went back to his old ways and undid all of our hard work. Then that would be bad. That wouldn't set the Rockies up for long-term success.

But I guess in this scenario, he sees the error of his ways. Maybe he wakes up as if from a dream. He thinks, boy, the last several years passed so quickly, I barely remember what happened. But wow, our organization's in great shape now. I guess I better keep doing the things that I've been doing. Or maybe he's somehow by osmosis absorbed these wise management lessons we've imparted. So, he's a reformed man. He's a changed man. He's Scrooge after being visited by spirits, right? But we're the spirits. So, we can't just sell the team, but we can just hire smart people probably. Yeah. I mean, that is the obvious answer because that has been a

problem or the problem with the Rockies. It starts at the top seemingly with Montfort and then maybe extends to how he has stocked and replenished or failed to replenish his front office, right? It's just, I don't know if it's fruit of the poison tree is the term that came to my mind, but that's not what this means exactly. That's for my good wife watching days. But, you know, if it's kind of like a poisoned branch sort of situation where you cut off the one branch, but there's some sickness inside the trunk and then you promote the next person and they learned under the predecessor and they're not actually going to do things differently, right? It's still the Rocky's way, whatever the Rocky's way is, then at some point you do kind of have to cut bait or have some sort of bloodletting refresh

start, right? It can't just be continuity when that's not working out so well for you. So that's the obvious solution, right? Just kind of clean house or not everyone. I'm not saying heads must roll on day one. Like evaluate the intelligence that you have in the organization. And there are smart people who work for that team. Like I think we should say that every time.

Yep, yeah. And there's some value in having institutional knowledge and memory and people have been around. But yeah, do a little office space style consulting exercise of what do you do here exactly? I suspect that the answer we would arrive at just to keep driving this point home is less about needing to clean house of everyone who's there and just being like, this department needs more resources. It needs more people and it needs more money to implement procedures and tech and all kinds of stuff. People, I don't know, man.

Physical infrastructure is important to baseball being good. And you've got to spend money on that stuff. And you got to hire people who can really do something with it. So I, you know, I think it's probably about a pure addition more than it is addition by subtraction a lot of the time. So, yeah. And if the spirit of the question is more about how do you win in Coors Field? What's the one weird trick to win at altitude?

I don't know that we've cracked that. Obviously, we haven't studied that as extensively as we would were we to inhabit Dick Montfort's body for several years. But I don't know that there is one answer that is going to transform your fortunes overnight. one answer that is going to transform your fortunes overnight i mean yeah there's probably some way to minimize the disadvantage or leverage the unique aspects of that ballpark but they've gone back and forth right and maybe the consensus has gone back and forth do you want ground ball guys right keep the ball out of the air. Do you want bat missers? Because when batt hangover effect, the Coors Field hangover effect where the Rockies are just always worse on the road than they should be because of seemingly at least the adjustment in altitude and the way that pitches move differently or the way that it

affects your body. There's got to be some way to train yourself out of that, hopefully, at least to some extent. So that I would focus on certainly. But all the other, like leveraging the quirks of the ballpark, I feel like it's probably sort of small beans compared to the big stuff, which is, you know, when you spend on free agents, sign some good free agents and also have people who are at least a little closer to the cutting edge, not the dullest edge, right? Just a little bit closer to that. And yes, I know that they have made some efforts to catch up there, but clearly they've been lagging behind. So really, I return to the Phil Birnbaum sentiment, which is that it's easier not to be dumb, basically, than it is to be smart.

However he phrases that, it's like, it's easier to kind of catch up to the pack if you're the laggard, if you've fallen behind, than it is to set yourself apart from the people who are already doing something well. You know, it's hard to separate yourself, differentiate yourself from that pack. But if you're way behind, then closing that gap and catching up, that's sometimes easier to do and also sometimes much more effective. You get a bigger bang for your buck that way. Yeah, I think that's right. I don't know whether we fixed the Rockies. I hope you're satisfied with that answer

and with your Patreon contribution. Ultimately, it comes down to like after a certain point, then it's just, well, how do we build a good baseball team? You know, how do we build a scouting department and a player development department? Because after a few years, then you're sort of almost starting from the same point. So, I'm not giving you my hot takes on this Rockies prospect should be promoted and you should trade

this guy and go get that guy, right? I haven't come up with the full plan for fixing the Rockies, but in the broad strokes, I think that's how it would work. Yeah. All right. That will almost do it for today. Since we didn't have a stat blast this week, I will leave you with this stat blast like question and answer. Listener Grant emailed to say, I was poking around baseball reference recently and came across Nick Solak's 2023 stat line. One game, zero plate appearances for Atlanta and one game, zero plate appearances for Detroit. I can't imagine there are many hitters who have appeared for multiple teams in the same season without registering so much as a plate appearance. If so, is two the most teams a position player has appeared for in a season without a plate appearance? And this didn't turn into a stat blast because the answer is yes. I poked around

baseball reference two. I stat headed this. And if I did it right, it looks to me like Solak is the only non-pitcher ever to play for multiple teams in the same season without making a plate appearance, which sort of surprised me initially, though I was talking to Michael Mountain about it and he pointed out it's hard to do what Solak did because it's hard enough to appear for a team to play without a plate appearance all season. That's fairly rare. But then to be someone another team would want to acquire and give a shot to in a game again without getting a plate appearance, that's a pretty tough needle to thread. That's lightning striking twice. Wanted by multiple teams, made the majors with multiple

teams, but did not get a plate appearance with either team. So yes, Solak seems to be the first, which is kind of cool. I mean, maybe not so cool for him. He probably would have preferred to make a few plate appearances, but it is at least a historical distinction. A fun fact for me, quite a sequence of team switches for Solak. November 10th, 2022, his baseball reference transaction log reads, purchased by the Cincinnati Reds from the Texas Rangers. March 31st, 2023, purchased by the Seattle Mariners from the Cincinnati Reds. April 14th, 2023, selected off waivers by the White Sox from the Mariners. April 18th, selected off waivers by the Braves from the White Sox. June 9th, selected off waivers by the Tigers from the Braves.

So I guess he's gone quite quickly from second round draftee, top 100 prospect, promising rookie who hit really well with the Rangers in 33 games in 2019, to in his age 28 season, an extreme journeyman phase. Gotta be nice to make it back to the majors, but pretty frustrating to get into a game, not make a plate appearance, and lose your spot multiple times. Wonder what Solak was thinking about that. You gotta be kidding me. Here we go again.

Also, since we mentioned that year-end episode earlier, episode 2105, the stories we missed in 2023, one follow-up to that, the Nationals entry was about how C.J. Abrams had suddenly midway through the season started stealing way more bases. In fact, so many more bases that he actually led the majors in steals by several steals from early July on. And I said at the time, well, that had to be a conscious decision. He was deciding to go much more often. I mentioned that he had hit a bit better during that stretch as well. And so it had helped that he had been on base more, but that that wasn't the whole explanation. It made me think, might more players have a C.J. Abrams-esque mindset change heading into the second season with the new step-off and pick-off attempt rules? Well, belatedly, I have realized what the change

was in C.J. Abrams' season that likely led him to start stealing so much more. Robert Orr at Baseball Perspectives on Friday wrote about C.J. Abrams' transformation as a hitter right around that time. He became more selective, started making better swing decisions. And that wasn't a coincidence either. He started batting leadoff for the Nationals on July 7th, after batting eighth and ninth mostly up to that point in the season. And from then on, he was, well, more of a leadoff guy, being selective, getting on base a bit more often, and running much more when he did. And I mention that because I think it's kind of cool when a change in batting order position seems to inspire a change in approach and performance. Because typically where a batter hits in the order

doesn't matter that much and shouldn't matter that much. But every now and then, you seem to see someone who just has a switch flip. In my memory, at least, it is often a change to the leadoff slot. Suddenly someone says, oh, I got to work the count. I got to see some pitches

so that my teammates will see some pitches. It's usually not night and day, but sometimes perhaps not purely in a coincidental way, there's at least a short-term change, and C.J. Abrams really seemed to take it to heart. I just hadn't noticed that that uptick in his running had perfectly coincided with his change to the leadoff slot. Nice to know that there was a likely explanation. It's kind of like when Richie starts wearing a suit in The Bear season two. Suddenly, he sees himself as someone who would wear a suit and conform to a certain standard of decorum. Changes his behavior a bit. Kind of a chicken and egg situation. Does

he change because he starts wearing a suit or does he start wearing a suit because he changes? But sometimes you see yourself in a different light and in a different role and it changes how you behave. You have a whole new self-conception. Sometimes it's a new job. Sometimes it's a change at home. You're in a relationship now. You got married. You had a kid. Maybe I better turn over a new leaf. Sometimes you start batting leadoff. Also, while we're on the death ball beat, I still object to that term, but guess who just announced that he has one? Former Effectively Wild guest Ross Stripling of the Giants,

who said this to sports reporter Ari Alexander. I'm throwing the quote-unquote death ball, which is essentially a very inefficient spinning slider that from my arm angle really high, if you can cut the efficiency of the spin, it basically can't move horizontally. So the only way it can go is down. And so it's just kind of like a funky downward harder slider that, you know, a lot of guys from high arm angles are trying to figure out. Even though I feel like I have a good arsenal and I can get soft contact, I just don't miss a lot of bats. So this is a pitch that the Glasnaus and the Verlanders and Luke Jackson and Nick Anderson, some guys throw and they get a lot of swing and miss,

like some of them over 50% swing and miss. So even if I can get a fraction of that, it'd just be a huge addition to my game to get some, you know, be able to put people away. I don't know if the death ball is the way to do it, but after how last season went, I agree that it would be helpful for stripling to be able to put people away. I don't know if the death ball is the way to do it, but after how last season went, I agree that it would be helpful for Stripling to be able to put people away. Finally, prompted by the banter about Masters of the Air earlier and how baseball is used in that show to establish that someone actually is American, producer Shane was reminded, and then reminded me, that in the sixth inning of Ken Burns' baseball, there's a clip from a movie in which something like this happens. In fact, it is the film Battleground, a 1949 post-war war movie set during the Battle of the Bulge,

which is depicted in Band of Brothers. And here is a similar scene, much closer in time to the events in question. What's the password? Texas. Keep them covered. They may be German. Any line on these woods, Major? I didn't hear the counter sign. Oh, Liga. Texas Liga.

Will this road take us to Third Bat Headquarters? Straight ahead. Get going. Just a minute. What is a Texas Liga, Major this road take us to third bat headquarters? Straight ahead. Get going. Just a minute. What is a Texas Liga, Major? How's that? I said, what's a Texas Liga? It's some kind of baseball term.

What kind? A safe hit, just over the head of the infield. Nobody asked you. How'd the Dodgers make out this year? Hey, who's your commanding officer, soldier? Whoever he is, he knows how the Dodgers made out. Let's see your dog tags. What?

Come on, we're not taking any chances. Sprechen Sie Deutsch. Hey, what is this? Was ist dein Name? What kind of nonsense? Schnell, schnell, name, sprechen Sie. Drop those rifles. You, who's the dragon lady? She's in Terry and the Pirates. What's a hot rod? A hop-cup jalopy. Hello, Joe, what do you know? Just got back from a Vortavville show. I guess they're okay. Thank you, Sergeant. A PFC major, praying for civilian. That's why I believe in being careful. May I suggest, sir, that you study up on baseball? Yeah, I guess I'd better. So there you have it.

Even in the 40s, you couldn't guarantee that someone would be well-versed in baseball. It may have been more of the national pastime, but it wasn't necessarily everyone's individual pastime. May have been more of the national pastime, but it wasn't necessarily everyone's individual pastime. If this podcast is one of your pastimes, you can support it by going to patreon.com slash effectively wild. The following five listeners have already signed up and pledged some monthly or yearly amount to help keep the podcast going, help us stay ad free, and get themselves access to some perks. Chris Hanneman, Ryan, Ethan, Mick Coy, and Drew W. Thanks to all of you. Patreon perks include access to the Effectively Wild Discord group for patrons only. Monthly bonus episodes, one of which Meg and I will be recording this weekend. Playoff live streams, shoutouts at the ends of episodes, as you just heard.

Signed books, potential podcast appearances, personalized recordings, and so much more. Discounts on merch, ad-free Fangraphs memberships. Check out the array of offerings at patreon.com slash effectivelywild. If you are a Patreon supporter, you can message us through the Patreon site. But even if you aren't yet,

you can contact us via email, send your questions and comments to podcastatfangraphs.com. 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 effectivelywild. You can follow Effectively Wild on Twitter at EWPod, and other podcast platforms. You can join our Facebook group at facebook.com slash group slash effectively wild. You can follow Effectively Wild on Twitter at EW pod, and you can find the Effectively Wild subreddit at r slash effectively wild. Thanks to Shane McKeon for his editing and production assistance. We hope you have a wonderful weekend and we will be back to talk to you next week. Upstairs, that's inventory. They both mean a lot to me. That's why I love baseball. Special games, it's preview series, pitching, and pure poetry. That's why I love baseball.

Effectively wild. Effectively wild. Effectively wild. Baseball podcast.