Effectively Wild: A FanGraphs Baseball Podcast - Effectively Wild Episode 2178: The Man Who Only Hit Slams

Episode Date: June 15, 2024

Ben Lindbergh and Meg Rowley answer listener emails about Kyle Schwarber batting leadoff, teams paying their players not to do in-game, on-field interviews, the phrase “potential World Series preview,” a team purchasing and privatizing a valuable public baseball website, a player who can’t hit anything except grand slams, a player who homers in every game […]

Hello and welcome to episode 2178 of Effectively Wild, a Fangraphs baseball podcast brought to you by our Patreon supporters. I'm Meg Rowley of Fangraphs and I'm joined by Ben Lindberg of The Ringer. Ben, how are you? I'm all right. I have no preamble today. No banter, no preface, no prelude. We're just going to answer some emails, except for just reciting synonyms for things that come before other things. If I just kept doing that for a while, that might be a bit of a preface. But we're just going to roll right into emails and maybe meet major leaguers at the end.

And we could lead off, one might say say with an email about leading off from listener jared who says i asked a friend who is a phillies fan why kyle schwarber hits leadoff for them since he doesn't fit a typical mold of a leadoff hitter not fast doesn't hit for high average strikes out a bunch according to tom tango's the book a home run has the lowest run value not adjusted for plate appearances out of any position in the batting order in the leadoff spot. Since Kyle Schwarber is the epitome of a three-true outcome hitter, why do the Phillies continue to hit him in the one hole? Is it to minimize the double play chances they'd have since he isn't very fast? Is he simply just better hitting leadoff? I'm hoping that you or some other baseball minds much smarter than I could help make sense of it. That has been kind of a contentious subject under the Rob Thompson regime among Phillies fans, as I understand it. This has come up, so you're not alone in wondering why Kyle Schwarber is leading off. Because, as you say, he is not the typical leadoff batter. He is very atypical,

in fact, in more than one way. And this was written about a bunch last year as the Phillies were making their playoff run and everyone was noticing that Kyle Schwarber was batting leadoff for them. And there was a MLB.com stat I saw. There have been 1,050 instances of a player making at least 500 plate appearances out of the number one spot in a single season. Schwarber's 205 average leading off, this is last season, was the lowest of any of them. So yeah, it's weird, but it works in the sense that the Phillies keep winning. So I guess that kind of takes the pressure off. And he's patient. He walks a lot.

He sees a lot of pitches. That's an important quality for your leadoff guy who's getting a lot of plate appearances, that he's going to be on base in a lot of them. That's probably the most important thing. Before I offer some thoughts on that, I just want to say like, man, good for Kyle Schwarber having a nice little bounce back of the year, huh? I know he had a 119 WRC plus while hitting 197 last year because we talked about that a lot. 47 home runs will do that to you.

But I imagine if I were Kyle Schwarber, I would prefer maybe the shape of my production this year, right? Because you're just going to get yelled at less often if you're hitting 250 than you are if you're hitting below the Mendoza line. Especially in a league that's hitting 240. Kyle Schwarber has been an above-average batting average. Yeah, he has a 129 WRC plus this year. 13 home runs so far. He's doing great. I think that your answers are the correct ones insofar as like he gets on base a lot he is patient he tends to you know he grinds he's a grinder he's a grinder of at bats um i think

part of it is clearly down to the time that he pinch hit in the eight hole on may 13th against the mets and didn't do anything, struck out, and I bet Rob was like, I'm not doing that again. Did you know he has a 129 WRC plus batting leadoff? Guess I should leave him there. I don't know why I'm giving him a dopey voice. He seems like a smart guy. I think that it's a lot about that he's just able to get on base with good regularity i wonder if they had greater

confidence in their speed guys um their faster dudes being on base guys in a good productive way if this would get moved around but like i don't know maybe maybe not. Man, Edmundo Sosa's having a good year too. What the hell, Ben? What the hell? The Phillies, they've been good. They're good. Did you know that they're, have you seen these Phillies? Have you experienced this? Rojas still has a 62 WRC plus.

Way to hold on, buddy. Doing that. But, you know, like I think part of it is maybe a guy like Rojas, you're less confident is going to get on base, man. But so it's pretty fast. I'm sure if they had someone who did possess the prototypical leadoff skills. Yeah. I don't know that they think it's necessarily the best place for Kyle Schwarber, but maybe he's their best option in that spot. or you don't want to put Bryce Harper there. Trey Turner has been hurt most of the season. So last year, Schwarber saw 4.28 pitches per plate appearance. That was fifth among hitters. Big average was 3.91.

And even with Schwarber, the Phillies were exactly average in that category, 3.91 pitches per plate appearance. This year, Schwarber still doing well in that respect, 4.11 pitches per PA. That is 29th in baseball. The average has fallen to 3.88 this year. And the Phillies are below average at 3.85. So it's not necessarily a lineup full of guys who see tons of pitches. And there's at least a perception, a belief that that's especially valuable for a leadoff batter, that that guy seeing a bunch of pitches is going to be helpful for everyone else who's coming behind him. Don't really know if that is true or if that's been proven or how to prove that exactly.

But I guess it sort of stands to reason. We know there have been studies that have shown that the times through the order effect is magnified for a hitter. A hitter who sees more pitches in his first and second plate appearance will do better, all else being equal, in subsequent plate appearances, for instance. So maybe that would apply sort of secondarily to the guy who's on deck or in the hole or just watching in the dugout. But that's the thinking. He does walk.

He does get on base. He's got a 370 on base percentage this year. And it's not just a Phillies thing. He did start doing this somewhat regularly, at least for the Cubs in 2019. So it's weird because only Aaron Judge has hit more home runs than Kyle Schwarber since the start of 2022.

And yet, I guess the other things that he does and the other personnel sort of make it make sense. Mundo Sosa has four triples this year, Ben. Did you know that? Did you know that? I did not know that. Yeah, I think that all of those things are right. I mean, like I'm looking at the Phillies Sosa has four triples this year, but did you know that? Did you know that? Yeah. Yeah. I think that all of those things are right.

I mean, like I'm looking at the Philly sprint speed leaderboard. Kyle Schorbert is dead last on this leaderboard. But when you look at the top of the leaderboard, like if you wanted to introduce, like I was saying, a speed element, like you don't want Rojas to lead off.

Cause you know, he's, he's on the team for his defense more than he is for his hitting. Trey Turner, as you noted, unavailable to lead off. And then you have Sosa, but Sosa gets on base a good amount, not as much as Schwarber. And I think once you get past the first inning, potentially a valuable guy to have on base ahead of Schwarber. If he's to come up, you know,

to bet that could work out nice for you. It is a little weird. Like we're, we're saying here are the reasons, but like he is very slow. He is very slow, but he gets on base a lot. And you know,

I think that's good. Jake Mintz wrote about this and talked to him about it last year. And Schwimmer said what we were just saying. If I can make pitchers feel like they're not settling in right away where they have to work from pitch one, that's a win for me and for the rest of our lineup. And, yeah, he has not started anywhere else this season. He's just a staple in the leadoff slot. It's not like he's hit way better historically batting leadoff. He has hit mostly batting leadoff. I mean, a plurality of his

appearances, if not a majority, have come batting first, but he has an average. He has a 100 TOPS plus there, which means his leadoff spot numbers are basically a perfect reflection of his overall numbers. But I think when he's slumping or when the Phillies are not going great, then people start to grumble a bit. Sure. Because it is unconventional and disputably. But when the Phillies are going great, then, yeah, why mess with success, really? They are indeed going great. They're going great.

Yes, they are. And Thompson said all these things last October. He does get on base, the walks, the on base, the slug. He can impact the game from pitch one and give us a lead, 1-0. He's done that many times this year. What he also does is, as we turn the lineup over, guys at the end of the lineup get on base. And now we've got this power threat coming up. Not only has he scored a lot of runs,

but he's created a lot of runs. And I think, yeah, he's not the Ricky Henderson typical leadoff guy. That's an understatement. But he's so effective in that spot. You know what would be like the coolest thing to ever happen in baseball then? Is if one day Kyle Schwarber just was Ricky Henderson,

like just ran like him out of nowhere what would we assume you wouldn't think it was a steroid thing you'd be like what in the world is that about i mean like it would yeah that's a weird it's a weird one that would be a weird one which there'd be a powerful witch involved the sort of question we would answer and effectively that's email show but you're supplying that hypothetical yourself this time. So yes, it is odd. We will concede. But I do think that some of the stereotypes about who goes where, that has broken down a bit in recent years, where the old preconceptions about having to have a speedy guy at the top of the lineup or your number two hitter is sort of a guy with good bat control and can move the runner over and that sort of thing. A lot of that has

fallen by the wayside because now it's just about, well, are you good and do you fit the profile? And number two hitter now is often your best hitter and that's become much more common. And we have seen more power in the leadoff spot lately, like Ronald Acuna last year, right? So I do think that it's kind of part and parcel with that, but that also, yeah, I don't know if it's even exactly the sabermetric mold. So it's a part of it. It's just, you know, Phillies are doing well. So as long as they're doing well, then they'll keep doing that thing. All right. Question from Michael. The discussion of Quique Hernandez's error during a mid-game interview and what he and Dave Roberts said afterward made me think about if teams could only get their players to

abstain from these interviews by matching the $10,000 to $15,000 payments they get. My main thought was how many errors would have to happen, maybe one per interview starting now for the sake of the hypothetical, for teams to consider this worth it. Maybe the top spenders already would. Either way, would we get a bidding war and find out just how much an interview is really worth? This pod has me believing it's worth at least $100 a month for at least three months. That's to appear unaffected. Wow, that's completely different, of course. If there is any correlation between payroll and national games with the impact of the interview error in terror view.

He's trying to come up with some kind of combination there of interview and error. I'm struggling to pronounce it. Yeah, you sound like you're in the Black Lodge on Twin Peaks. In terror view. That's how they talk in there.

It's messed up. Would that also correlate? Most effectively, while hypotheticals have a when would you deploy X question. So would teams negotiate for even lower leverage parts of the game? Huh. I don't know.

I don't want to be a bummer by offering a boring answer, but I suspect that the fact that this exists suggests that teams aren't that worried about it. Right. Like if clubs were really bothered by it, this would not be a thing that would exist. And I imagine the exposure piece of it is good, you know? And like we talked about last time, there have been times when I've watched some of these on-field interviews, in-field, in-game,

on-field, in-game? On-field, in-game? On-field, in- game on field in game new portmanteau for this now that we had in terror view in terror view it does strike us with terror so that's not bad but there have been times when i've been watching whatever the hell we're calling this uh and thought to myself uh that guy's so charming. That guy seems like a good hang. That guy seems like a smart, cool player. I didn't really have much context for him before. And now I feel like I have a sense of it. Like, I get why this is appealing.

And I suspect that most clubs are like, it's probably fine. Does it strike you that it seems like we get more outfielders than infielders? We do still get a lot of infielders, though. There are a lot of infielders. Yeah, I don't know. There was that one time that was it Maldonado who was catching while he was? Yes. Yes. And we couldn't even hear him. So I'm like, you're distracting this guy. And we don't know what he's saying because the mask was like, you know, his lav mic wasn't able to cut through his mask. But I think they probably don't find it to be all that troublesome or it just wouldn't

happen. But I don't know, maybe I'm underestimating the pull of the TV to, you know, either the players themselves or more likely to league officials who like the idea of being able to say, look at our fun, cool guys doing fun, cool baseball stuff. You could probably construct a case if we knew how it affected performance. It's possible that it doesn't affect performance at all. But if you even thought it did slightly and it were some high leverage moment, then you could probably make a case of a win is worth X millions of dollars. And if this makes you slightly more likely to commit an error in

this situation and thus less likely to win that game, well, $10,000 is a pittance when it comes to that, probably. So there could be cases like that. But it would probably make teams look kind of grumpy the way that it probably makes us look kind of grumpy when we rant about this. And maybe the players appreciate the exposure, perhaps. It's such a small amount of money in the grand scheme of things, as we noted last time, in terms of even not one of the more highly paid players. But it is also, as I think someone pointed out in the Discord group, it is a lot of money still on a per minute basis, maybe. It is a lot of money still on a per minute basis, maybe, because it's only half an inning. Maybe you're mic'd up and you're not doing anything other than talking.

You're just on the field. It's not like you have to go anywhere or spend any extra time working. So it's still a decent rate of return, perhaps. And also, even if you're a multimillionaire, like a Major League Baseball player, like many of them, then there must be some part of you. If you didn't grow up with that kind of money, where someone offers you $10,000 for like five minutes of not hard work, then that's got to be tough to turn down. I sometimes wonder about that when I see celebrities like making appearances or some legendary rock band playing some billionaire's birthday or something or like some star doing cameos or whatever. And I'm like, do you need to do that? Right. Really? But maybe sometimes they're actually getting something out of it.

Maybe you enjoy making cameos and speaking personally to your fans, or maybe you enjoy hobnobbing with big wigs at some corporate event or birthday or who knows, or you enjoy the more intimate performance space or something. But I do always wonder about that because it's like, it's hard enough to get me to travel. Like if I were that rich and famous, like you would never get me to do anything like that. So I always wonder about that. Well, and I know that like, you know, for it sort of depends on the level of fame, right? Like some folks who are like, they're not, they wouldn't necessarily be described as like working actors in like a more journeyman sense, but like, you know, your Cw stars who end up doing a lot of

like endorsement stuff because their royalty income is not what it used to be right so they have to like supplement ways that they maybe didn't have to in the past but to be clear if anyone with major league baseball wants to give me ten thousand dollars to sit there and offer commentary for half an inning. Like, you know, call me. Oh, yeah. I'd be happy to hear that as long as you're not also playing in the game, which would be cool. No, it would not be cool.

It would be the worst. And people, I had a dream about this the other night, Ben. I had a dream about it. And the worst part of my dream was how many people delighted in how badly I played. It made me feel quite lousy. I woke up and I was like, wow, that's a new way of turning self-hatred around on me. Anyway, but yeah, like, look, it's just like everything that you need to either do or buy around your house when you're in your 30s is like a thousand bucks. So, you know, somebody wants to pay me to do a half innings worth of commentary. I'll get over it. You know, I'll figure it out. I'll come up with something to say. And you won't even have to worry about me booting the ball. Unlike if I were in the fields, in which case you'd have to worry about that regardless of whether or not you were chatting with me. How can you not be pedantic about baseball question from Carlton, who says, I found myself irrationally annoyed over the weekend by a phrase being thrown around regarding the Dodgers-Yankees series.

Naturally, I knew just who to call with my pedantry. Whom to call, Carlton? You do that, and then sometimes we get emails from people and i'm like why would they email and i'm like oh i get why i understand now i'm not normally uh correcting people's who's and whom's but i thought it would be on brand since it's talking about calling us because of our pedantry do you all find the phrase potential world series preview as irritating as I do. Technically, every interleague series is a potential World Series preview. And although Dodgers-Yekis might be one of the more likely possibilities,

it's still pretty unlikely. Furthermore, in our current era of interleague play, we have a potential World Series preview every day, which makes it barely even seem noteworthy. I feel differently about saying potential postseason matchup later in the season when it becomes more clear what the playoff field may look like. For example, if the Braves and Brewers are playing a series in September and they're currently lining up to face each other in the first or second round, then sure, go ahead.

I'll also say that if I put my rational thinking cap on, I understand what they mean and don't have any great suggestions for a better phrasing. I also understand why it's used in this situation, but not when the A's and Rockies play each other. My blood is already boiling a little less than when I started typing this email. So even if you don't have a chance to respond, I appreciate the email therapy. Maybe you just need to type this out. Just send it to us. Like it'll be just a little inbox where you can just send your little low stakes rants as we call them

on our Patreon bonus pods. And it'll be kind of cathartic for you just to express it. When we got that email, I was like, that's one of the most relatable emails we've ever received because I often use the process of writing to clarify what I think about something at all, and then I'll read the end and I'm like, oh, I need to rework the top of this because I finally have found my answer for myself, right? So yeah, when we got this, I was like, yeah, buddy, I get you. I know what that's like. This does not bother me at all. I think we've identified the important moments of differentiation between, say, a series between the Yankees and Dodgers and between the A's and Rockies. Because, you know, we spent time last episode talking about how crowded the playoff middle is right now, or at least the potential playoff middle.

Right. We have all of these teams that are maybe within striking distance of a playoff spot, but that doesn't mean that there aren't teams that are like really looking like they're going to be powerhouses come October. I mean, our make playoff odds at fan graphs right now go in the following order. The Yankees at 99.9 the phillies at 99.5 the dodgers at 99.3 and then you have the orioles at 98.1 if anyone is interested in the world series win odds the dodgers lead the pack with 21 there the yankees are behind them at 14 if any of you were like why are you disrespecting the yankees because they gotta go through the east i guess and the dodgers are like probably gonna win their division pretty handedly and won't be quite as so the odds of them of the yankees ending up in a wild card series

well not not likely i wouldn't say it's likely ben wouldn't be a thing i'd categorize as likely is i think more possible than um what the dodgers are facing. And then we have the Phillies behind them at 12.6. So I would take exception if, say, a team that was not currently in a playoff spot, even a wildcard spot, were presented as a potential World Series challenger to a very good team. I think you need to be discerning. And I think that broadcasters normally are. They save their potential World Series matchups for really big matchups. If the Yankees were to play the Phillies,

they'd probably say the same thing. If the Orioles were to play the Phillies or the Dodgers, that would probably be in the mix for them. Beyond that, I think that there are a lot of booths where they will say, oh, this is, you know, a potential October matchup. This is, you know, these teams might see each other come playoff time. But I think that they are appropriately discerning with the World Series,

potential World Series matchup. So while it is true to say, at least until teams have been mathematically eliminated from playoff contention, that there is a hypothetical in which it could be a World Series. It is not a meaningfully true hypothetical for many, many teams, like, say, the Rockies, the White Sox. My stars, like that White Sox team. Although, you know what? They gave the Mariners the business so

gotta gotta tip our caps and feel horrified about mariners hitting anyway this is one of those pedantic questions where it never bothered me in the slightest until i heard this email or read this email does it bother you now no but but i am but but i'm doomed to think about this email now for the rest of my life every time I hear the phrase potential World Series preview. So you have now infected me with your brain worms, I guess, Carlton. So I just don't think it bothers me, especially when the two teams you're talking about have the two highest World Series probabilities of any team. If you're ever going to throw it around, that is the time to throw it around. So while it is true, it is technically correct. The best kind of correct that you could use this phrase could apply to almost any interleague matchup or even every interleague matchup.

I think if you reserve it for more likely, even if it is still less likely to happen than a coin flip, let's say, then I am completely okay with it. I'm okay with it too. I do hope that people take seriously the notion that they can give us intrusive thoughts. They have. They have. Yes. You're the intruders, people. Question from listener and Patreon supporter Jeff. A favorite segment on Effectively Wild is Ben translates other sports news to baseball.

Okay, maybe it's not a regular segment, but it could be. So an NHL team, the Washington Capitals, is buying a popular hockey website, CapFriendly, and shutting it to the outside world. What do you make of this? What would this look like in baseball? And are there any popular baseball sites that could tempt a team to do the same? As a responsible Patreon supporter, before firing off this question, I did pop over to Discord to see if this was being discussed. Found a good pun about CapFriendly by Ben E. Guess they were friendly toward the Caps.

And a comp by Triumph listener, this is like if the Rays bought Zips, which would be bad for fan graphs, I guess. So has this happened? Could this happen? A team just buying a site wholesale? I think in this case with CapFriendly, it's just one person runs it, I think. And so it's not like they bought some big company or something. It's just they hired

this person to keep doing what they've been doing for CapFriendly. I think it's owned by Monumental Sports and Entertainment, but I think it might be mostly maintained by one person, Dominic Zrim, the co-owner and director. They bought Dominic? Yeah, I guess they are employing this person now to do the same thing for them that he was doing for this site. to do the same thing for them that he was doing for this site. So it would be like if a team, I guess, hired Jason Martinez, let's say, to have Roster Resource be their internal depth charts solution. And then it couldn't be hosted by Fangraphs anymore. Given what I have heard about, I'm going to brag about Jason for a second,

and John Becker, who ably assists him. I think that if someone did that, other teams would cry it because I know for a fact that many a team person looks at roster resource and finds it to be a very good roster resource. And so I think that there would be a fight. There'd be there'd be fisticuffs. I don't care for this at all, though, because this is like a news outlet of some stripe, right? Is that a fair way to

describe this site or Dominic? I don't want to say they bought Dominic because that's yucky. They're planning to keep this up through the 2024 NHL draft in the beginning of free agency, but then they'll lock it down permanently once the sale closes in July. And I guess this was something that the NHL didn't really like existing anyway.

The NHL, I don't think there's anything illegal or anything. It's just that apparently the leagues, from my subsequent reading, that the NHL would prefer for this stuff not to be published or that there should not be public places like publishing cap stuff and salaries and contract terms and CBA stuff. I don't know. Hockey teams are pretty closed- mouthed when it comes to injuries. Certainly they'll be like, it's a lower body injury. It's like, did he have his leg amputated or did he strain a quad or something? You know, so I think there's a little less precision and transparency when it comes to that stuff in hockey than we're accustomed to in baseball. But the NHL thinks that this sort of stuff should be proprietary.

And so the league would say, I think that this team would not be able to have it be public and for the team to be, say, making money from the ads and being a partner and everything. So apparently, though, a lot of other teams were relying on this. So it is like Roster Resource. It is kind of like Roster Resource, yeah. And according to what I'm reading here, yeah, like 70% of NHL teams don't have an internal salary cap infrastructure. So they're just sort of outsourcing and scrambling now. Wow.

Yeah. That's wild. And yeah, you could see why it would be advantageous. They don't have like e-biz. They don't have like an e-biz equivalent. They must have something. They have to have something. Who's making what and everything.

But I guess when it comes to cap, I mean, that stuff gets complicated. We're interesting. We've been spared that as uh baseball people pundits uh that's a big thing obviously in nba just like cap analysis and oh yeah can this move be made and what can they affect right so yeah and if the players uh get their way we will not ever have to figure that stuff out in MLB, but it is complicated, obviously. And so, yeah, if there are, I guess there are maybe two main people, Dominic Zrim and Jamie Davis, and then the Caps will hire those people, presumably, and they will just continue to do it for them behind the paywall, essentially. And I think those people, or at least one of them, has experience working for NHL teams in other capacities in the past. I think Shreve does.

But it's interesting. Like, we've seen certainly we lose a lot of great analysts. And you have certainly experienced that personally. Yes, I have. Managing every fan graphs, as I did, as the former editor-in-chief of Baseball Perspectives. And therefore, we will sometimes lose resources when someone gets hired by a team. Sometimes if it's something that was developed

prior to that person's employment and association with that team, then they can kind of gift it to the internet, as happened with PitchingBot, right? Where the person Cameron Grove, former guest of ours who maintained PitchingBot,? Right. Where the person Cameron Grove, former guest of ours who maintains Pitching Bot, he got hired by the Guardians and now it's at Fangraphs. So that's nice. Sometimes that happens.

Sometimes that doesn't happen. Gregor Barczyk. He ran HitTracker Online, which was a site that predated StatCast and it provided very accurate analysis of home run distances and trajectories and landing spots and everything. And I think when he went to work for the Red Sox, that site shut down or it certainly did shut down at some point. That wasn't a case I I don't think, of like the Red Sox were hiring him because they wanted to know how far home runs went exactly. But I'm sure there were similar applications and they just wanted to hire him and thus he was not able to continue to maintain that site.

There was one like Texas Leaguers, the site that has PitchFX charts and plots. I think that was down for a while when Trip Summers, who started that site, he was working as a scout. And I think that was inaccessible for a while. I don't know if it was inaccessible because he wasn't allowed to maintain it or whether he just didn't have time or what. Yeah, that sort of thing does happen,

but I can't think of a really useful site that everyone relies on that we have lost like that, but it could happen. Yeah. And I, like, I should be clear for all my bragging that like, you know,

teams have their own versions of this stuff. I'm, I'm shocked. I wonder how much of a bidding war there was for their services because if it's so indispensable and he's the guy that does it,

why do the capitals get to be the ones that benefit from that? Is it just because he has cap in the name? What else would you do but come be a capital? Well, you can see why teams would want to do that sort of thing. But what would be the equivalent?

Obviously, now we have certain resources that are offered by the league itself at Baseball Savant, for instance. like Fangraphs and Baseball Prospectus, which have or have had some level of partnership with the league or get data feeds from the league at least and share some information. And so I guess it's a little less grassroots than it used to be where you would go to this site to get that and this site to get that. But there's still stuff like that where some analysts will have, you know, there'll be like Alex Chamberlain has, who writes for Fangraphs, he has, you know, pitch data that you can look up and Robert Orr at Baseball Perspectives, he has Seager,

plate discipline, leaderboards at his site. And so people will have their homebrew stats that you'll have to sort of hunt for sometimes. But I think things are probably a little more centralized and professionalized now. But there have been cases, I guess, with projection systems maybe that were ticking offline for a while. But yeah, like if someone hired Dan Szymborski just to be their stack guy and do projections for them. I'm sure he's had interest in offers over the years. And so if that were to happen, then let's say Fangraphs wouldn't have Zips anymore, that sort of thing.

But there are many projection systems out there. So it's not like you'd be losing a one-of-a-kind system, though we certainly love and value Zips. Yeah, a good system, but you're right. It wouldn't be bereft entirely. No, we would be very steamer reliant all of a sudden, but I haven't asked him this directly, but I think in addition to the explanatory power that we think that it has to have, say, our playoff odds and our depth chart projections powered by a blend of steamer and zips.

Some of it is protecting against the like, hey, Dan got hired somewhere. Now what do we do? They keep hiring writers, Ben. It's so inconvenient to me personally. And, you know, I think worse for everyone, although I'm happy our friends are happy. And I guess this cat-friendly site is not actually one of a kind. There are other sites that provide some level of information. There's Puckpedia, so you can still find some stuff. But that was kind of the go-to in the way that there are

multiple places you can find payroll information, let's say, but some of them seem to be more trusted and accurate and well-updated than others, right? Puckpedia. Maybe I really do need to get into hockey just so I can enjoy a whole new world of puns. Question from Eli, who says, my girlfriend and I were having an important hypothetical discussion. Namely, would it be beneficial to have a player on your team who could only hit grand slams? That is to say, if the bases are loaded,

this grand slammer has 100% chance to hit a home run. But in any other case, they can never get a hit. Wow. So yeah, this is a grand slam, a bases loaded specialist. So it's the kid who only hits homers, but the kid who only hits homers, who only hit homers with the bases loaded.

Yeah. Here's a question I have about this before we entertain the likelihood that this person would be rostered. And like, they probably wouldn't be because like, how would you know? Is it that you can't get a hit otherwise or you can't hit a home run otherwise? Yeah, I think the question sent in by you, I and Christina, yeah, they can't get a hit in any other context. They're just useless. You would never be afforded the opportunity

to demonstrate this as a skill, right? Because you would just be forever striking out and people would be like, well, he's not rosterable. Even if you were like a defensive standout, you do have to hit a little bit, right? But let's imagine, I'm going to tweak the hypothetical slightly so that we have more to entertain here. So let's say that like, pick a name, Ben, pick a man's name.

Pick a man's name. Dominic. Dominic, okay. Dominic. Dominic. Okay. Dominic. Dominic has left his life of cap analysis for hockey. He has established himself as a big leaguer. And then one day, Dominic is struck by lightning. And as

a result of being struck by lightning, we don't know why. Nature is mysterious. He is now this player, right, where he can't get a hit unless it is a grand slam moment. So you're giving him some runway to actually demonstrate this as a skill. And, you know, probably a lot of runway because his team would feel bad for him that he had been struck by lightning, right? So here's Dominic. Dominic has this skill.

I still think it would be difficult to roster Dominic unless Dominic could play some good defense. to roster dominic unless dominic like could play some good defense and if you could play good defense um like let's say that dominic is like a plus center fielder and he can hit a grand slam on demand uh when the moment presents itself then i think dominic is like a more interesting bench player like still probably not rosterable ultimately because he's again you need to help him a little bit and you want to be able to deploy that guy in situations that aren't just like, hey, we need a defensive substitute late because it's a close game and we can't trust Kyle Schwarber out there, man. He just is a butcher in the outfield. So Dominic's also a Philly. Fun.

Let's say, though, that Dominic gets some runway to demonstrate this. You're the opposing manager. runway to demonstrate this. You're the opposing manager. You have decided that this is a real thing and will pretend for a moment that you are being given the opportunity to assert it as a real thing, even though I imagine front office folks and the rest of your coaching staff would be like, that's not a real thing. But you have Dominic. You know that Dominic is going to hit a grand slam if he comes in as the pinch hitter in a situation where the base is loaded. Okay. You know. Don't you just put up four and you just walk him?

Yeah, you do. So this minimizes the value. It's still value. It still gives you a run. It still gives you an automatic run. On base and run. Yeah. Also, do you think that the opposing manager would get fired

pretty quickly for like conceding a run like how long would it take for us to be like oh no dominic has like a repeatable magic skill because of the lightning you know like how long it might it might go well for him if he's on the phillies because you know, they're already batting Kyle Schwarber leadoff. So they're open, you know, they're here for the Bucs. He does hit a lot of grand slams, so maybe it's him. So the average number of plate appearances with the paces loaded. Yeah, I was going to ask, you know, I introduced the Lightning, so you should introduce some facts. I was going to ask, you know, I introduced the lightning, so you should introduce some facts.

Yeah. Well, so last year, the average number of plate appearances with the bases loaded was 147. And it ranged from the Dodgers, who had 220 plate appearances with the bases loaded, to the Royals at 115. Out of how many? Out of how many plate appearances total? Thousands, right? Thousands. Yes, many thousands.

Thousands and thousands. It's rare. It's rare. But it's still a significant number of plate appearances. Sure. And so if you could carry this guy on your roster, surprise. By the way, the Mariners had the second most played appearances with the bases loaded last year. I wouldn't have guessed that. Yeah, and then sometimes they hit grand slams, but not as often as it would have been nice for them to do that.

No, if they had Dominic. Not if they had Dominic. They don't need Dominic. They have the big dumper. How dare you? I think it would be worth rostering this guy. If you knew, you're right. We would never know that he possesses this ability. You have to know.

But if you knew somehow, and I don't know how, even if someone alleged this, how would they demonstrate it, right? Right. Yeah, the problem is if they were even bad but good enough to play in other circumstances, then eventually they might be able to demonstrate it because if they could be playable. Maybe, but like in order for you to guarantee, guarantee that he is up with the bases loaded, like he has to be coming off the bench. I mean, like you might stumble into it every now and again where it just so happens that in the batting order, he's up when the bases are loaded. But like, it seems like the more likely scenario is that you are having him pinch hit for someone. And if he is just like a complete zero at the plate otherwise, like imagine and we're in Philly, remember, because I changed my hypothetical. because I changed my hypothetical. We're in Philly. This guy has offered for his last since the lightning, right? And, you know, the good people of Philadelphia, they want to embrace him.

They feel bad that he got hit by lightning. His hair's all weird now. But they're also like, hey, man, like, why are you hitting, though? And he comes up to hit with the bases loaded, having offered for like a month or whatever. They're going to get booed out of the building although it would be really funny when he then hit a grand slam i mean the the faces we would find in the crowd ben the faces but it's like you're gonna have such a hard time justifying bringing him in in that scenario because like that's a crazy high leverage scenario. If you even, you don't even have to, Ben, right, I show, you don't even have to hit a grand slam is the thing, right?

Like that is an incredibly valuable game state. Even if you don't hit a home run, like you can just score a bunch of runs anyway. It doesn't have to be a home run, Ben. Mm-hmm. There are certain hitters who have been successful with the bases loaded for whatever reason,

and they've been known for that. Like, Pat Tabler has the highest batting average ever with the bases loaded, and we're talking 109 plate appearances and 88 at-bats, and he batted 489 in those situations. And so, oh, Pat Tabler does well with the bases loaded guy. Like he's above, you know, Tony Gwynn is third and Earl Averill is fifth.

You know, it's mostly very good players at the top there. And then it's Pat Tabler, who was not that great, but he was good enough to play for 12 years in the big leagues and be like a league average hitter. And so he had the opportunity to compile enough plate appearances with the bases loaded. Why did I put the emphasis on appearances when I was saying plate appearances? I don't know. But he compiled enough plate appearances with the bases loaded. You almost did it again, didn't you? You were like, oh, don't do it, don't do it, don't do it.

That we know that Pat Tabler, Pat Tabler. Pat Tabler. Pat Tabler. Pat Tabler. Pat Tabler and his plate appearances. Wait, what is his... Is his name Pap? It's not.

No, it's not. It's not. It's Pat, the much more common name. He became a guy to call up just when he was done with his playing career. I always think that about the guitarist of Nirvana, Pat Smear, where sometimes you'll hear him introduced. It's like, I heard Paul McCartney once he was playing with Pat Smear and Dave Grohl, and he's like, Mr. Pat Smear. It certainly sounded like that to me. Anyway, I know it's a stage name.

That's the joke. But it was still funny to hear Paul McCartney say it. I'm Mr. Pat Smear. Pat Tabler. Pat Tabler. He was able to play enough that he developed that reputation. Right. Did he actually have a great true talent ability with the bases loaded? Who knows?

Who knows? But someone could. And it would be notable if you hit a home run every time you that we would notice that very quickly that would be how quickly have we noticed that with royce lewis and it wasn't automatic with him but it was like wow look at all these grand slams he's hitting so yeah the guy would just have to be good enough to establish the reputation where we noticed it and he wouldn't even have to be very good because if he were not very good and was great with the bases loaded,

we would notice it even more quickly. He just has to be good enough to be in the lineup, which would not happen if he never gets a hit in any other situation. But if he were bad, but good enough, then he could parlay that into being the bases loaded pinch hit guy because he could prove it.

Like if he knew, I mean, the question is, does the player know that he has this ability? Does he believe in it? Or is he as surprised as everyone else? Does he feel like he's channeling some baseball god when the bases are loaded? And maybe then if he does, he could volunteer this information.

He could tell you, you know, I feel super powered when this is happening and would be confident in it sooner. But then you could be like, well, prove it that you're this good at this. And then he would if he actually could do it. And so you'd pinch hit him with the bases loaded and you would keep doing that. Just the way that you bat Kyle Schwerber leadoff and he does okay and you keep winning, you keep batting him leadoff. You would definitely keep pinch hitting this guy. And even if this is his limited skill set, and even if you're right, he would soon be relegated to just an automatic walk.

Automatic walk. There are enough situations over the course of a season that I think it would be worth carrying this guy. It would be worth rostering him. I still don't know that it would be. carrying this guy. It would be worth rostering him. I still don't know that it would be, but I also wonder, I introduced the notion of the intentional walk with the bases loaded, right? But I wonder how much that would actually happen because it's a big thing to do. It's the kind of thing that people talk about on podcasts where they are like, Pap Tabler, he has skills you know so it would get discussed uh a lot if you were like the fifth manager to do it then people would be like well yeah this is just what league does with this guy

it's crazy but it's true but if you were the first one i'd see it on a game and then i'd be in the fan graph slack being like davey please write about this like this is this is some prime Davey stuff right you would been co-byline go and so I wonder maybe I'm underestimating the amount of value this player would bring because I am overestimating the willingness that big league managers would have to just walk in while we were talking about that hypothetical the Astros released Jose Abreu. Whoa. Yeah. Not a huge shocker given how he'd played.

I guess he turned into the guy who can only hit grand slams, basically, and can't do anything else in any other situation. Was he hitting grand slams? No, he wasn't doing that either. I was like, oh, I missed something important about Jose Cruz. Extra sad sort of because they sent him all the way down. I know. Yeah, we talked about that.

And then he played in some rehab games and then they brought him back up and they gave him 13 more games and he batted 167 with a 519 OPS. And it was like, well, I guess that little sabbatical did not fix anything. Yes. And it was like, well, I guess that little sabbatical did not fix anything. Do you think that another team will take a chance on him? Because he is owed $30 million, but the Astros are responsible for all of that. If he gets picked up by another club, then they're just on the hook for whatever's left of the minimum, right? Maybe he'll be a White Sox. Yeah, right.

I could see some very bad team. Yeah, the White Sox. Maybe he should just go be a White Sox again Yeah, right. I could see some very bad team. Yeah, the White Sox. Maybe he should just go be a White Sox again. I don't know if I want that for him. I don't know if there are any hard feelings there on either side about the way that their association ended. But yeah, maybe just for like you never know and change of scenery and clubhouse guy leadership. He's a great clubhouse guy. He has a good reputation for that.

Change of scenery was what did him in. I mean, the change of scenery coincided with his just losing all of his offensive ability, but maybe a new change of scenery will snap him right back into it. I don't know, man. I feel bad about the way his career has kind of come into a close.

Jose Abreu is an important... In the like, Cuban players in Major League Baseball, like, that guy's an important dude. You know, I think we should—I'm not suggesting that you're being disrespectful, but, like, I hope that people remember, like, the earlier part of his career. Because, like, that guy—that guy was really good. Oh, yeah. part of his career because like that guy that guy was really good oh yeah i mean like that guy was really very good and you know he debuted late because of the the cuba of it all and so yeah no i i remember talking it must have been at least a couple years ago about how because he hadn't really declined or hadn't declined precipitously at that point and he was in his mid-30s and i was thinking at the time like i i was i'm gonna when jose abreu retires i'm gonna write the jose abreu would have been a

hall of famer if he had come to mlb sooner because if you do like translations and and minor league major league equivalencies of his cuban stats where he was just like totally wrecking the Cuban league when he was there. And you add that into what he did in the majors, which from 2014 to 2022, he had a 135 OPS plus and played, you know, like every game, like barely missed a game many seasons. And of course he had the sort of small sample MVP in 2020, which was not only a small sample, but maybe not the best selection. I mean, that was weird, but like, you know, glad he got some hardware because he was really good. He, of course, won Rookie of the Year in 2014 too, and he was just a monster that year offensively. So, if he had been that kind of player in in his earlier years in mlb then i think we would be

looking at him because you know 30 war guy even as it is even completely cratering these last couple seasons and yeah if we factor what he did to the first half of his 20s like yeah it's a very impressive career so it's an impressive career it We should have respect for Jose Abreu and what he has meant to the game because it's more than just this last two seasons. Rays released Harold Ramirez too. I saw that. I like Harold Ramirez. I do too. He was fun for them the last couple of years.

I hope he catches on somewhere. I enjoy watching that guy play. That seems more likely than Abreu, I guess, given the ages involved, although. They had roster crunch stuff because they had to make room for walls coming back from injury, right? I wonder if there's like a, in the way that when the Rays pick someone up, you think like, ooh, what do the Rays know? Or like the Rays start sniffing around your prospects or non-prospects. You're like, oh, is this someone we should, I wonder if the Rays release someone or the Dodgers or whoever else,

are you more likely to discount them and want to pick them up somewhere else? Because it's like, well, if the Rays or Dodgers couldn't fix them, then who are we? Can we fix them, right? So maybe. Maybe.

We got a similar question actually to the all Grand Slams and nothing else question, which actually invokes. Would that be whoops all Grand Slams? Wait, is it oops or whoops? Whoops. Oops. You've now, it's oops, right? Oops, all Grand Slams.

I had to think of it. I know. I had to think about it now because you. I've ruined it. This is like how how this is how like bauman doesn't feel confident he knows how to say mitch hanegar's name because i mispronounced it around him one time and he was like well she would probably know he's a mariner so well this is not the opposite of that question which i guess would be great all the time except when the bases are

voted that that person would be very playable too but this is a corollary that also does invoke Royce Lewis. And it's from Grant who says, I'm currently looking through box scores and a thought popped into my head. Let's say a hypothetical player, we'll call him Lois Ruiz, were guaranteed to hit at least one home run in every game they played for the entirety of their career. However, they struggle with staying healthy. What would be the maximum percentage of games Lois could spend on the IL and not get cut? For example, 90% of games spent on the IL would leave 16 active games for him to hit a homer in, which I feel like would definitely still be worth. Well, Grant says he thinks that would still be worth rostering. I can see this would definitely vary based on salary, but let's consider him a constant salary at $8 million a year for the sake of this conversation. I could also see it varying depending on how often they get placed on the 10-day versus 60-day. Also, I guess this phenomenon would continue into the postseason, but the team would have no way of controlling which games he's healthy for and which ones he's injured for.

for and which ones he's injured for. So I guess that's important if we're holding salary constant here, because if this guy's hurt all the time, then obviously his salary would eventually come to reflect that. And so he would be paid like a player who's hurt all the time. And yet when he's healthy every now and then, he hits really well. But this guy would be paid like a more like a more extreme version of byron bucks and let someone you you basically can count on and not even pencil and you can use ink that he's going to be out most of the time but whenever he happens to be healthy automatic dinger in that game so dingers yeah so eventually his his pay would come to reflect that production.

But I think there would be a point at which you would stop rostering him. But I think it might be like single digit games. Wow. Because you got to think like the last guy on your roster is going to be a replacement level player like at best. Right. I mean, it's going to be the last spot in the bullpen that you're constantly cycling guys through, or it's going to be some bench bat maybe who's kind of interchangeable.

And so to get this production, and it would be a luxury, I suppose. It would be something that not every team could afford, an $8 million player who barely plays. But I think if you were a contender and you knew that you were going to be in the postseason and you're like a fairly high payroll team, because like eight games in which you're hitting a homer every game. I don't know if it's one for four with a homer or if you're offering any additional value in those games. But even if it's just the bare minimum, really, eight homer games, like that's going to be, I don't know exactly what that would translate to in war. It depends what position you're playing

and what are you doing in your other play appearances. But it's going to be real positive value and probably more than you're going to get out of your 26th man typically. So, you know, if you have the luxury of kind of carrying that salary and just, hey, whenever you're good to go, we'll take you. And if you know that you're going to make it to October and so he might just happen to be healthy in one of those playoff games. And then that's going to give you even greater value. I say, why not?

I think that all of that is fine to say. I mean, there is like, there is additional costs to rostering someone like this, which is that you have to, you know, he's like presumably taking a spot on the 40 man. You got to move a guy around,

you know, and to your point, teams do this. They go up and down with dudes all the time, but it isn't a costless thing from a roster construction perspective. Right. So that might be a gating factor for some clubs just as much as the actual expense of his his salary would be. I mean, I think it would need to be more games, but maybe I'm wrong. Matt says probably premature for this question, but I doubt the remainder of his career

will change the answer much. Will Justin Verlander go into the Hall of Fame as a Tiger or an Astro? Of course, I sent a cheeky response of Verlander wearing a Mets uniform because Matt omitted that option. That was a good one, Ben. that was a good one ben it was a probably take that off the board i think he'll go in as an astro right don't you think he'll go in as an astro yes but it is the reason why it's an interesting version of this question which

usually i'm just like you know whatever like the player will say what they want and it'll be a team that he was good on and who cares. And also you can choose not to wear a cap if you don't want to specify, which is an option for him. But in this case, he did spend significantly more time with the Tigers and 13 years with the Tigers versus seven so far with the Astros. Yeah. So that is, you know, that would, and significantly more war value with the Tigers, even though he has been better on a per inning basis with the Astros, like considerably. I mean, 169 ERA plus with the Astros, 123 with the Tigers. But, well, he was coming up, of course,

with the Tigers, not that he was bad or really had a lot of growing pains or anything, but his early years when he wasn't quite the ace, and then also those years where he was kind of heard and people thought, oh, is he kind of done? But all told, he has way more war accrued with the Tigers because the time spent 56.6 baseball reference were versus 23.2 for the Astros. And don't forget those 2.2 for your New York Metropolitans. Don't forget it, Ben. But I guess that's also because he just threw so many innings when he was a Tiger. It seems like it's something out of another era, which it is basically, because like 2011 was another era when it came to pitcher usage. And he threw 251 innings in

the regular season in 2011. That is wild that there is still an active pitcher, an aged one, but an active pitcher nonetheless. And then went to the ALCS and pitched like 20 more innings on top of that. But the reason why he wouldn't, I mean, he has a Cy Young with each team, of course, but his championships, the two titles came with the Astros and that probably goes a long way. But I don't know, you know, drafted by the Tigers, came up with the Tigers. I could see him going Tigers. Even though with the recency effect, he might go Astros. And he's not done yet, of course.

He has a vesting option for next year. I don't recall what the terms of that are. I wonder, too, if he might. I don't recall what the terms of that are. I wonder too, if he might, I don't know Justin Verlander, obviously. And I'm not sure how he kind of feels about that stretch of time, but I wonder too, if he will opt for the Tigers because it provides some amount of distance from the banging scheme, which obviously has different implications for him as a pitcher than it would for like, say, you know, like not that L2 is going to really be able to pick a different team, but you know, they're for the hitters. It's a different conversation, but I do

wonder if he'll want to be like, well, you know, there's a demarcation. Don't worry about that. Those are legit titles. No one, no one has anything to say about them. You know, don't worry about it. Don't worry about it. And of course he made plenty of playoff appearances with the Tigers, and he played on great teams with the Tigers. So the fact that he was sort of a perennial playoff player for them too makes me think, even though they were kind of like one of the better teams that wasn't able to break through and win one. That might sway him somewhat. So that's a tough call, though. That's why I thought it was kind of an interesting version of this question. Maybe he'll just find the Tigers logo more distinguished or something.

I don't know. His option vests if he gets to 140 innings pitched, which is probably going to be tough because of the injury. Yeah, it seems like it's going to be hard. He's averaging like 5.7 innings per start. He's at 57 innings now. So he'd need to make like 14, 15 more starts. And there's probably not time for that, right?

Or is there? Well, that might be close. But if that were to vest, maybe he'd get another year with the Astros on there and he might anyway. He has said he wants to continue pitching forever, although he's been like league average or so this year. So never want to write off Justin Verlander because people have done that before. But, and you know, he could keep pitching league average. It's just that it's going to be tough for him to get to his goal of 300 wins because he's got 40 to go and he is 41 years old. So. But who knows what I mean, like he'll just keep getting older. So that's working against him. But, you know, he if he has a full healthy season and isn't still, you know, having

had the weirdness of the injury and what that meant for his spring, the results might end up being different. OK, last question comes from Patrick, who says, I came across a baseball subreddit post about players who just missed out on being teammates. The post notes that Alex Rodriguez and Aaron Judge missed each other by one day on the Yankees big league roster back in 2015, if only because Judge was called up to fill A-Rod's vacated roster spot after the latter's release. This got me thinking, though, wouldn't they have played in spring training together? In fact, they did, both in 2015 and 2016.

Their first time playing together was on March 4, 2015, against the Phillies. A-Rod started the day batting second at DH while Judge came in as a defensive replacement in right field at the start of the sixth. A-Rod was subsequently pinch run for in the bottom of the same inning. So this raises the question, were they teammates? So Patrick wants to know, were Judge and A-Rod teammates? What is a teammate?

The fact that they played together in spring training. Sure. Does that count? I mean, I guess we need to. They were on a roster together. They weren't teammates for very long. They were very briefly teammates. And then they weren't teammates for a while, right?

Because I would define it as needing to be on the same roster. You need the potential to go into the same game to be a teammate, right? Because I would define it as needing to be on the same roster. You need the potential to go into the same game to be a teammate, I think. I think that's my criteria. Yes. But you'd have to specify that they were teammates in spring training if you were. Sure. If you were one of those players and you were just saying, I was teammates with so-and-so, you could have been teammates in Little League or high school or college or the minors. There are plenty of teammates who were not major league teammates. They were not major league teammates.

But they were team, they have been teammates. They were at major league spring training. I know, but that's not, those stats don't count. Those stats don't count. I mean, they don't count toward, you know what I mean. You know what I mean. Yeah. And then there are also times where players were on the same team in the same year, but were not on the roster at the same time, which is this situation, right? So you could say that both Judge and A-Rod were 2015 Yankees. And so they were members of that same major league team. Yes, but they weren't teammates. But they were not teammates that same major league team. Yes, but they weren't teammates. But they were not teammates, not major league teammates. Okay, here's a scenario. So let's say that A-Rod had, because did he just get released? I don't remember the circumstances of A-Rod's designation.

Yeah, I think he just got released. Let's pretend that A-Rod had instead gotten hit in one of his little tiny bird bones and had gone on the injured list. And then they had brought up Aaron Judge to fill his spot on the active roster. Then they would be teammates in my opinion. Yes, that's a teammate. That's a teammate. Because they'd be in the dugout together. It's really about being able to be in the dugout together, I think.

I think that's what it's about. I think that's right. Yeah. If you have the ability to give someone a nickname and, like, spit at them. Because they're always spitting, Ben. They're always spitting, these guys. They're spitting all the time. They are.

Then you're a teammate. But if you get released and the other guy comes up to fill your spot, not a teammate. I misspoke, by the way. It was 2016, not 2015. That was the year that Judge came up and A-Rod was released. So I would say they were both members of the 2016 Yankees, but they were not teammates on the 2016 Yankees. However, they were teammates in spring training. They were spring training teammates.

But you just got to specify, really. Yeah, you just have to specify. So many players have played with each other at levels other than the majors. So just not major league teammates. Yes. All right. I teased that we were going to meet major leaguers today. Meg just had to go because someone came over to do some work on her house, but I don't want to promise you meeting major leaguers and then stand you up, never make the introduction. Also, I have dozens of tabs open related to this segment. So let's do it. I have prepared two major league meetings today. We are meeting two players who debuted on the same day, June 2nd, but got there in very different ways. Daniel Schneeman of the Guardians and Jamie Westbrook of the Red Sox. Let's start with Schneeman, not to be confused with Max Schumann of the A's who debuted back in April. Daniel Schneeman, whose name reminds me of Ned Schneebly,

Mike White's character from School of Rock, is a 27-year-old left-handed hitter from San Diego, listed at 6 feet, 185 pounds, drafted by the Guardians, who were not yet named the Guardians, in the 33rd round of the 2018 draft. I think I've said this before, but I'm going to miss it when we stop meeting major leaguers who were drafted in late rounds like that, rounds that don't even exist anymore, because when you get a 33rd rounder, you know this was an underdog. Now, Schneeman was drafted

out of Brigham Young University. His wife, Allie, played first base for the BYU Cougars softball team and I believe is currently an assistant coach for them. So we've got a baseball softball couple here. And Schneeman's ascent was slow and steady, usually one level a year, excepting 2020 when the minor league season was canceled. He reached AAA for a couple games in 2022, but his first full season at AAA was 2023, 797 OPS. But this year, repeating the level, 53 games, 223 plate appearances, 984 OPS, 294, games, 223 plate appearances, 984 OPS, 294, 428, 556 with 10 homers. So he has the third highest WRC plus 155 of any AAA hitter this year after top prospect James Wood of the Nationals and Spencer Horwitz of the Blue Jays. Among AAA hitters who've seen 500 pitches, almost 300 of them this year, Schneeman had the 11th highest ex-WOBA, number one on that list,

by the way, an earlier Guardians call-up, Kyle Mazzardo, who has not supplied much power for the Major League Guardians thus far. In fact, he doesn't have a homer yet. And Schneeman didn't seem like the type to supply a lot of power. He didn't have a whole lot historically. He hit 17 homers in his first four minor league seasons combined. But then last season, he hit 13, and he came into spring training this year and totally tore it up. 13 for 39 with a double, a triple, two homers. That's a 1012 OPS in 20 games. Guardians broadcasting legend Tom Hamilton said that Schneeman was the most improved player he saw in spring. And here's what Guardians manager Steven Vogt said about him in May before he was called up. Schnee showed a lot this spring. Schnee,

which reminds me of another movie character. Schnee Skywalker. Schnee, what a wonderful nickname. And he's D underscore Schnee on Instagram, so I guess he embraces it. Schnee showed a lot this spring. Versatility defensively. The at-bat quality to me is what really stood out, and whether this guy came off the bench in the seventh inning, eighth inning, started the game, the way he ran the bases, the teammate he was, he really impacted camp a lot. And I know I enjoyed getting to meet him. That's what we're doing now. And the coaches just raved about him. Daniel had a phenomenal camp. Why would you ever call him Daniel once you've established Schnee? He's one of those people that you feel he's just so reliable, Vogt said, like he defines reliability. Whether that means he's going to be

ready for the pinch hit at bat, he's going to get in the seventh inning or ready to be in the right place and cut off some relays or capably play second in wherever we put him on the diamond. That says a lot about a guy that he's just reliable. No matter when he's called upon, he's ready to come in and contribute. And, Vogt said in May, the reports on Schnee is that he kept his spring rolling and then some. I'm really excited about Schnee. The Knights who say Schnee. And this is all quite a come up for him is when Eric Langenhagen published his Guardians prospect list in April, he ranked 42 players. Daniel

Schneeman was not one of them. And I asked Eric about him now. And he said, I have 40 contact, 50 power on the 20 to 80 scouting scale. I guess if he can play all over the place and the uptick in plate discipline is real, that's a 45, which would still be a slightly below average player. But about that playing all over the place, he plays all over the infield and all over the outfield. And in fact, he has made some history here for his positional versatility. According to the Elias Sports Bureau, Schneeman is the first player to debut in 1900 or later to play as many as six different positions within his first six MLB games. Six games, six plus positions. Schnee is the only one who has done it. Just checked off a bunch of boxes on the bingo card immediately. Shortstop, second base, third base, left center, and right. He's more of an infielder by trade.

He has much more infield experience, but he started playing outfield more regularly in the minors. So now he has that club in his bag, or maybe it might be more accurate to say that glove in his bag. Outfielder Jonathan Rodriguez was optioned to make room for Schnee. Rodriguez debuted earlier this season too, though we haven't met him on the podcast. But in addition to playing all those positions, Schneeman in his first seven games, 19 plate appearances,.357,.526,.571. So a nice little shot in the arm for that Guardians offense. He hit a two-run double off Cole Irvin on the first major league pitch he saw. So I am gleaming for Schneeman. I want to see Schnee all in on this guy. Now Schneeman, about 27 and a half years old,

he played 445 minor league games, 1,765 minor league played appearances. Those totals pale in comparison to the next major league we're meeting. Debuted on the same day, but it took him a long time to get there. So I guess it's appropriate that it took him until the end of this episode to be introduced. Jamie Westbrook, who is not that much older than Schneeman, about a year and a half. He's 28, turns 29 on Tuesday, and it will be a happy birthday because he's a big leaguer. Jamie Westbrook was drafted in a high round, fifth round, but a much earlier draft, 2013. He was selected out of high school, and so he's been bouncing around the Bush Leagues ever since.

Westbrook is a right-handed hitter from Springfield, Massachusetts, so appropriate that he's making his big league debut with Boston. Also plays a bunch of positions. He's listed at 5'7", 193. So he's a shorter guy, although really, those dimensions, 5'7", 193, and he doesn't look like he's out of shape. He just seems solid. Professional athletes are just built different.

Like 193, that is fairly heavy for 5'7", for a fit guy. Big leaguers are big and not always vertically. Sometimes they're just thick too, not necessarily in the big dumper way, though maybe that too. Anyway, Westbrook really put the time in. He played 11 seasons in the minors, 1,159 games, 4,748 plate appearances. And that probably doesn't even count the 27 games he played for the Sugarland Lightning Sloths of Texas's Constellation Energy League, the four-team independent league that played in 2020. Schneeman has been in the Guardians organization his whole career. Westbrook has played for five organizations. He was drafted

by the Diamondbacks. He's also been in the Brewers, Tigers, and Yankees systems. Last year, he had a near 900 OPS with Scranton in AAA for the Yankees. Didn't get the call. This year, he had about an 800 OPS for Worcester. And the thing about Westbrook, heartwarming story. And with a heartwarming story, you want heartwarming quotes. And Westbrook, he understands that assignment. Every story you read about Westbrook's call up, he delivers the money lines, not the betting kind of money lines, the quote kind. So he debuted June 2nd, bottom of the ninth, two out, two on. He pinch hit. And yeah, it would have been wonderful if he had gotten a walk off hit, but he didn't. He got a walk and the Red Sox lost in extras, but it was still a feel-good moment. Westbrook said, it was nuts. If you're going to get in there, I guess that's the best time,

get thrown right into the fire. We obviously had a chance to win the game there. So I was thinking, let's have a good at-bat. The crowd was loud. When it got to 3-1, I kind of had to refocus, but it was everything I dreamed of. Alex Cora, Red Sox manager said, while the inning was going, I was like, yeah, it's going to happen. And it was a great at-bat. We were hoping for more, like a walk-off. What a story. But it was a big league at-bat. Actually, Alex, it was a big league plate appearance, not an at-bat. But it was still special. This MLB.com story by Ian Brown says, Cora has a saying to every player once they make their debut. You're a big leaguer now. Is that a saying? Sort of just a statement of fact. But it's true. Jamie Westbrook, big leaguer. And of course, the call-up story is good. He got the call because Von Grissom and Romy Gonzalez both

went on the IL with hamstring strains. And so AAA Worcester manager Chad Tracy called Westbrook in his hotel room in Charlotte on Saturday, told him to hustle to Boston. Westbrook gathered his wife and seven-year-old son, and they were on their way. Westbrook said, Tracy called me and said, hey, I'm sure there's been a lot of managers throughout your career who wanted to give you this call and I'm happy it's me and you're going to the big leagues. I don't really know what he said after that. That was all I needed to hear. A lot of tears. I just wanted to make sure the manager was serious and he wasn't joking with me. That would have been incredibly cruel. I'm still at kind of a loss for words, just a lot of gratitude. Did he ever start to lose hope? Yeah, absolutely. Pretty often, honestly. But I'm just happy I kept showing up regardless of how it was going where I was at.

Today is a day I've always dreamed of. If you were to ask me on draft day coming out of high school, I would have told you I would have made $200 million and played in the big leagues for 15 years. Everybody's story is different, but it's so much sweeter now and I wouldn't want it any other way. So it's been a long time coming for sure. It's a beautiful day. It really is. I often wonder about that.

Wouldn't want it any other way. Wouldn't you want the 15 years in the big leagues and the 200 million? I mean, maybe the debut wouldn't have been quite as sweet. Like if you could keep everything else the same, you know, if he makes the big leagues, maybe he doesn't meet his wife and have his son. I'm not saying he wouldn't want this life, but you know, if you could keep all that and also have the 200 million and the 15 years in the big leagues, maybe he doesn't meet his wife and have his son. I'm not saying he wouldn't want this life.

But, you know, if you could keep all that and also have the 200 million and the 15 years in the big leagues. I don't want to take anything away from him. I'm very happy for Jamie Westbrook. Now, this story says he was a Red Sox fan growing up in Springfield, but moved to Arizona when he was 10 years old. A subsequent story says that the Red Sox were the first team he rooted for. I'll just note, I don't want to blow up his spot here. that the Red Sox were the first team he rooted for. I'll just note, I don't want to blow up his spot here,

but when he was on the Yankees in AAA last year, he did post a few pictures of himself on Instagram as a 10-year-old wearing a Yankees cap at Yankee Stadium, wearing full Yankees regalia, getting a Yankees-related gift by a Christmas tree. But now that he's in Boston, maybe he should just memory hole those Instagram photos. Ah, yes, the Red Sox were my first love. He did subsequently record his first hit, single to left, and he said it's indescribable just to see the ball hit the grass. And no, you're in the minor league so long. What if I go up there

and don't get a hit? You never know how things will happen. He got an ovation in Fenway, as the scoreboard noted that it was his first hit. And what did he do with the ball? As if we weren't already in Westbrook's corner. Just gave it to my mom, said Westbrook. She was battling breast cancer the past five months or so, and she's in remission now. Just finished radiation last week. So I think she deserves that ball for so many reasons. I'd be here all day talking to you guys about all the reasons. So she's got it. It's storybook. It really is. I couldn't be happier. I'm happy for him too. So he's starting against some lefties. He plays infield and outfield too. And man, you know this from the Kevin Costner monologue.

Well, one of them in Bull Durham, but there really is a big difference even between AAA and the majors. He took his first charter flight. He said he was looking forward to experiencing life in a major league caliber hotel room. Quote, I'm pumped. I'm gonna sleep good tonight.

I might take a bath and use the robe if they have one at the hotel. I'm excited to experience the whole thing with my wife and baby. So it's nice just seeing the finer things in life. We don't live lavishly. My wife still works. So it'll be a cool thing. It is a cool thing.

He was nicknamed barrel man, by the way, in the minor leagues. Not because he has a barrel chest or is barrel shaped, though that might be true too. But because of his ability to barrel up the baseball. So hopefully he'll keep doing that for Boston, though he has a 620 OPS through his first nine games with the team. But he has hit a homer, probably a barrel. Thanks to at BYU Statsman on Twitter for nominating Schneeman and to listener and Patreon supporter Small E in the Discord group for nominating Westbrook. Also, some not so great news. After we recorded, it was reported that baseball's got another gambling scandal on its hands. If you remember, November 2022, episode 1923, we did an interview with the creator of the website UMP Scorecards, which, now that I think of it, that would be a pretty big loss if someone were to hire that guy to grade umpires for one team.

I know there are other umpire graders or auditors out there. But we talked to him because his site had graded a perfect game, the first in its history. On the biggest stage, World Series Game 2, umpire Pat Hoberg called every pitch accurately, according to Ump Scorecards. And that wasn't an isolated event. According to Ump Scorecards, Hoberg was the most accurate umpire from 2022 through 2023, 95.5% accurate calls. But perhaps he isn't perfect in every realm. It was reported by The Athletic that MLB has disciplined Hoberg, who somewhat conspicuously has not umpired this season. And seemingly it's because he has been disciplined for violating the league's gambling

rules. Another Friday news dump here. That's when we find out who gets suspended for PEDs and sports betting. We don't yet know what the nature of the betting was, nor do we know the nature of the discipline. Jeff Passan reported that according to his sources, Hoberg has denied betting on baseball. MLB statement said, during this year's spring training, Major League Baseball commenced an investigation regarding a potential violation

of MLB sports betting policies by umpire Pat Hoberg. Mr. Hoberg was removed from the field during the pendency of that investigation. While MLB's investigation did not find any evidence that games worked by Mr. Hoberg were compromised or manipulated in any way, MLB determined that discipline was warranted. Mr. Hoberg has chosen to appeal that determination, therefore we cannot comment further until the appeal process is concluded. Hoberg put out his own statement saying he was appealing Major League Baseball's determination that I should be

disciplined for violating the sports betting policies. While that appeal is pending, it would not be appropriate to discuss the case. That said, I've devoted my adult life to the profession of umpiring and the integrity of baseball is of the utmost importance to me. I look forward to the appeal process and I'm grateful that the Major League Baseball Umpires Association is supporting me in the appeal. So this is not great. We don't know exactly how not great it is. Don't know if we should be saying, say it ain't so, ho. Probably we shouldn't be saying that regardless. But we've mentioned Pat Hoberg many a time for his exemplary umpiring.

I think he came up when we had our recent hypothetical about a perfect umpire and whether that umpire would be beloved. And Hoberg is really respected for his umpiring. And in a way, I guess it's good that he's so respected. Maybe it makes his umping less suspicious somehow. Then again, it goes to show you never know who's going to be connected to this seedy stuff. Now, we don't know. Maybe he just bet illegally on other sports. I'm sure we will find out at some point.

But when we were discussing the recent round of gambling-related suspensions, I think I said an umpire. Now, that would be bad. We don't want a Tim Donaghy-style scandal in MLB, but we will see. The rules are the same for umps and players when it comes to betting. Bet on baseball or softball at any level, one-year suspension. Bet on a game you're involved in, banned for life. And bet on other sports, but not through a legal sportsbook. It depends. Could be just a fine. As we've said before, these issues are not going to go away. Oberg is just 37, by the way. He's been umping full time in MLB since 2017. The appeal will be heard by Rob Manfred.

I guess that's how these things work, but sort of strange because I'm guessing Rob Manfred was involved in that initial discipline. You get a ruling from MLB and then you appeal to the commissioner of MLB. Maybe he puts on robes or an old-timey judge wig or Bobby Valentine fake nose and glasses when he hears the appeal make it seem like it's someone else. We will return to this topic whenever we know more. All right, I'll leave you with this thought. We were talking last time about the trade deadline, and I almost called it hot stove. And then I realized that, no, it's the summer. We can't call it hot stove. But what do we call it instead? Well, listener John in our Patreon Discord group

says, I'm certain this has been proposed before, but I feel like the summer hot stove equivalent should be the grill. We all gather around the grill to talk trades. Of course, this is perfect. The hot grill. Though, as I said on the last episode, I think it might be kind of a cold grill this time. That will do it for today and for this week. Thanks, as always, for listening. You can support Effectively Wild on Patreon 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. Jack Conway, Jay Swift, Andrew Paddock, Adam Goldstein, and Eddie Dudek. Thanks to all of you. Patreon perks include access to the Effectively Wild Discord group for patrons only, monthly bonus episodes, prioritized email answers, discounts on merch and ad-free Fangraphs memberships, and so much more. Check out all the offerings at patreon.com slash effectively wild. If you are a Patreon supporter, you can

message us through the Patreon site. That way we'll know it came from a Patreon supporter. But anyone can also contact us via email at podcast at Fangraphs.com. Send us your questions, your comments, your intro and outro themes. You can rate, review, and subscribe to Effectively Wild on iTunes and Spotify and other podcast platforms. You can join our Facebook group at facebook.com slash group slash effectively wild. You can follow Effectively Wild on Twitter at EW pod. You can find the Effectively Wild subreddit at r slash effectively wild. And you can check the show page and your podcast app for links to upcoming Effectively Wild listener meetups at MLB ballparks. 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. Baseball is a simulation. It's all just one big math equation. You're all about the stats we've compiled. Because you listen to Effectively Wild. With Ben Lindberg and Meg Rowley. Come for the ball, banter's free. Baseball is a simulation.

It's all just one big conversation. Effectively Wild.