Effectively Wild: A FanGraphs Baseball Podcast - Effectively Wild Episode 2328: Rogers Tat

Episode Date: May 30, 2025

Ben Lindbergh and Meg Rowley banter about the Rockies’ historic series losing streak and their rest-of-season projections, an Orioles fan’s decision to get the name of Trevor Rogers tattooed on his butt, a Patrick Corbin innings-eating update, draft prospect Jace LaViolette’s dedication to staying in the lineup, the late-career struggles of Clayton Kershaw, Justin Verlander, […]

Effectively wild, where we can talk about autonomy all day long Effectively wild, we've been in makeup on, I'm like you know it's gonna be a good time I wanna learn about next statistics I wanna hear about none of them RBI's, yeah Tell me about some prospect I should know about Hello and welcome to episode 2328 of Effectively Wild, a fan-graphed baseball podcast brought to you by our Patreon supporters. I'm Meg Raulio, fan-graphs. I am joined as always by Ben Lindberg of The Ringer.

Ben, how are you? Well, I bring you today's sign of the Rockies' apocalypse. This comes from our friends at Optistats, the fun fact finders over there as featured on Effectively Wild, episode 2320. They have a new Rockies stat, new Rockies stat dropped. I don't know if we're gonna open every episode with one of these, but we probably could.

According to at Optistats, the Rockies have now lost 21 consecutive series dating back to last year. That is the longest series losing streak in MLB history. Wow. Yeah, so they just got swept by the Cubs, but they didn't even have to get swept. They just have to lose. And once they did, it became official.

No team has lost as many consecutive series. So they have not won a series since last September. That is, that's pretty extraordinary, obviously. Last September, last September, Ben. Yeah, it's not just extraordinary, it is unprecedented. It is unique. And I think that is the accomplishment of this year's Rockies and last year's White Sox to some extent also, at least at times, which is that they really tested the contention that baseball is a random sport, that anything can happen on any given day or in any given series that we don't bat an eye when the worst team in baseball beats the best team in baseball in any game. It's not even really remarkable. We wouldn't lead a show by bantering about

that. Even a series loss by a great team to a terrible team just wouldn't really be that notable. And yet the Rockies have really put that to the test and have said, let's, let's see if that's actually true. Let's find out, watch us. Let's see if we can not even fluke or luck into a single two out of three at some point over the span of a few months. It's really something, you know, I, I saw one of my cousins over the long weekends. She and her fella were in town. We had dinner, and then we got breakfast. And this is from my mom's side of the family. So, this is a Colorado

cousin. And she was like, how are the Rockies? And I hadn't been, you know, I knew they were bad. Like I had the baseline answer, right? The most important thing I felt't been, you know, I knew they were bad. Like I had the baseline answer, right? The most important thing I felt confident in, which is that they are bad in a way that is rapidly unprecedented. But I was like, surely I've gotten their win total wrong, right? Because they have to have won since the last time we talked and then they hadn't, you know? It's like, it's a really kind of incredible thing. You get used to, well, you know, you get used to a good team losing to a bad team every

now and again. And then they're, they have nine. Ben, they have't won 10, they're, they, Yeah, it's about to be June. It's the end of May. Yeah. Single digit wins, single digit wins. That's, you know, the, candidly, candidly, the most remarkable thing. And perhaps I am thinking about this the wrong way, right? I'm open to that notion

that I'm thinking about this the wrong way, right? I'm open to that notion, that I'm thinking about this the wrong way. But in some respects, it's incredible that they aren't more than 25 games out of first place, you know? Like, doesn't it feel like they should be like 30 games, 35? I mean, I get it. I get it.

I know. I mean, like with every passing day, further and further from God's light. And it doesn't help that the entire NLOS lost yesterday, including the Diamondbacks, which at some point we had, we need to unpack the mystery of the Arizona Diamondbacks. I don't understand this team. They should be better than they are. I'm confounded. But it's remarkable really. And, you know, I don't want to impugn the resolve of the people on the field for any given Rockies game, right? Like baseball is a game of failure. Famously. This is the, this is a cliche about the game. A cliche? Like, what was that? Like, cliche? Like I was,

I don't even know. I think you should leave it in. I mean, we're exploring new ways to say words. But you know, it's a cliche about the sport. Cliche, cliche, cliche about the sport. Yes. It's a game of failure, right? One that I quibble with because I maintain that they're all games of failure. That baseball is not actually unique in that respect or even unusual.

But yes. But yes, it is one of the things that we think of the sport, or at least many of us do, if not all. And I think part of that is, you know, there's the losing of it. And then there's the grind of the length of the season, right? That you can find yourself in a spot where you are on the wrong end of the ledger and you still have to play like a hundred games, it's so many, right? And so I think it wears you down in a sort of special way. And so I think that the guys, these guys are used to failing. They're used to having to wipe it and move on, right? That they are pros. And even if they are not as good either individually or collectively as their brethren in the big leagues, they're big leaguers. But when you're looking at nine wins on May 29th, on some level, don't you? Send your union rep to the PA and go,

so like how much of this do we have to do? You know, like is there, is there recourse? Is there a secret rule in one of the many rule books that says that if we get to a certain point, we can just concede the season and move on? Like it is a, it's a grim kind of project now. You know where they went wrong was firing Bud Black. Because under Bud Black...

Yeah, they had a robust 175 winning percentage this season. They were 7-33. Right. And under Warren Schaeffer, they have a 125 winning percentage, which is merely 2-14. So if they had kept playing at the Bud Black pace... an underworn Schaeffer, they have a 125 winning percentage, which is merely two and 14. So if they had kept playing at the black pace,

they'd be in double digit wins by now. So they pulled the plug too soon, clearly. Clearly. Yeah, it's just, I feel for their fans. I do feel for the guys and I understand they are the ones doing the failing. I don't want to almost weirdly infantilize them by separating them from their own responsibility for the situation they find themselves in, but they're also miscast in general. Not all

of them, but they're largely miscast. This isn't a big league club. This isn't a big league caliber club. This is the kind of club that makes people who don't really have a good grounding in analytics be like, what is replacement level really? Does this undermine a central tenant of your entire value framework? It is dad business. They should be allowed to smoke weed on the field. I think that's where I'm at. Like, cause then, you know, we talk about banana ball and all of its attendant silliness. I'm not ready to totally wind up into my savanna

bananas take. I'm not here. That's not our project today. You know, that's a bigger, that's a bigger conversation. It's one I'm not ready for. But, but the tone might hint to people what I think of a Nanopal, which is, you know, it's not for me, but, but, but what we haven't done is let those and only those who want to partake to be clear. I am not, I am not advocating some sort of weird baseball MK Ultra program where we force drugs upon the Colorado Rockies. That would be extreme. But I do wonder how different would it be if they got to play a little bit stoned? Would they have a better time? Or sometimes one could, not me, I never. But sometimes you think you're going to have a nice chill night and like watch something stupid, probably with Nick Cage. And then it hits you the wrong way and you feel anxious and bad the whole evening. Would it be like that? Would they be like very aware of how much everyone is watching them?

But maybe not, hence that lawsuit, you know? Maybe that guy should yell, don't worry, we're on the party deck, we're consumed by booze, you smoke away. They should probably do edibles, not smoke though, because like that's, you know, for the children, it can be, because you want to have plausible deniability for the children. And if somebody's just like lighting up a massive spliff on the field, that removes the mystery, are they stoned? Are they stoned Rockies? But if they're just having some little gummies or a mint, sometimes it's a little mint,

sometimes it's a chocolate bar. You don't know if you're getting the hyper concentrated end. That happens sometimes too. Anyway, I'm just saying that let them play stoned if you're gonna make them play the rest of the season. But again, only if they want to. Yeah, it couldn't impair their performance that much because there's not that far to go. They are still technically officially professional athletes.

So, yeah, maybe Edibles, you don't want to lower the lung capacity, but still, it might improve their mindset, at least. I mean, it depends on the person, I suppose. But they could also they could sign Stone Garrett. He got released by the Nationals. He could be stoned Garrett for the Rockies potentially, if they want to go that route. They should trade for Blaze Alexander. Yes, exactly. They could go with the all weed team. But really, there was some sign of progress, which I saw Christopher Kamka

tweeted that the Rockies allowed only nine runs in that series to the Cubs, which was the fewest they've allowed in a series this season, and they were swept anyway. So I don't know whether that's actually a good sign or not, because hey, we got the pitching under control. We weren't hemorrhaging runs, and yet even having done that,

we still got swept because our offense is so impotent. So it depends. That's kind of a glass half full, glass half empty situation. How you interpret that one. But yet they not only challenge notions of replacement level, they also challenge projection systems. And we went through this with the White Sox too last year where I was consistently taking the under on the projections,

even though generally I abide by the projections and subscribe to them and think that I don't have any super special insight that allows me to beat those systems. And yet there was just no way I was buying that the White Sox were gonna be that good that they would even play at a semi respectable clip over the remainder of the season. And they did not, they fell short

of whatever those projections were. And we're going through the same thing with the Rockies now. And Alex Kirschner popped this question to me on Hang Up and Listen the other day, just how bad I thought the Rockies were gonna be. And I did take the under significantly on the projections, but now I'm questioning whether I went under enough. Cause right now, according to the playoff odds page, they are projected to win 50 games.

Right. Not happening. Right. I mean, no, I mean, it would be, it would be legitimately shocking. It would because that's a rest of season winning percentage projection of 388. It's just, it's hard for me to imagine that happening. It's not as if there are really reinforcements on the way. I mean, maybe some injured guys get back,

but it's not as if you can look at them and say, oh, they're gonna trade a bunch of guys at the deadline because A, they're the Rockies, but B, who, they're going to trade a bunch of guys at the deadline. Cause a they're the Rockies, but B who would they trade really? And I just don't know how low I would go with my projection. Cause it's the same with the white Sox where they were truly a terrible team last year, but they, they did really underachieve and they probably had bad luck and misfortune on top of being terrible.

And the Rockies right now are six games below their base runs record. So things like negative 175 run differential. It's incredible. Again, it is May 29th, Ben. It's May 29th. There are teams. There are teams. Look, I know that like I'm about to say something that's incredibly obvious

because it's like, well, no, there are teams that have positive run differentials at the end of the season. I understand, but like for you to have a run differential that putrid this early, it is a, like, I guess what I'm trying to say is, even though they play baseball in the mood and you might have a baseline expectation

of higher variance for the performance of this club, year to year, regardless of the roster composition, just factoring in the cores of it all, even with all of that understood. Amazing, unfathomable, really? No other team is in negative triple digits, though the Orioles of all teams are kind of close. So yeah, I don't know how low I would go,

but I would definitely not project them to get to 50 wins. It's just they're on pace right now for what, like 28, or something like basically half that is just. This was a playoff team in 2018. 26. Sorry. 26 wins is what they're currently playing at a pace for. But yeah, it's. They were a playoff team in 2018, Ben. Yeah, they were. That's a long time team in 2018, Ben. Yeah, they were.

I mean, that's a long time ago in baseball terms. It is, but it isn't, you know? Like, it is, but it isn't. Yeah, the sad thing is they are tied for the highest projected rest of season strength of schedule, too. So it's not like they've played the hard part of the schedule and it's just going to be smooth sailing from here on out. Now it seems to make that much of a difference

who they're playing. I think that the answer is clearly that like, there is no, it's all hard schedule when you're this bad. Like there's, I mean, even facing off against teams that are demonstrably pretty bad is hard when you're this bad, when you're this bad, when you're this bad. And they are-

Like their May schedule has been pretty tough. They've played the Giants, then the Tigers, then the Padres, then the Rangers, then the Diamondbacks, then the Phillies, then the Yankees, then the Cubs, and now they're playing the Mets. Those are all teams that are decent or were at least expected to be good. So they haven't had that many series where they really stank up the joint against bad

teams. I guess they had in mid April, there was a nationals series. They lost two out of three in that one. And then they got swept by the Reds. But they have had a tough schedule. But yeah, Ben, it's just, they're beyond really strength of schedule adjustments because they're just seemingly not a major league caliber team. They have had the, they're tied for the second highest strength of

schedule to date according to ESPN. But yeah. It's a grim kind of project, you know, it's, I feel like merits investigation by some sort of human rights organization or something. I don't know. We got an email from listener, Patreon supporter Jake, who responded to your plea for Rocky spans to write write in and one did. Often we get a flurry of email responses to a prompt like that.

Well, we got one, but. It felt like the right number. And I don't say that to knock the email, which was thorough and well-considered, but that feels, that feels like the right number of emails to get when it's about, you know, being a Rockies fan. Seems right. Forget it, Jake. It's Coors. But here's what Jake wrote. Listening to your discussion about Kyle Clark's segment on Nine News, Meg was curious if there were any regular attendees of Rockies games

who could speak to the makeup of fan splits at these games. Jake says, I bought the Rockies ballpark pass this year, which allows me to attend 78 out of 82 home games for about 200 bucks, which- It's a good deal. It is a good deal, aside from the product that is being put on the field. It's still a good deal.

It's still a good deal, yeah. It's still a good deal. Even with a garbage team, it's still a good deal, in my opinion. I have attended a lot of Rockies games over the past three-ish years. I've lived in Denver and my general experience is that there is always a very large contingent of fans of the visiting team, anywhere from 20% when teams like the Pirates are in town to greater than 50% for the Cubs, Dodgers, Yankees.

The Yankees are such a huge draw that the ballpark pass doesn't work for that single series out of the year. Should be 81 home games, right? Unless the Rockies have an extra home game, which they're probably entitled to. We should give them that, but no. No, I think we shouldn't. I think we should spare them that. I would argue that the bigger problem is the rooftop party deck.

As you were just saying, the joke I've heard repeated by many folks here in Denver is that Coors Field has one of the best bars in Denver that also happens to host baseball games. The party deck is almost always packed with all kinds of fans, regardless of date, opponent, time, et cetera. I acknowledge that I'm contributing to the problem that Kyle mentions, where I attend dozens of games a year

to see as many stars of other teams that I can. And this has brought conflict for me too. But ultimately, I love baseball. where I attend dozens of games a year to see as many stars of other teams that I can, and this has brought conflict for me too. But ultimately, I love baseball, I love the sport generally, and I want to take the chance to see the game in person when it's a simple 15-minute bus ride away. Love the show, love Kyle Clark, and still love the experience of a Rockies game, even if they are historically inept. Look, I haven't been to a ton of games, of course, like probably fewer than folks might expect given that I have family in Colorado.

But I have had a great time every time I have gone to a Rockies game. Now they, the last one I went to, the club was closer, much closer to respectability than they are now. But the beer is good, the concessions that I had, I can't remember what I ate, but I remember thinking that they were good, you know, and it wasn't crazy expensive. It's a good time. I get it. And, you know, I think if you can want to be around baseball, have the ambient experience of baseball and to

the emails point, like enjoy seeing really good teams. I think that's fine. I think it's a fine thing, you know? I think it's fine. I think so too. All right. Unlike the Rockies who are not fine. They're very far from fine.

Far from fine. Yeah. Yes. Speaking of teams that have been terrible and the players on them, I just mentioned that the Orioles had the second worst run differential on the season. Here's something that we need to issue a ruling on, I think. So Trevor Rogers made his major league debut for the Orioles over the weekend and pitched well. He actually went

six and a third. He did not allow a run. He was facing the Red Sox, who have also underperformed their base runs record by six games, just like the Rockies. Rogers five strikeouts and one hit by pitch and no walks and solid game that the Orioles won two to one. And this was something of a surprise really, because Rogers had not pitched at all well in the minors this year. In fact, he had an eight plus ERA in a handful of games, a double A and triple A. And given that a 30 year old Orioles fan named Calvin Wooden, who lives in Pennsylvania, he tweeted before this game, if Trevor Rogers pitches a shut 30 year old Orioles fan named Calvin Wooden, who lives in Pennsylvania.

He tweeted before this game, if Trevor Rogers pitches a shutout, I'll get his name tattooed on my ass. Okay. So this was, this was on May 24th at 6 46 PM Eastern time. That was the day that Trevor Rogers pitched. So that was, I guess, shortly before first pitched and Calvin Wooden put this out there. And Trevor Rogers did not allow a run. He pitched six and a third shutout innings. And so Calvin Wooden is getting a

tattoo of Trevor Rogers, his name on his ass. Now I would submit that he did not need to do that because I mean, for any number of reasons. Cause tweets aren't binding. Yes. But, but beyond that, okay, Calvin Wooden is a man of his word. I respect that, but he did not pitch a shutout. He pitched six and a third shutout innings. And that is meaningfully different in my mind, right? I mean, a shutout is a complete game

where you do not allow a run. It's not six and a third innings. What if he had got one out and was pulled with an injury? Would that then qualify for ass tattoo? I don't think so, according to this tree. So then about you saying ass tattoo, that makes me very uncomfortable. Can't quite identify why.

Yeah, but wouldn't went ahead with it. And this is not the first time that he has done such a thing. Wait, I'm sorry. Continue, but wait, continue. Andy Koska at the Baltimore banner, which does excellent journalism and also this story, which is also good journalism, but just, you know, on a lower stakes subject,

although pretty high stakes for Calvin Wooden, I would argue. I mean, maybe not. Maybe he has a different understanding of his own ass and it's immutability than we do. Yes, I would say so. And so the Baltimore banner spoke to Wooden who said, I don't want it to come off as though I was hoping

Trevor Rogers was going to have a bad start. I was being a Debbie Downer. This team's got me in my emotions a little bit. Fair enough. I was maybe hoping it would be reverse psychology, and I guess it worked because he ended up throwing the best game that one of our starters has all year. Now, I doubt Trevor Rogers saw the tweet in that moment.

I was... Okay, so thank you for anticipating one of my questions, which is do we know if Trevor Rogers had any idea about this prior to it happening? I don't even know if he knows now, although hopefully someone informed him, but- I mean, is it hopefully? Well, yeah, I'm not sure if I would want to know this actually. Would you want to know? I don't know if I'd want to know. Yeah, if any effectively wild fans have gotten our names tattooed on some part of their... I don't want to know about that.

Yeah, I don't need to know about that. I'm not saying I disapprove. I just, I'm not sure if it would improve my mood to know that or not. But it's not like this tweet went viral or anything and people were holding him to account. In fact, even now, after the story circulated, it has 15 retweets slash quotes and I guess 500 faves, likes, I mean, 30 replies. It's not a viral tweet by any stretch of the imagination. So it's not as if he was going to be shamed by the internet if he didn't go through with this and I would be the first to defend him because I don't think he needs to. I don't know whether it's relevant that he's, he wrote pitches a shut out, shut out as two words instead of one, but I don't think that changes anything.

It just, it wasn't a shut out anyway, hoping it would be reverse psychology. I guess it works. And so this week he is planning to have Rogers' name tattooed on his butt. I don't know whether this has already transpired, but when the name Trevor Rogers is affixed to his Askin, it will join the two- Oh, Askin?

Sorry. Askin, what are you doing? What are you doing over there? Askin. It will join the names of two other sports legends, Heston Kirstad and NFL quarterback, Gino Smith. So, yeah. Wait, how?

Okay, sorry. So he's going to have three. Yeah. What are the, what were the circumstances of the Kirstad and Gino tattoos? I will tell you thanks to the Baltimore banner and its diligent reporting. So the Kirstad Grand Slam, he hit a Grand Slam last year, June 29th, I guess. And he tweeted, if Heston hits this Grand Slam, I'll get his name tatted on my ass.

This was June 29th, 8.45 PM. And then the reply to it is, it took 13 seconds for me to regret this tweet. So he then hit a Grand Slam, and having just put that out on the internet, he felt that he needed to get the Grand Slam. So just put that out on the internet, he felt that he needed to get the Grand Slam. So there is a picture. It is a tasteful picture. You can't actually tell that it's an ass. It could be any part of his body, but you can see that the, it's like

an insignia. There are two bats crossed. It's actually quite tasteful. And on one side it says Heston and on the other side it says Kirstad. And on one side it says Heston and on the other side it says Kerstad and on the top in the crux of the bats, it says Grand Slam and below it says 629, 2024. So that was the circumstance of the Kerstad tat. But that was proceeded by years, by about eight years, Geno Smith was the first.

And that tattoo says Geno Smith, number seven, 1023, 16. So this was years and years. They went like eight years between tats. Wait, wait. Yeah. So the year was 2016, I'm quoting here from the Baltimore banner, and the Ravens were middling.

So were the New York Jets. And when the teams met October 24th, Wooden tweeted a similar proposition for his small number of followers. If Smith beat the Ravens in his return as a starting quarterback, his name would go on Wooden's butt. Well, Smith tore his ACL in the second quarter. Ryan Fitzpatrick entered and engineered the Jets win against Baltimore. And when Wooden ran a Twitter poll for whether he still had to get Smith's name on his behind, the overwhelming verdict was yes. Well, that was his mistake, obviously, opening it up to Twitter and saying, should I get a tattoo of Geno Smith on my butt? Obviously, Twitter is going to say yes. This is

how you get... Twitter is feral. What are you doing? Why are you letting Twitter? Oh, this is how you get Bodie McBoatface as the name, because you just open up to the Internet. It's always going to be the most trollish or entertaining one. People are going to laugh at your expense and your Geno Smith, but tattoo. And obviously he was willing to abide by that outcome or he never would have run the Twitter poll in the first place. I don't think he ran a Twitter poll about this Trevor Rogers

and whether he was obligated even though it wasn't a shutout, but he just willingly went ahead with that one. So he obviously, he's okay with this in a way that I think most people would be. I don't wanna call this a kink, but he's into this in a way that I think most people would not be. And he says, it's not for attention. I was raised by a father who loved to make jokes,

likes to make people laugh. That's just what I like to do. That's why I make dumb memes on Twitter. I guess that kind of is for attention in a way, but in a nice way. I mean, you know, he has about 3,000 Twitter followers and it says, you know, he's an O's and Raven's fan and then it says, Ashtat guy.

So he is embracing this aspect of his identity. He also says in this article, the reason it's there is the only people who are actually going to see it are the people I wanna see it or my girlfriend, which is a funny sentence construction because it makes it sound like he doesn't want his girlfriend to see it, which might be true,

but I guess she's probably going to, I don't know about their relationship. He says, and I already got it cleared by her the third time. She's sick of it at this point, but she doesn't care. Which again, sounds contradictory. She's sick of it, but doesn't care. It's not like I'm getting a tattoo on my arm or my forehead. True, it is a different proposition.

It is out of sight and mostly out of mind most of the time. Okay, so like, here's the thing though, that is true. And look, I don't have any tattoos. I don't have an issue with tattoos, like whatever, it's your body, do with it what you want. I have heard from people who have tattoos that you can develop like a, not a fixation or an addiction, but like once you've gotten one, you sort of, you've broken the seal and it seems like many, not all certainly,

but many people end up having multiple tattoos, right? You kind of get a taste for it a little bit. Like how would you feel if you were Heston Kirstad or Geno Smith or Rogers, like, and you knew that your name was on somebody's keister? Would you feel good about that? Would you feel weird about it? Is it flattering? It's weird. It's, I guess it's one of those things that comes along with fame and celebrity

and high salaries. Is it? One of those things? Is it though? Evidently. Oh boy. But yeah, it's not something you necessarily expect, I guess, when you enter this line of work. I wouldn't. I wouldn't anyway. I just think that it is fine, first of all, to say I was doing a goof on Twitter. I didn't mean this.

You've already demonstrated a resolve around it, so perhaps you want to be consistent. But especially the Gino one is like the wildest of all because it's one thing to get the name of an athlete on one of your favorite teams permanently affixed to your body. It strikes me as a slightly different category of behavior to get an opposing player's name tattooed on your body and a separate category still to do it in a game where he very famously like f**ked his knee. And then Ryan Fitzpatrick came in and everyone was like, it's magic and like got obsessed with Ryan Fitzpatrick.

And now he just wears Hawaiian shirts on Thursday night football a lot. Even when it's cold, sometimes it's like, Ryan, put a jacket on. He does wear jackets. He's not a fool, but those shirts might convince you otherwise, but I think they're fine. So it's a lot, you know? And do you feel kind of, do you feel cursed if you're him? Like, just because surely, you know, we struggle,

I think, as human beings to really think probabilistically. And so do you feel like you have angered some sort of sport god that you've rolled snake eyes three times? But maybe you don't think of it that way. Surely, if it really bothered him, he'd stop saying he'd do it. But also, I don't know, what a fascinating psychology. Because it's like, on some level, it's the ultimate in not taking yourself too seriously

because you have an objectively silly thing, three objectively silly things tattooed on your ass. But it's also in some way wildly self-important because it's like, who would know? You know, like who's keeping track of the state of this guy's ass other than his girlfriend and the people he wants to show it to, which is like probably a piece of this that also merits exploration, which is like, are you just dropping trow at the slightest provocation to show people your hinder? Is that what you're doing?

Wow. You know, you were worried we weren't going to have stuff to talk about today. You were like, we got to, you know, we got to do meet a major leaguer. And then I got busy with editing. And then I ended up doing a playoff odds thing that probably took as long as like meet a major leaguer. But it did inspire me to ask for a new feature for the site. So in that respect, it was productive. But I was just like, I don't know, we'll probably come up with something.

We've been talking about a random guy on Twitter's ass for like 20 minutes. Yes, the story does not delve into the aspect of it that most appealed to me, though, the pedantic aspect of the shutout and this not technically being one. It does get into just how his family feels about it. His mom and grandma had some misgivings, but they still love him. And how his- It would be funny if they were like, we no longer love him.

I mean, it would be sad for him, but it would be kind of intense if they were like, the first one we could overlook, but by the third one, we had to put our foot down and say, no Thanksgiving for you until they're off of there. Trevor Rogers is a tattoo too far. We have disowned you. But I hope Trevor Rogers doesn't know. If I were Trevor Rogers, I would just not because like, again, it's like, it's not like this guy is going to be in proximity to Trevor Rogers

to show it to him. So ultimately, it doesn't really matter. But also also I would be, I would just find it odd. Like I, you know, I'd find it weird that like somewhere up there, there's a guy with my name on his ass and it's not the guy of it. I don't want to put anything on Trevor Rogers, but it's just like a person up there. Yeah. You know, anyone. That doesn't matter whose butt, any butt. Any butt, you know? His girlfriend, they were two months into dating

when he got the Kirstad tattoo and she accompanied him. Which was the second? The second one? The second, yeah, she accompanied him to the tattoo parlor. Wow. I think they have to get married now. Yeah, he went eight years

between the first and second tattoos. So if you were to extrapolate now, it seems like this is an exponential increase in the timeline. It's really accelerating. And so I don't know what that means. The story does explore. Yeah. What can it tell us about like, you know, the gosh, it doesn't mean anything. It's a guy getting tattoos on his ass. Yeah. It's nothing. It means... The story does note that he's running out of space on his right buttock. And he could either add Rogers's name beside it, close to the thigh, or he could go under Smith's name, or he could jump over to the left cheek and wouldn't says, they're just butt cheeks. It will get on me one way or another. And so he...

They're just butt cheeks. I mean, like, on the one hand, that might be the most profound sentiment I've ever heard in my entire life. But on the other hand, they're your butt cheeks, though. Dude, like, what does the Gino one, what does the Gino tattoo look like? Did you already tell me that? You only told me the Curestead one. It just says his name and number and the date. Okay.

And the date. Okay. Cure date. Okay. Kirstad one's a little more elaborate. It was graphic designed by a friend of Wooden's. So we'll see what he has in store for the Trevor Rogers. Did the friend know where the tattoo was going when he designed it? I'd imagine so. Was he told that in advance?

Probably. Will he change the way you think about it? You know, I think it would have to, you know, if it's, you're putting more, I mean, I'm sorry, I don't want to besmirch his friend or like make him feel self-conscious about it, but like you're putting more effort into a graphic design that is going on an arm or, you know, a thigh, you know, one of those weird tattoos.

I do have a little bit of judgment about this. Like the tattoos that are on the back of the calf, it just seems like that is an area that is prone to changing in size. And like I would worry about the scale of the tattoo remaining consistent. I suppose that's it. Not my calves, unfortunately, but we've covered that on the Patreon bonus episode. I know. I didn't mean to make you feel self-conscious, but you know, I think your calves are probably fine. That's none of my business. I just mostly think, here's what I will reiterate my general feeling about fame and the way people interact with it, which is that you as a consumer of media, of sports, of music,

whatever, podcasts, your opinion of them, you're allowed to think whatever you want about it. And you're allowed to say whatever you want about it. And you're allowed to say whatever you want about it to other people, even in a public forum. I mean, I think like be a reasonable human being and not a weirdo, but like technically, it's not my business. But when you make it, when you make the person who is the like subject of the opinion or the devotion aware of it, then it's like, hey, I get to think that's weird though. I get to, that's when I, that's when you get to be like,

so, I don't know how I feel about my name on your ass. Like, it's not a shrine. I think you should keep them all on one cheek. If only because, if only because it puts a natural barrier, like there's a natural limit to how much real estate there is over there. Yes, once you expand to the second cheek, there's just really, why stop there? Why stop there?

You're gonna end up tattooed from head to toe in like athlete names. The name is small, I guess. It's no shrine, but I do see that in a follow-up reply, he did refer to it as the wall of niche male athletes. So... That's rude. That's kind of rude. He actually, he said someone questioned him

because they said, saved by the bullpen because Trevor Rogers was relieved, implying that, oh, he's off the hook, he's spared because he didn't pitch a shutout. But then Wooden said, truthfully, I meant just himself and however long his outing was because I didn't know if shutout. But then Wooden said, truthfully, I meant just himself and however long his outing was, because I didn't know if he'd have pitch limitations or not with his injury stuff this year.

So he was willing. I'm sorry. He was one inning, I think, into the outing by the time he tweeted this. And so he was really just, he was rolling the dice here. Well, okay. But so here's the thing. He wanted to put Trevor Rodgers name on his ass.

On some level, what he was searching for was a reason to do it because you're not given an off ramp and like that, and then elect to keep driving if it's not something you want. I also will just submit that he should perhaps engage in some amount of self examination because the,ination because the notion that this is not like attention seeking behavior. No, no, my friend, you are like, I gotta get a third guy's name on my butt

and you had a reason to not do it and you decided to do it anyway. And you don't do that unless you're inviting the follow-up question, which is, well, can you prove it? And then you get to, and you're're like just tweeting pictures of your butt. I mean Yeah, I it's his business, but he made it my business, right? Yeah, he involved a paper of record in his hometown Right. He he inspired reporting and so I'm just responding to the news

I'm not trying to shame the guy think it like whatever, whatever you want tattooed on your body is your business. And we've made it other people's business on this podcast, I suppose. And I just noticed that the first comment on the banner story is, come on, Andy, is this really a story? I have been a reader for years at this point, trying to help this periodical become a legitimate source for news. This story should not have made publication. Sorry. Yeah, there are some more complimentary comments under that, but there are probably some effectively wild listeners who are feeling the same way.

So perhaps we should move on. We can move on, but I will simply say that when you are the fan of a baseball team that is underperforming your expectation to the degree that the Orioles are, which to be clear is not as bad as say the Rockies, but they are doing worse such that we have an occasion to talk about the future of the franchise multiple times on this podcast. Again, it is May 29th and we are having that conversation. I think you invite AskBaseWhimsy wherever you can find it. I think you're like, here it is. Now, you can, I think, correctly comment that the notion that this is not attention seeking behavior false, patently. The idea that this is a guy buffeted by the winds of fate, also

wrong, right? But it can be a fun little whatever, like, don't worry, there's going to be plenty of occasion to write about how they should fire Elias. Like, we're not going to be short on those stories. You can do a butt-based thing. Sure. You know, we are pro-butts on this pod. This is a pro-butt podcast. We are simply saying, it's kind of a lot what you're doing over there with your own butt, guys. Some might say that the Orioles have played like S this season, so he's just making it official.

Couple other things before we get to your playoff odds prompt. Just want to note that it's been Corbin time all season. Patrick Corbin has now pitched 48 innings. And as you may recall or not, because famously you cannot recall our bold preseason predictions, but not even once. I believe Ben Clemens did predict that Corbin would pitch 100 innings. And I was disappointed that he had picked that because I was gonna go bolder.

And I was gonna say that Corbin would lead the Rangers in innings pitched, even though he's Patrick Corbin and was one of the most durable, but also one of the least valuable starting pitchers in baseball over the past several seasons and was picked up kind of in an emergency shorthanded situation shortly before the season started. Well, there are only three Rangers pitchers ahead of Patrick Corbin's innings

total right now. There's Nathan Ivaldi who's at 69 and a third and who was removed from his most recent start with a triceps soreness which was said to be precautionary and supposedly he's making his next start so hopefully he's okay. But you've got Ivaldi, you've got Tyler Malley at 66 and you've got Jacob deGrom at 63 and a third. So they all have healthy leads. And if they all finish out the season, then in theory, they should all finish with more innings than Patrick Corbin. But that's quite a trio when it comes to injury track records. And I know if Aldi has been more durable as he's gone on and aged,

but put those three in their IL stints and their surgeries together and you'd have yourself a lengthy list. So I'm just saying, I am not betting against the dark horse candidate here, Patrick Corbin. In fact, if I had been able to make that bold prediction, I'd be feeling pretty decent about it right now,

because I mean, he has been roughly replacement level according to fan graphs were, but he also has a sub for ERA and he's gonna get his chances. And all those guys ahead of him have pitched well and considerably better, but I'm just saying, all it takes is one IL stint for each of those guys and it's the little Corbin that could. It's the Energizer Corbin. He's just going

to keep taking that ball as long as they keep handing it to him. So he's still in the running. That's all I'm saying. I don't think it's value that should be accounted for in war any more than it already is, right? Like war is accounting stats. So if you throw innings like, and they're decent, you're going to accrue war. And that's not all because it's a fit-based war, at least ours is. And so like there's an interplay there. But like, I don't think you should get special extra value attributed to you by taking the ball every five days and throwing like a reasonably long start every time you do. But I think that we underappreciate sometimes like the glue, you know? Those guys end up being kind of glue guys for their rotations in a way that

we get so dazzled by the aces. And then sometimes like half your rotation gets hurt at once and you're like, oh, thank God, like a guy who can just throw six. And are they great innings? No. Are they workable, serviceable innings? Are they innings that if your offense is not being like ridiculously poor that night, can get you a win? Yeah. Incredible.

Amazing. Because, you know, not every team has that. You know who could use Patrick Corbin right now? The Baltimore Orioles. The Baltimore Orioles would have been so well served by bringing in Patrick Corbin. Boy howdy, you know? Maybe so. Yeah.

Yeah, I think the anti-stat heads who still exist, they overstate the case when they say that saprometrics types don't care about innings or that it's all about the rate stats and the strikeout rates and all, because again, it is accounting stat and it does consider bulk. I think there's maybe a little bit of value on the margins there that perhaps war doesn't account for. Russell Carlton's written about this. I'm open to that. Yeah, you know, you save the bullpen and then you have your high leverage guys who are more

available the next day, let's say. There's a little bit of that that is perhaps tough to account for, but yeah. Okay, so speaking of injuries, just wanted to, for the second episode in a row, shout out a college baseball player. What? This may be unprecedented, this streak. Happening to you.

I know, and in this case, I guess it's a more prominent baseball player, but Jace LaVolette. I don't know whether you've heard about this, but yeah, so he's like an actual guy, right? Yeah. He's a first-rounder. He had a rough season, but he'll still go in the first round, I would think. Yeah, so he plays for Texas A&M, and he's like a real prospect. And he gutted his way through this SEC tournament. He played through a fractured hand or I guess fractured fingers.

Like, I don't know that I've quite heard of a player doing exactly what he did here because it was on Thursday, he was hit by a pitch and then his left hand was in a cast and a splint, like there were splints around, I think, two of his fingers. Oh boy. And yeah, and then, you know, he was ruled out for the rest of the tournament, unsurprisingly.

And then it turned out that no, he was back. He was actually going to play because they told him that his fracture couldn't get worse, that he couldn't damage it further, which sounds almost hard to believe, but that is the medical advice that he and his team received. And so he was told that he could play without doing further damage as long as he could manage the pain. And so he did, and he played, and he said that he would run through a brick wall

if it could enable him to be in the lineup. And so he was in the lineup and he was DHing. I guess there was that much. He didn't have to put a glove on and play a position. This was in his left hand where the break was. And so he managed to grip the bat differently so that I guess the grip was not quite impaired by this break.

Again, it's very hard to imagine like how this could not impair your performance, but like he had surgery, he had to have surgery. And then he was just back in and his coach says, that's just one of the most, maybe the most incredible things I've ever seen on a baseball field. And it just shows a lot about how much that guy cares

about his team. So with the bottom two fingers of his left hand protruding out of a cut batting glove and wrapped together in a splint. He changed the grip on his bat by overlapping his hands to support the fractured finger. Despite the pain, he managed to drive in two of A&M's three runs on the night with a single Anisak fly. The latter contact flew off the bat with 104 mph exit speed, according to the broadcast. So evidently he was actually able to put a pretty good swing on the ball somehow here. And then he said after the game, it's pretty clear.

I said it in an interview the other day, I'd run through a brick wall and I want to win. That's about it. I just wanted to win and the Aggies won the game when he got hurt over Auburn, but then I think they lost despite his heroics on Friday when he returned. And so he was then able to rest after that. So what I was going to ask is like, does this bump him up your draft board or down? Does this make you raise him on the preface list? Because clearly he has want.

And I don't think you could classify this as I wash. Cause like- Sure could not. No, he's in there. Like if he had just said, you know, get me in there. If it had been like a hold me back sort of situation in a fight where you don't actually want to fight. You want people to hold you back.

If he'd been like, I wanted to get in there, but coach said no or the doc said no or something. By the way, looking at the press conference here, he does not just have eye black. He has eye cheeks. He's wearing, is this eye wash? This is like cheek wash? Cheek wash this Tire face is this a thing it's I black wash this is yes

This is a thing it is like very much a thing in the college game right now Okay, where a lot of these guys it's a crop There are multiple programs that where this has become a trend so it's across, there are multiple programs that, where this has become a trend. So it's not just an A and M thing. I don't know, I don't love it. I think it looks kind of weird and doofy. I don't really understand,

but also, I mean, who am I, you know? I mean, there is I, you know? I mean, there is, there's science behind Eye Black, right? Like it's not, it's a surreal thing. It's not a fight necklace. Like I, you know, it does reduce glare from either the sun or the stadium lights, right? Cause it absorbs the lights.

And so I guess in theory, the more of it that's on your face, the less, I don't know whether there's a correlation. I don't think that the determination that is being made is like, oh, this has increased utility to reduce glare. So let's have it go all the way to the bottom. I think this is a bunch of like 18 to 21 year old dudes being like, this looks cool.

Yeah, that sounds likely. Yeah. So, so you want a certain amount of grit and determination and pain tolerance in a professional athlete, because at some point you're going to have to play through something. Yeah. This is fairly extreme to the point where I don't know whether it, it crosses over into worrisome.

Like you do want some degree of self-preservation. And often that can help your team. Now in this situation, okay, it's the end of the season and it's the tournament and it's the end of his college career and whatever, he's gonna have a break. And if he did have a break, but I mean a break from playing. And if he can't actually damage himself, then I guess fine, no harm done other than the pain

that he is suffering here. But the mentality there, you don't actually want someone to run through a brick wall because that would be bad for them. And there are many players in baseball history who have had that mentality and have run into walls. And it turns out that if you do keep running into walls that is probably bad at some point. Like you you actually hurt yourself and thus by extension you hurt your team. Kind of the the pistol

Pete Reiser example of a guy who's just laying it all out there and just is so no holds barred in his approach. Sometimes teams will talk to players about that. Like, hey, don't run into the wall or don't dive if you don't need to. And so there's something to that also. And I don't know Chase Lavallette's entry history or I guess he's been pretty durable. I don't know if this is part of a pattern,

but I'm sure there are some people, this is almost like a football mentality. This is like, this transcends baseball in a sense. And so it almost seems out of place. Like he's had a good college career. He's had a thousand OPS, three seasons in a row. He almost had, yeah, he almost got to 20 homers this season. He would have been, I think, one of eight players to have 20 plus homers three times. I saw that stat in college. You know, like he's been an impressive player, but yeah, there's a certain point

where I would almost worry about making a long-term investment in a player who like has that kind of disregard for his own wellbeing-being, perhaps. It strikes me as the sort of instinct that can be reined in and managed. I don't know that it would really change my opinion of the kid negatively. I am not a doctor, but the notion that you can't like a worsen the injury seems surprising to me. Sounds dubious. I mean, I buy it, I guess if that's what they're saying. But I, yeah.

What if you got hit again though by a bitch? Like, I guess it would just break again. You know, I don't know. I guess you can always break something hitting as he proved. Right. So I think that you could worry about it from a like, you know, if he were to suffer additional injury, maybe that changes the calculus for you. Although like, does it, does it if the injury in question is one like this where it's like, you know, it's not like he has like a ligament thing or like a soft tissue injury. Like it's a break as a result of being hit. Like that's not a, you know, it's not like one of those non-contact ones that makes you nervous about like, oh, are the bones bad? I don't think that's how they think about it. I don't think they phrase

it quite that way, but that's like what I would think of like, oh, are you pulling apart on your own volition? Right. So, um, I don't know that it would like really change my perception of him in a negative way. I might have some questions for the coaching staff of Texas A&M because it's like, okay, you've been told he can't worsen it, I guess. But first of all, is it really I know know that he managed to make some solid contact and driving a run and whatnot, but is this really your best option? Also, are you protecting this kid from himself?

Are you intervening to say, hey, I so appreciate the commitment that you have to this program. You've done so much to get us here. We'll take it the rest of the way as best we can." And I don't know, maybe he was just insistent, like he's 21, he has agency, so doesn't have a fully formed prefrontal cortex. So maybe that agency is being put to, you know, silly ends. But I'm always kind of torn on this question come this time of year because college baseball matters to these guys in and of itself. And that isn't to say that it's not instrumental and that it's not a stepping stone for them and all of that, but the notion that this doesn't have psychic benefit, that this isn't something you deeply care about and have memory

of and imbue with importance just because you're a legitimate draft prospect is silly because it's clear that it does matter. It matters even if you're a guy who has the skill and potential to go very high in the draft. But I also think that sometimes, and I'm not saying that this is even necessarily that circumstance, you know, particularly given the injury and he's a position player and so it's a little different than being a pitcher even. But it's like, you know, every year we end up with stories about guys who were put in a potentially compromising position. It doesn't always compromise them,

you know? And so you have to like kind of account for that piece of it too. But every year we hear about guys who threw 120 pitches and then like a day later through another 120 and it's like, is this really the best way to preserve stuff for these guys? So I'm, you know, I don't know. Yeah. That's the thing. It can not only be counterproductive long term to play through an injury, but also in the short term, because if you are hampered by that injury,

then you're not the guy that you usually are. And so you're not really getting your full strength self, even if you're able to grin and bear it or grit your teeth. Now, I guess his results belie that. He actually did make a significant contribution in that game, but generally, when you're playing through pain, you're not gonna be playing as well as you usually do.

And so that should be part of the calculus. Right, just like every guy who ends up throwing way more pitches than is advisable by the pitch smart guidelines doesn't blow out, right? But there is a risk, risk either under performance or of injury And sometimes I don't know if the the calculus properly Prices in that risk to the decision and like these coaches want to win

They want to win the postseason them keeping their jobs sort of dependent on them winning in the postseason at a certain point. But also, like, it matters to Jace LaValette. Like, I think that's genuine. It clearly matters to him. He wants to show up for his guys and he's an adult. So he gets to make some choices too. And so I, you know, it's always a, there's tension there. Cause I don't want to like, baby these guys, you know, I called him a kid, but like he's 21. He can be drafted. If he can be drafted, he can stand in with broken fingers. Like, I don't even know what I'm saying, but you know what I mean. Like there's a it's hard to know exactly what the right thing to do is there.

And I think that with position players, you have a you have more room. You have more margin for error than you maybe would with a pitcher where it's like sometimes you hear the pitch totals for these guys and you're like, good Lord, like, come on, that's a, that's a draft prospect. Like you can't put him in a spot where he might blow out. But the thing is he could throw 90 pitches and still blow out. So what do we even do? I don't know.

I don't know. Yeah. Speaking of injuries and players possibly nearing the end of the line, one of the things that I said I was looking forward to this season, but also sort of dreading, was the possible simultaneous swan song of Clayton Kershaw, Mack Scherzer and Justin Verlander. And to this point, I have not really seen anything that makes me think it's less likely that this will be the last hurrah

for the three of them. I don't know if you can even call it a hurrah, the last ride, I don't know. Kershaw has returned, which I'm pleased about, and he is coming off of his strongest start of the season. He pitched in a game against the Guardians and the Dodgers lost, but it wasn't Kershaw's fault. He allowed only one run in five innings.

That was the deepest he'd gone in his three starts, but it wasn't great peripherals wise. He walked two, he struck out three, and that was a season high strikeouts. And so, by the way, you mentioned the Rockies not being as far back as you'd think, given their record. That has, well, mostly they have contributed to that deficit, but the fact that the Dodgers have not been the super team that was expected, that they've merely been very good, that has as much to do with that. If they had played to expectations, which they have not quite to this point, then the

Rockies would be even farther behind in their dust. So that's part of it. But Kershaw is back to hopefully bolster that injury-plagued rotation. But to this point, three starts, 11 innings, six runs, six strikeouts, and six walks. And those are not great peripherals, obviously. And he's sitting about 89 with his fastball, which is down a bit even from where he was before.

And maybe it's Rust and maybe he's still working out the kinks after coming back from an extended absence and I hope that he will be better. But combined that trio now, Patrick Corbin, he keeps going forever. But these three, I don't know, they're a little older than Corbin. He's only 35, but they have combined for, I think, negative.1 fan graphs were so far this season. And Scherzer has barely pitched. He was in one in outing and then that troublesome right thumb of his was inflamed again and that has caused all sorts of cascade problems

with his mechanics and so he's been on the IL since then. He is nearing a return, seemingly. And then Verlander, he's been chugging along, but just not pitching particularly well. And now Kershaw's back, but also not pitching particularly well. So I don't want these guys' careers to end, obviously. But I guess I'm kind of indifferent if the only way that they can be prolonged is for them to keep scuffling along as collectively replacement

level. I'm not someone who believes in tarnishing a legacy. I think what you did, you did. And after that, I'm not going to fault you for it. If you just like playing baseball and want to play as long as you can, even if your legacy is assured, that's fine. But they're obviously not providing the same thrills that they once did.

So it's a name and a jersey, but every now and then maybe there's a flash or some heroics, but they're not really giving you what we are accustomed to getting from these guys. And of course, Verlander has been hurt too, and he's had a, a peck issue and that affected his velocity seemingly. But like all three of these guys are at the point where these physical infirmities, you can't really forecast them being free and clear of those things. Right. of those things, you know, like you could say, yeah, the injuries have held them back, but you can't also look ahead with any confidence to a time when injuries will not be holding them back. And so, you know, they've, they've all been on the IL this season as they are

kind of perennially at this point. And so we're, we're tracking essentially for potentially these three careers to come to a close in tandem. They haven't said that or anything. It's far from a guarantee, but that was one of my questions heading into the season. And it remains a question and seems closer to being answered because we haven't seen a Verlander Sontz. There hasn't been a great resurgence or anything on his part. And it's not like Kershaw has completely turned back the clock and looked vintage. And Scherzer just seemingly can't stay on the Mount at this point.

So that's where we are with that trio who have given so much and have been the defining pictures of their generation and all the rest. And they're certainly entitled to ride off into the sunset if they want to. And they've hung on longer than a lot of guys would given all that they've accomplished. But yeah, it's been not unexpected, but sort of sad to see. I wouldn't be surprised if everyone you just named is kind of done after this year. It's so interesting, like what changed in my reckoning of the end of his career with Puhols' one last good season, you know? Like, those three guys are Hall of Famers.

That's not going to be hard. That, you know, that ballot won't be difficult. I do want them to, well, do I want them to all retire in the same year so that they're all in the ballot? You want them all in in the same year so that they're all in the ballot? Yeah, I do. I think that'd be nice. You want them all in in the same class? Yeah, what an induction weekend that would be.

It would be something. I do worry that ballot space is scarce, but maybe it's better to just get them all in and clear them and then you leave room for the guys who might need more space. But I think that they're no doubt Hall of Famer. It's just like, you know, Pools was a no doubt Hall of Famer. And his time in Anaheim didn't alter that. It altered like the shininess of his career war total, but it didn't change the reality of him as a Hall of Famer, right? But I think that he had this stretch, and we talked about this on the pod, where younger fans didn't get it. You know?

You felt kinda crazy watching Pujols as an angel because you got the sense that younger fans didn't have any context for him as the very best version of himself. And so you're like, no, this was like the best. This was like one of the no, like you don't understand how good he was. Like I need you to I need you to feel it, you know, and you can't you can't quite do it. And then he had that great final year. Yeah, that did qualify as a last hurrah. That was a hurrah. So as long as you're active, there's the potential for hurrah. That was a hurrah. Yes. As long as you're active, there's the potential for a hurrah.

That was a historically anomalous hurrah. But still, you could get a single start where you get a vintage Kershaw, Scherzer, Verlander performance and that would be fun. I'm curious what they will end up prioritizing because if this is the last year that they're in the majors, then who knows how the rest of the season will go. But if this is the last year that they're in the majors, then who knows how the rest of the season will go. But as things stand now, they might look at it and say, oh, this is kind of a sour note. I want to write again and see if I can recapture something.

But that way can also lie madness, right? Because if you're always chasing it and you just get perpetually diminishing returns, you get further and further away from the version of yourself that was awe-inspiring. If you're chasing that last hurrah, you can end up damaging your memory in people's minds further and to a surprising degree more than you mean to because you're trying to reclaim it one last time. Whereas if those guys at the end of the season announce like, we, you know, we've had this really long and wonderful career, and I'm so grateful and I won these awards and I had a World Series or multiple or whatever. And

like, to be able to go out on that note, no one's going to remember this year. Like no one's going to be like, well, remember when you were bad in half a season's words on baseball last year? Like no one's going to remember that. But if you keep hanging around, then you cloud the image a little bit. You cloud people's memory of you. So I guess what I'm saying is that selfishly, if only to not have to have annoying debates on the internet a couple of years from now, I kind of do have they retire at the end of the year,

because it's going to make things cleaner. But I also don't know if it really matters all that much because it's like there's no dispute. The case is probably made and the point proven simply by saying that we are in the midst of, I think, a very necessary conversation about what will our standards be for Hall of Fame starters going forward as starters throw fewer and fewer innings on average over the course of their careers? And how is that going to alter our understanding of what a Hall of Fame starting pitcher is? How will voters account for that difference when they're comparing the starters of today to the starters of yesteryear and you know, like folks like Jay Jaffe are trying to account for that in real time to adjust for the metrics that they have relied on historically so that they are giving an accurate representation of the quality of guys career.

This is like a big conversation. But even within the context of that big conversation, there's always this caveat up top that's like, yeah, but those three guys are definitely Hall of Famers, right? There's no doubt about it. And much of that is because they pitched enough of their careers in the prior era of starters that they have big innings totals and they have been around for a long time and those cases are less contested, but they have had seasons where they've thrown fewer innings and not because of injury, but because of changing standards, although not all of them. It kind of depends on the guy.

So anyway, all of that to say, they're no doubt Hall of Famers. And I look forward to the easy part of the ballot when they come up because I should have a vote by then. But I'll just be curious to see sort of how do they understand their own legacies and their own narratives and how much does that matter to them? You know, sometimes guys just love baseball and they just want to be around the game. Playing isn't the only way for those guys to do that. Like I imagine all three of them could find a role with either a team or the league office after they're done. I wouldn't hate seeing like, you know, it would be kind of cool if Scherzer and I say this because he's been involved

with the executive committee so much, you know, like I could also see Scherzer being like I want to go work for the union maybe like, I don't know, maybe that's something he'd be interested in and trying to, you know, help the PA or something. I think the PA is in a pretty good spot, but like he's a thoughtful guy and I think has a good perspective on this stuff. So maybe that's the next step. You can be in the game, but you know, I don't want people to be like, oh, that guy? It's like, no, that guy! They were great. We're going to have annoying discourse about Kershaw and the postseason stuff when his Hall of Fame case comes up.

Even though there's no doubt people are still going to be like, well, Angeline and you know, and it's going to be annoying, Ben. It's going to be annoying. I'm going to throw Andy's book at them. I'm going to throw a hardcover version, not the proofs we got, the one I preordered. That's what I'm going to throw. I'm going to be like, no, whack you on the head. Yeah, some of these guys have said

that they wanna stick around. And Verlander, of course, said he wanted to pitch a very long time, years ago, when 300 wins still seemed within reach potentially, but also they do sound frustrated at times with the way that their bodies are betraying them. So, and Kershaw has talked about that too. I think we'll get the, after their careers are long over, people saying, remember when Max Scherzer was on the Blue Jays?

Remember when Justin Verlander was on the Giants? And most people will say, no, actually. I don't remember that. Right, actually. I don't remember that. Although they might be forced to reckon with Verlander on the Giants because that team is playing good baseball and might end up in the postseason. So who knows?

Like he, postseason Verlander might ride again, although probably not in like a high leverage kind of capacity. Right, the Astros left him off their early playoff roster last year. So who knows? But yeah, and I think the only exception to that would be if Kershaw did extend his career by leaving the Dodgers,

which seems highly unlikely at this point, but you know, he's been rumored, he's flirted with the Rangers at various points. If he were to do that, it doesn't matter at this point, Verlander and Scherzer, I wouldn't describe them as journeymen, but they've been around. They have several teams, and you associate them with a couple more than others, obviously, but still, they're accumulating late career teams. They've been a bit itinerant in this phase of their careers, whereas Kershaw, he is Mr. Dodger. He is just part of that franchise's legacy

of great starters and he's been the career Dodger and all the rest. And so if he were to have some weird random season at the tail end with some other team, I wouldn't begrudge him that, but it would kind of complicate the way that he was remembered. Unless we all just memory hold it

and pretended that it never happened, but you wouldn't be able to describe him as just career dodger, you know, professional cradle to professional grave kind of career one team guy, there is still an extra mystique associated with that, particularly with that franchise. I know that there's been flirting, I do struggle to think it will ever really happen. You know, and at this point from, it's gonna sound meaner than I mean it to like, I do struggle to think it will ever really happen. And at this point from, it's gonna sound meaner than I mean it too, I don't think the Rangers are like, we must sign Kershaw, this is a different,

there's that piece of it too. I wonder what he'll wanna do. I wonder what he'll wanna do. It's like some of these guys, they got young kids, maybe they just wanna be at home for a little while. Oh, yeah. I could imagine having read Andy's book, just him not being around the game for a while. But yeah, there has been that whole question about Kershaw's intensity.

How would he transition to post-playing life? What would he do with himself? And hopefully he's able to make that transition effectively. But it's not easy for everyone. I don't imagine it will be easy for any of those guys given their, their on field dispositions. But also, yeah, like they contain multitudes and he has expressed, like he clearly likes being with his family. I imagine they all like being with their families. I don't, I'm not sitting here saying like, unlike Justin Verlander who hates his

family, I don't mean it like that. I just, I don't know. Maybe Verlander will be like, I'm going to take Ben's phone away. That's my new full-time job. If that's the case, hey, maybe call it a queer sooner rather than later. But yeah, he's, uh, Kershaw is, is 26 strikeouts away from 3000. Yeah. Granky, remember, didn't quite get there. He got within 21 Ks and you gotta think Kershaw will get there this season unless he gets hurt, even at his current paltry strikeout

rate. If he does keep making starts, uh, he's going to get there. Although you can bank on him continuing to make starts, but it's not like either he or Granky for that matter really needs another accolade, especially someone like Kershaw who has all the sayungs and everything else. But, you know, it's a nice little thing just on top of everything else. And also I just wanted to point out, because we were talking about the championship or bust mentality with Jace LaVolette. And sometimes I decry that mentality when it comes to professional teams. And sometimes I take the piss, as they say, across the pond out of the Yankees for their

either sincerely believing or pretending that anything short of winning a World Series is just an absolute disgrace and that like you shouldn't have even showed up and it's just a failure and runner up is first loser and that whole rhetoric, which I just generally don't subscribe to. I think that you should take pride in your accomplishments. If you have a successful season, there's more than one way to do that. I don't consider all 29 teams that do not win a World Series to have failed. Right.

In a sense, they have. Sure, it's the goal for everyone, but you can still. And some of them have failed more dramatically than others, to be clear. Yes. But the Yankees, because of their track record of winning World Series, and because of the Steinbrenner era rhetoric, especially of World Series or Bust, they are now locked into that. And we've talked about this before and I've read Aaron Judge quotes to this effect and I've kind of mocked it. And this might be my favorite entry in the genre because

the Yankees just received their AL champion rings, which is just the ultimate indignity. If you're a Yankee to win a pennant, I mean, don't even acknowledge such a disgrace. Why would you even say embarrassing? But they were forced to accept runner up rings. And I just love this story that I'm reading on MLB.com. The headline is quote, pride mixed with anguish. Yanks receive AL champ rings with eyes on world series rematch in LA. You were saying just last time about how at least in some quarters, the Yankees

aren't quite as hated as they have been, partly because they haven't been as successful lately. They haven't won rings since 2009. Since they deprived me and my fellow 2009 baseball operations interns of rings. We didn't even get a consolation ring and the curse has hung over the organization ever since. But they got these rings which are described

as ornate and sparkling. There are diamonds and rubies and sapphires, along with the Yankees top hat logo. This is the sort of story that I think could fan the flames of Yankees hatred once more. We've got 14 karat white gold. I mean, these are valuable pieces of jewelry and they say American League Championships 2024. The story says they were beautiful, classy, significant, and for most players now collecting dust. Quote, this isn't the one we wanted boys, John Carlos Stanton said,

cutting through the ballroom chatter. The one that we want is in front of us. I'd better not see any of you guys wearing these around. John Carlos Stanton is gonna come for you if you wear your AL pennant winner ring. And the story continues. And so they have not and they have not been seen wearing these. It seems notable that Brian Cashman distributed the treasures in a muted exchange within the walls of a Manhattan hotel built decades ago. There was no ceremony on the field at Yankee Stadium to acknowledge the previous World Series.

Not even that is fine. Yeah. Not even the traditional opening day flag raising of the franchise's 41st pennant. Okay. If you have 41 of them, I get that it's not as big a deal, even though there are some franchises out there we could name that have never been champions of their league. I'm not naming any names,

not specifying any franchises, but you know, they're out there. The story continues. Months later, that five game fall classic feels like a lot of these rings acknowledged, perhaps with a head nod or handshake, and now shoved into the forgotten confines of a closet or drawer. Anthony Volpe said he initially tried to turn the ring down, but was told he couldn't. So he gave it to his dad, Michael. He didn't want this hanging over, hanging around his neck. In hindsight, Volpe said it commemorates the journey of getting there.

So he'll, he'll allow that much. That's what, that's all I'm saying. And then at the end of the day, I just put it away. I don't need to see it again. Clark Schmidt paused for a few long seconds, trying to find the right words to convey his indifference, then ultimately compared it to a participation trophy. I don't want to walk around with this runner-up or second place ring from when I was with the Yankees looking back and saying, that was my shining moment. That's just the standard here.

We're trying to win the World Series every single year. It'd be cooler if it was a World Series ring, mused Tim Hill. Tim Hill, I looked at it once and then I threw it in a box. First loser, Carlos Rodan sniffed. That's what it represented to me. This is just, this is the best Aaron judge.

All I really think is we lost. I mean, the Yankees just will not sport their AL champion rings. I'm going to defend them a little bit here. I think that there's an important and appreciable difference between the way that fans should think about seasons and the way that pro athletes are likely to think about seasons. I wouldn't think there was anything wrong with a player on a team that, like the Yankees, manages to win the pennant, but they can't quite seal the deal and they don't win the World Series, taking pride in the season that they had and

saying, look, we, you know, we won a lot of great games, we brought a lot of joy to whatever, you know, if they, if they view that effort as, you know, ultimately unsuccessful in terms of winning a World Series championship, but something that the organization can still take pride in, I would not begrudge them that or think it unreasonable. But I also know that it can be difficult to kind of switch tracks emotionally. And that particularly when you're not even a year removed from the loss and you're in the middle of a new championship season, which is the official term for the regular season, that you might not be able to, first of all, you might not be kind of through the process of letting that go and that you also, just because of

the amount of time that has passed or hasn't, And that you also, you're like geared up, you know, you're trying to go win the whole thing again and to dwell on the loss or let in the reality that like you still had an incredibly good year. You're not in that mindset. Whereas like I want fans to be able to enjoy all the other stuff attendant with a big league season and to find moments of appreciation, satisfaction, etc. wonderment within the course of that, regardless of whether or not it ends in a World Series championship. But I understand these guys not having time for that or room for that,

you know, and needing to look at, put it this way, I think that it is a more emotionally useful and perhaps easily accessible kind of state to look at that loss with disdain and view it as fuel rather than see any positive in it, because you're trying to not feel that way again. And so I get it. I do think that it is okay to have the ring and to be like, that's pretty, or, but you're not gonna, yeah, I don't know.

And baseball players, major leaguers, make enough that they're not gonna be super excited probably about the the pawning potential, the auction potential of this very valuable ring here. And so I get that there's not a lot of cache associated with the runner up ring. That is essentially what it is. And I'm not saying I would wear one. I mean, I probably wouldn't wear a World Series ring either, because that just, it seems a little ostentatious. I would, I would wear it every day. I would be, I would for a little while. I mean, like,

after a while, I wouldn't. It's so big. It feels like it would get in the way of doing things. Yeah, that's why people would ask you about it. And that would be so, I'm going to do a big square. That'd be so cool. If you were, if you were a pro athlete and you had a championship ring and it's this big Goddy awful thing and like most of them do not look good. They look expensive, which isn't the same thing, but like you've worked for this your entire life. It is like the pinnacle of your profession. You'd be so, you'd be so proud.

I'd be proud. It'd be a prized possession, but I wouldn't wear it out. I don't, I don't want to wear it out. I don't think so. I would wear it out. I'm not even. Unless I wear it at an event, a baseball event, maybe. I'd wear it to the grocery store. I'd be like, oh yeah, I'll pass you that ice cream.

Have you seen my ring? And I'd make sure to like use that handy. I don't want to give strangers an additional reason to talk to me. I don't want a conversation starter. I want conversation enders, which is ironic given my role in this podcast. Well, you know, if you whack someone with a ring, that's a conversation ender. See, it has utility. True.

It's funny because I would hate to be actually famous. I am like known to a niche part of the internet. Yeah, you don't want people's butt tattoos having your name on them. I really don't want my name tattooed on anybody's butt. I am expressing a strong preference to not have my name on your body. I think... No, thank you. I would prefer to not have that be... It weirds me out. No, thank you. I don't want that. But I do think that like, in the scenario where I have a World Series ring because I'm on a championship winning baseball team, I'm just a different person than I am.

And so in that mindset, I would be like, here's my ring. And then it would be like in the first, I think it would come in phases, right? So like, you know, for the first couple months, you'd be, we're not even going to get to my playoff thing. And that's fine. It's kind of boring. It doesn't matter. Some of the teams are good and some of them are bad and they're the ones, you know, blah, blah. Anyway, so you would for the first couple of weeks,

you'd be like, I'm going to the grocery store and I'm wearing my ring. I'm pumping gas and I'm wearing my ring. I'm worried about my ring, but I also need to show my ring. And so I'm going to sublimate the anxiety so that I can be like, here's my ring. And then you'd put it away after a while because like they are these big honkin things and you wouldn't want to damage it and you'd worry about losing it or getting stolen. But then after a while, after a while, you might bring it out again. So like I have seen scouts at the field from organizations that have won championships and they have their ring and they're wearing their ring.

And some of these are older scouts and they're older championships, so the rings are less ostentatious. So that might be, I might be under rating just how silly I would feel to be like, oh my God, look at that thing. But like some of the older ones are, they're still noticeable, but they are more modest than the current iterations of them. But sometimes you'll be, you'll be sitting at the field and you're like, you see a scout with the ring, you're like, that's cool, man. You got a ring. You guys did it. That's so cool. I would not be

grudge anyone wearing one. I really wouldn't. I mean, it's tacky to a degree. And like I said, they look more expensive than they do aesthetically pleasing. There is sort of a, this is maybe a mean way to talk about this incredible accomplishment. They have like prosperity gospel vibe a lot of the time, the World Series rings or like the Super Bowl rings where you're just like, did you win? We get it. But also if you won one, you'd be like, yeah, we did. Here it is. Yeah. I look, I think if, if they said, Hey, this isn't the one we wanted and this is motivation. This is, you know, it's a starter ring and now we want the championship ring. Sure. That's fine.

But I think the almost performative just disdain for like, we don't even want it. Do we have to have this? Can we give it, can we refuse this? I think part of it is probably the way the Yankees lost that series and the way that game five went. And that was just embarrassing. The way that they fell apart in that game, not to take credit away from the Dodgers,

but boy, that was a Yankees collapse in that last game. And so that's still smarts, I'm sure. That memory is still fairly fresh and so they don't wanna be reminded of that, I understand. But the whole, as if this was a wake or something, just the somber mood, the Yankees forced to accept the AL champion rings that most teams would be very happy to have

and most fan bases would be happy for their teams to have, even if it wasn't the ultimate goal. It's just, it's as Yankees coded as it comes. Yes. I think that that is totally fair. And maybe the problem is with the ring ceremony, right? And they didn't have like an on-field ceremony, but like there's an expectation of this.

And so what if you're new to the team, you know? What if you weren't on the team last? Right, and you have to sit in the room and you're like, five in here is really weird. Tim Hill's like, I gotta get a ring because I can exchange it for a moonshine at rest because he looks like a bootlegger. Okay.

I wasn't even worried. You were like, Oh, what are we to talk about? Do you still want to do your meet-up major league or do you want to save it? No, we can save it for next time. But yeah, I did want to mention though that as Scherzer and Verlander and Kershaw are faltering Rich Hill was assigned to AAA. He's one rung away, just maybe a couple strong starts at AAA. We could see Dick Mountain in that Royals rotation showing those youngsters how it's done.

Every time. It is. Speaking of, well, Dick's. so I've realized something about myself. This isn't going to come as a shock to anyone who listens to the podcast, but it is something that I've really had to grapple with in the last couple of days. And I messaged a friend of the pod, Craig Goldstein, about it. I'm not mature enough for Richard Fitz's name to exist in pro baseball. It's a real problem.

And I understand that he doesn't go by Dick because like, I'm sure he has self-awareness. But- Yes. Richard Fitz, Richard Love Lady, they are pretty staunch in not abbreviating. Right. They know what's up and I want to respect their wishes, right? I don't want to call them a name they don't go by. That's not my place, especially if they have a stated preference, which they very reasonably would. But every time I see Alex posting on Blue Sky about Richard Fitz, I laugh. I laugh every single time.

I laugh every single time. I'm not met. His parents must be too pure for this world. It is just... I have a joke in mind every time and I feel embarrassed and like I'm diminishing myself more than I'm really making fun of him. It's not his fault, he didn't pick his name. Dick Fitz. I just, I'm weak. From butt tattoos to Dick Fitz. Well I just now realized what the players with all over eye black remind me of. They look like Juggalos.

I also just noticed that Calvin Wooden, the Orioles fan whose fan-ee will soon be bearing the name of Trevor Rogers, actually misspelled Rogers in his initial tweet. He spelled it with a D like Brendan Rogers. I hope someone tells him in time before he gets to the tattoo parlor. That will do it for today. Thanks as always for listening. You can support Effectively Wild on Patreon by going to patreon.com slash effectively wild

as have the following five listeners who have already signed up and pledged some monthly or yearly amount to help keep the podcast coming, help us stay almost ad free and get themselves access to some perks. Voox Biker Stash, Connor Adam David Robertson, Mark Richard, Gray K, and Hannah Bennett,

thanks to all of you. Patreon perks include access to the Effectively Wild Discord group for patrons only, monthly bonus episodes, playoff live streams, prioritized email questions, autographed books, personalized messages, 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. If not, you can contact us via email, send your questions, comments, intro and outro themes to podcast at fangraphs.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 effectively wild. You can find the Effectively Wild subreddit at r slash effectively wild. You can join our Facebook group at facebook.com slash group slash effectively wild. And you can check the show page at fan graphs

or the episode description in your podcast app for links to the stories and stats we cited today. Thanks to Shane McKeon for his editing and production assistance. We will be back with one more episode before the end of the week, which means we will talk to you soon. ["I Want Bantam with New Arms"] I'm just a fan who wants Nothing less than effectively wild

Oh wild, oh wild Nothing less than effectively wild