Effectively Wild: A FanGraphs Baseball Podcast - Effectively Wild Episode 2373: The Ballpark Panopticon

Episode Date: September 11, 2025

Ben Lindbergh and Meg Rowley discuss and speculate about the percentage of major leaguers who’ve been inducted into some hall of fame and banter about Elly De La Cruz’s extended slump, Sean Murphy’s hip-to-be-tear revelation, and the perils of playing through injury, then assess where the line is when publicly shaming fans for ballpark behavior, […]

Hello about baseball I want to know about all the single team I want to know about Satvas and about Oh Oh Todi I'm a very modern fan

Reading up on all the analytics I want to know about baseball Presented by Patreon supporters of Effectively YO Hello and welcome to episode 2373 of Effectively Wild Baseball Podcast from FanGraphs presented by

our Patreon supporters. I am Ben Lindberg of the Ringer, joined by Meg Rowley of FanGraphs. Hello, Meg. Hello. Here's a question that has been on my mind and that I will now put on your mind in the minds of everyone else who is listening. What percentage of major leaguers do you think are members of a

Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Fame, Not the Hall of Fame, but A Hall of Fame. And I'll tell you what prompted this question. So there's a player named John Poff, who was briefly a big leaguer. Great name, yeah. He was the subject of his stat blast years ago. Sam stat blasted about him, I believe, and found that he was the player who had had the most major league playing time exclusively after rosters expanded in September. So he had cups of coffee in two consecutive seasons,

1979 and 1980 with the Phillies and the Brewers. And that was it for him. That was his whole career. So he played those whole months and then never got back in the big league. So he was the guy who had the most playing time exclusively in that window of a season. And then I had him on a couple episodes subsequently because I did a little digging into him and we researched him and he seemed like a really interesting guy. So he was on 1739 and 1860. He's a writer.

He's a poet. He's a deep thinker. He's a community activist. He's a teacher. He's had a lot of different lives in addition to being a big leaker. So really interesting guy seems like a fine fellow. And we've kept up a bit of a correspondence since. And I actually heard this past summer from someone who wanted to get in touch with him and was hoping I would have his contact info, which I did.

because he was being inducted into the Oklahoma City AAA Baseball Hall of Fame because he had himself a fine stint or a few stints in Oklahoma City in AAA. And so I'll read from the news here on MLB.com about the OKC Hall of Fame inductees this past August. Poff spent parts of four seasons with the 89ers during the team's affiliation, with the Phillies in 459 career games, Poff slashed 294, 378, 497. Not too shabby. Anne had 58 homers, 98 doubles, drove in 295 runs. He recorded back-to-back seasons with 20 homers in at least 90 RBI in both 78 and 79.

He led the team or tied for the team lead in doubles for three straight seasons between 78 and 80 and led the team in walks in both 79 and 80. So, yeah, he was a really good. player for that AAA team. And the Oklahoma City Comets now have recognized him. He went in a class of three, along with a former longtime executive for the team, as well as another brief big leaguer, the excellently named, maybe even better named, Cipio Spinks. Oh, my God. Yeah.

Quite a class. Maybe better named? Yeah, I guess so. Maybe. Come on now. John, as much credit as I could. Cipio Spinks trumps John Puff every day. Spinks.

But they are both Hall of Famers now enshrined in the Oklahoma City Baseball AAA Hall of Fame. And so I was emailing with John and congratulated him on this. And I said, John Poff, Hall of Famer, that has a nice ring to it. And that made me think because this is a guy who had a very brief and pretty undistinguished big league career. Obviously, getting to the big leagues at all. It's pretty impressive. That's why we do meet a major leaguer segment. But you would not know his name based on that.

And yet, in AAA, Hall of Famer for Oklahoma City and deserving had himself some excellent stats there. So I was thinking of all the Hall of Fames that a player could potentially be a member of. Because I think sometimes even maybe when we're doing meet a major leaguers, I come across someone who is just the most obscure big leader you could probably think of. But maybe they're in their colleges. Hall of Fame or something. Or their high schools, regions, yeah. Yeah, right. Their county, their city, their state, their country.

You could be in a team Hall of Fame, in a Major League Team Hall of Fame, in a minor league team Hall of Fame, a league Hall of Fame, there are so many Hall of Fame. I think that only about 1% of all players who are now classified as Major Leagueers are in the National Baseball Hall of Fame, have plaques there, that is. but what percentage do you think are in some Hall of Fame? I think like a shockingly high percentage. I wouldn't say that it's 100% because there are, I don't want to make anybody feel bad. There are high schools or colleges that have such a story tradition of their guys making the majors that, like, they are actually positioned to be a little bit selective about these things, right?

But that is not the overwhelming majority. And I would go so far as to say that if you are a big leaker of any renown, and by that I mean like have accumulated meaningful service, even if it does not get you to 10 years, even if it does not come with an all-star selection, even if it does not mean that you've won a gold glove or that you're on a Cooperstown trajectory, I would submit that the majority of folks who are in that position. You know, you're like, you're like a career bench guys. I bet their high schools create a Hall of Fame for them to be inducted into.

Yeah, they probably have Fields named after them. Oh, sure, sure. A lot of them do. Yeah, or Little League Fields named after. I don't know if there's probably a Little League Hall of Fame. I don't know. There's a Hall of Fame for everything. Yeah, I think it's a lot.

I think that it is a sizable majority. you know, the kind of majority that makes you feel like you have a mandate, you know, that sort of thing. So I think that it's a lot of guys. I think that and to, I'm sounding a bit like I have judgment about that, right? Like this is undeserving in some way. I think it's fine. I think it's a nice thing. It is, it is an accomplishment to get there at all. You know, it really is. And I think that acknowledging that is nice. And often these guys, if they have any sort of financial resource will feel a pull to, you know, donate a scoreboard, to refinish a field, to get turf installed, whatever, you know, the case may be. They often are participants

in the continued baseball legacy of their high school program, maybe their college program, depending on its size. So I think it's a nice, it's a nice thing, you know, but I do think the percentage would probably make people go, really. Like a couple of years ago, I remember hearing that, and, you know, I don't want to, I don't want to overstate the quality of his career, but I don't want to, I don't want to understate it either. Like, you know, Willie Bloomquist is a guy, you know, he's, he's had a, he had a pro career span many years, a couple of stints with the Mariners. He's, you know, was born in Bremerton, Washington. He went to South Kitsav High School for all you, you know, Peninsula, folks out there. And he has been inducted into the, well, he's in the ASU Hall of Fame, sports Hall of Fame, which makes sense. He's in the college sports communicators

Hall of Fame. That feels not real. I'm sure I recall him being inducted into like the Puget Sound Sports Hall of Fame. Well, that's a great example. If Willie Fulmquist is in two or maybe more Halls of Fame than the Little League does, by the way, have a Hall of Fame. It's called the Little League Hall of Excellence. Same difference. And what an eclectic mix of inductees because it's not necessarily the best little leaguers. It's just anyone who was in Little League and then went on to accomplish something. So you have to have played in a chartered local Little League and then must have become a quote unquote recognized role model as an adult. You don't even have to have had sports success later in life. Right. You could have been bad in Little League, but still. Now, it's funny, though, because there are great baseball players in the Little League Hall of Excellence, and then they're kind of mediocre major league baseball players.

And then there are actors, there are presidents. Wait, this is my question. You don't have to have gone on to be a pro athlete, baseball or otherwise. I think that's nice, you know, because. Yeah, I think so, too. I mean, not to invoke the verbiage of the NCAA, but most, you know, most of them will go pro and something else, right? Like, and they can still have a meaningful impact on their community, on their profession, et cetera. Yeah, I think it's great.

John said it was a really good weekend when he got inducted that he said it was really nice and fun. One of those unexpected things like hitting a home run or, or, yeah, he hit plenty for OKC though. That's why he's a hall of favor. Or then in quintessential John Poff fashion, he compared it to and quoted Keats with poetry, quote, surprised and delighted with a fine excess, if I can sound so pretentious about it. And he can. So he said it was a really good weekend. And that's great.

Yeah, because with the National Baseball Hall of Fame, we don't want to be grumps and say, oh, you don't get to have your day in the sun. But it's supposed to be exclusive. It's supposed to be for the elite. that's why there's such cachet and such an honor to it. And so it's not like you want to rain on anyone's parade and keep them out necessarily, but also you do have to preserve what it means the significance of getting into that Hall of Fame because it is for the baseball 1%. If you opened it up to everyone, then there was the famous Adam Jones suggestion that Sam often mentions

where he tweeted, I think, just they should all get in, just everybody should get in. Right, right. And, yeah, I, you know, I don't want to keep anyone out out of personal animus, but also, you know, you lower the standards to a certain degree, the statistical standards at least, and suddenly it's not quite as special. But there exists so many other halls of fame, and that's kind of your consolation prize. And sure, getting into a AAA baseball local hall of fame is not quite as special as getting into the Cooperstown one. But it's pretty cool. I mean, you know, I'm not in a Hall of Fame. So it's got to be a good thing to have your day in the sun, even if it's not quite as bright a spotlight.

So, yeah, I was thinking like my first gut feeling was maybe like a quarter of them or something. Oh, I think it's higher than that. Yeah, you've convinced me now. I think it's higher than that. Willie Blunquist and his father were inducted into the Kitsap Sports Hall of Fame in 2015, I think. They were the class of 2015, but then I think the actual induction took place in 20. 2016. Goodness. So complicated. So if Willie Blumquist is in three Halls of Fame at minimum, then that's a pretty good indication. At minimum, Ben. You know, there might be others that.

And I got to say, hey, Willie, kind of a bad look that this one didn't make your ASU bio. I'm just saying, like, have some thought for the folks back home. What harm is there really? Cooperstown has to worry about standards. But if you're a local Hall of Fame, a lower level Hall of Fame that's not getting much media attention. Sure, brighten someone's day. Brighton someone's day. And recognize excellence at lower levels because that counts too. There were a lot of people who were wowed by John Poff's play for the 89ers back in the day.

To them, he was a star on the field. So that's worth recognizing, I think. So, yeah, this is nice. And I'd love, if someone wants to do the research, this would be a fun research project. for someone else to do and tell me about. Definitely not for us to do. But take a random but representative sample of former major leaguers and just do some research and try to assess how many of them are actually in a Hall of Fame

and then extrapolate from there. And maybe we could put a number on this. But yeah, I think you've convinced me that maybe it is actually a majority. I think it's a lot. Maybe if it's like they're all in Hall of Fame, then maybe that makes it less special. But because that's the thing people always say about big leaguers is that even if they're not great by big league standards, they were great by some standards just to get to the big leagues. You do have late bloomers and you have players who kind of came out of nowhere and maybe they weren't even stars when they were kids. But most of them were the best player in their town, in their city, on their team, in their league at some level.

So they were all Hall of Famers somewhere, essentially. So it makes sense, I think, and that just does remind you how you get to this big major league melting pot and everyone is elite there. Yeah. And thus, by those standards, not everyone is elite, but by any other standards, they all are. And so they should all qualify for some sort of Hall of Fame most likely. I think that that's probably right, ma'am. Okay. Well, let's talk for a second about someone who might be in the Hall of Fame someday, but is perhaps not helping his case quite.

as much this season as I had hoped and anticipated. I think that Elie de la Cruz is having one of the more disappointing seasons in my mind. He hasn't been bad. He's been good, even. And that just speaks to how high my hopes were for Ellie. He's one of those players we talked about recently when you just have a broad skill set. Your bar is just going to be set higher. Your floor is someone else's ceiling because, you know, you know,

You play shortstop, you're fast, you hit for power, you do all these things. And so what I'm describing as sort of a disappointing down years, like a four-win season by Fangraffs, which is really excellent. But not quite what I was hoping, because I was hoping that he would take a leap this year because he was so good last year by FanGraphs were, at least he had 6.5 in his age 22 season. That's a lot. Yeah, and it seemed like there was more in there. You know, that was with a 119 WRC plus, and it seemed like, boy, if he could hit well from both sides of the plate or just decide not to switch it anymore or just continue to make strides, as players often do at that age, he makes a lot of strides. He's very tall. His strides are long. He stole a lot of bases.

He stole 67 bases last year, which if that in itself didn't contribute a huge amount of value, made him more exciting than someone to talk about. And this year, he's got like half that. He's got 33 steals. Now, in another sign of how not really that valuable in the grand scheme of things stolen bases are, his fan grass base running runs total is actually higher this year with half as many steals as last year. So presumably he's done a good job of advancing in other situations, staying out of double plays, not making outs on the bases, et cetera.

But on the whole, he just hasn't really made progress offensively. and maybe has gone a bit backwards in some respects. Like, he's cut down on the K rate, which is good, which is encouraging. But the power has been down a bit. Perhaps those things are related. And the babbip is down a bit. But, you know, he's basically he has the same expected weighted on base as he did last season. He just overperformed it last year and has been pretty much dead on it this year.

So I just, I wanted more. And he's slumped really later in the season more. recently. And so there was a time when it looked like he was on pace for more, but it seems like he's not going to get there. And, you know, it's just a sign of the sky high expectations that I and most people had for Ellie, that this feels like it's just a slight stagnation. I don't know that this means anything long term. And I still believe that he's going to have those just monster seasons. He's going to have some peak Ellie year where it's just seven, eight wins or who knows what. But it wasn't this one. Correct me if I'm wrong, though, like part of what might be contributing to his

second half issues is that he's been playing through injury, right? He has an oblique issue or something, right? Yeah, he has something. Yeah. Not enough to keep him off the field. But enough to be impacting his performance, presumably. Yeah, he has reportedly some sort of quad issue, it seems. One can imagine that that would be contributing to some of the dip that we're seeing and that he might if he gets back to full strength, you know, perform a bit better. And they're in this odd spot, right? Because they've been on the fringes of the playoff race for a little while now. They're potentially in position to challenge the Mets who, but boy, just keeps wounding.

Got some loose bodies in Sean Manaya and it's not going well. And so I think because he hasn't been so hurt that they want to put him on the aisle, but that they are in this tight race. They felt compelled to keep playing him, which, like, at a certain point, are you hurting yourself more than you're helping, hard to say? So I don't know what to do. I don't know what to make of it.

I'm optimistic about his long-term trajectory. This season has not changed my opinion of that for me. But your mileage might vary, sort of like Ellie's. Yeah. He is the best player on the Reds. He's the most valuable player on the Reds, Despite this down year, now it's not a great sign for the Reds that their most valuable player is at 3.8 war. But, yeah, you can't blame Ellie for the fact that they're not in playoff position.

Of course, if he were having a six or seven win season, then, well, that would help, certainly. But it would also help if some other players would pick up some of the slack. And that's been the issue with a lot of the other homegrown Reds and the younger guys, they just haven't really shown up around him. You're sort of Spencer Steers and others who a few years ago at least looked like they were going to be part of an exciting core. And that just hasn't really happened for a lot of these guys. So you have Newell F. Marte, who's hitting and doing well in some respects. But then, yeah, like Matt McLean and just, yeah, like the pitchers, some of the pitchers are encouraging, exciting, Hunter Green when he's healthy and Andrew Abbott having himself a fine. year, Nicolillo, et cetera. But yeah, it's just weird that like the best Reds position players

lately have been Brian Hayes and Miguel and Duhar. Like, okay, it's not what I expected. Exactly. I'm glad to see Hayes doing well in Cincinnati. Perhaps he just had to get out of Pittsburgh. That has happened before. But yeah, the Reds could use some help from other position players in addition to Ellie reaching his potential and ceiling. You know, if, if Brian Hayes figures it out and since he, damn, but good for him, but also damning, just a damning, damning statement about their ability to do anything with hitters at all. I mean, like, the pitching's going, this isn't about sincey and it's not, you know, so maybe you're like, hey, stay on target. But no, my target remains the Pittsburgh Pirates or at least aspects of them. It's such an interesting, weird franchise

because remember a couple years ago when we were like, where could they possibly play all of these guys on the infield? And it's like, there's a natural sorting that maybe went on there. But yeah, like,

they would surely like a better season out of Ellie, but I imagine that it is kind of low on their list of priorities. I will say, you're right to highlight how good Hunter Green has been. And also just like he's been playing well.

He also looks good. like his body looks, you know, like he's, I don't know, the conditioning looks solid. I think long term, they're still promising science, enthusiastic science to be drawn, you know, excitement to be found in SINC if one wants to, but some of it's going to come down to, can these guys sort of course correct and also like will the org feel like it can spend some money again because like you tried and then I was like, oh boy, some of our free agent signage They didn't do, no, no, going all that while. Yeah, Ellie's pre-all-Star Break, post-all-Star break, WRC Plus splits 128, 68.

So things were going great for a while there earlier this season. It seemed like, yeah, he was cutting down on the K's. He was maybe being a bit more selective, walking more, not chasing as much. And so, yeah, maybe you just look at that first part of the season and say, that's the real Ellie. And then this has been the slowed hampered by injury, Ellie. perhaps next year he picks up where he left off before he got hurt and then has a whole season of that guy. And I don't want to overstate the case either, right? Like the likely answer, which is the boring answer, but still to my mind, to the more likely one, is that his true talent, as it is currently constituted, lies somewhere in between first half Ellie and second half Ellie.

And then the question becomes, one, how severe was the injury? Like, is this going to be one of those situations where they don't end up making the postseason and then we immediately hear about various, you know, nips and tucks that have to take place in the off season for him? Or is, is it truly just like a nagging thing that hampered him, but you can't lay all the blame there? And then the question becomes, okay, like, how do you advance the game? Because he is so talented and he is so exciting. But also, like, they do need him to look more like he did last year than this year. So, conundrum. He hit 18 home runs before the All-Star break.

He has hit one since. And he stole 25 bases before the break. He's still an eight since. So, yeah, it is a tale of two seasons. And it's a disappointing season, nonetheless, even if that's the reason. But that is slightly encouraging in a way, as long as you don't have a player who has a long history of injuries. And then that becomes a concern in itself.

But it is nicer to think that, oh, this is just a temporary infirmity. And then when that heals, he'll be right back to being that superstar that he has played like before. Infermity. I'm glad you brought up playing through infirmities, through injuries, because I was going to talk about another player now who has flummoxed me for years. And now maybe we have an explanation. And it's that he has been hurt this entire time. I speak of Sean Murphy of the Atlanta Braves, who is done for the year now. He is having surgery to repair a hip tear.

Oh, is it a laborum tear? Yes. Oh, my guy. Me and Sean exactly the same. Yeah. But the big revelation is not that he has this laboral tear in his right hip now, but that he has perhaps had it for three years. He's had it for a very long time.

and I've been so mystified by Sean Murphy because he had this incredible start to the 2023 season, his first season in Atlanta. They trade for him that previous December. They extend him. He starts that season like gangbusters. He makes the all-star team and then just goes completely cold after that all-star game. It was like 999 OPS plus before, 585 after. And he just mostly has not been that.

same all-star level guy since then. He's had moments. He's had spurts where it looked like, okay, maybe he's back. He actually hit quite well just in August, but he has not been able to sustain it. And so he's now been displaced. He's been overtaken by Drake Baldwin, which is okay for Atlanta. You've got another good young catcher, but not so great for Sean Murphy. And you were banking on having Sean Murphy at an excellent elite level for years.

He was on the short list of the best catchers. in baseball. That's why Atlanta wanted to acquire him. And then that turned into the William Contreras trade. It was the Sean Murphy trade. And then it was the William Contreras trade because somehow the Brewers swooped in and stole William Contreras as the third team in that trade, which seemed like a nifty pickup at the time. But in retrospect, has been even better, although William Contreras himself has been playing through injury at times this season. But Sean Murphy apparently had been hiding this from everyone, had not disclosed this injury to the team.

And there's some pretty frank comments from Braves Pobo Alex Anthopoulos here where he says, yeah, we didn't know. So he's going to be ready for spring training. There's four months of rehab after this surgery, so he should be good to go last year, but there's a significant tear that this MRI showed. Anthoplas says he's tried

to manage this the last three years or so, and he should be a much better player once this is resolved. So he's saying that, yeah, this is why this has not been the Murphy that we expected since the middle of 2023. And Anthopoulos says, I guess it was July when he hit well. And then August it was not good. And he was getting some treatment on his hip. Anthopoulos says, he swore to us he was fine. And look, that's the guy he is, right? He hadn't been on the IL before having the oblique a year ago. Ultimately, we had a conversation with him Sunday night, and he said, it has been bothering me.

I can get through the season and is going to come to you guys at the end of the year and ask you for an MRI. We said, look, that doesn't make any sense. Let's get an MRI now. Oh, my God. Now that you're being honest with us. And when we asked him,

he said it's been bothering him the last three years, but you wouldn't know about it. Now, three years would suggest 2022. Right. I assume probably what Anthopolis meant, though, is three years as in three seasons, as in 2020, 23, 24, and 2025. I assume he said, look, I would just grind through it and play through it and it would come and go. But in talking to Dr. Bird, the doctor, he was stunned that Murphy has been playing the last three years with it, significant tear. I don't get it.

I just do not understand why players do things like this. Okay, so wait. So the likely timeline that we agree on and that they agree on is that this occurred sometime in the course of the 2023 season and has been bothering him since then. Is that right? It doesn't specify exactly when, if there was an inciting incident, it doesn't say. But Anthopoulos says that it's clearly affected him, that it's been bothering him for three years. I assume by that he means, yeah, the past three seasons.

And I'm inferring that probably it was something that could not have been hampering that much early in 2023 because he was playing so well. So I would think that it was probably something that started to bother him in the second part of that season. But I don't know for sure. They haven't said like, yeah, it was this game or this month when it happened. Because like, okay, so like in 2023, his monthly WRC plus numbers. now, you know, he's a catcher. And so he's not playing every game. And that means that he is sort of necessarily a little more likely to be buffeted about by like small sample performance.

Right. So like I'm going to say the games just so that we have this as a point of comparison. So in 2023, he played 23 games across March, April, 23 in May, 15 in June, 15 in July, which is also a month disrupted by the All Star Break, which is good to keep in mind. 16 in August. and then 14 in September. His monthly WRC plus numbers in 2020 were 160 for March, April, 154 for May, 146 for June, 109 for July, 136 for August, 37 for September, October. Okay, fine. So we'll bear that in mind.

And then obviously, we know that he played 72 games in 2024. He had a 78 WRC plus. injury, what have you, 2025. He has played 94 games, obviously missed time earlier, 96 WRC plus. So I think that there are two things that I would offer about this. The first, there are three things that I would offer about this. The first is, I do wonder how much pain and discomfort are catchers who we would understand to be fully healthy compartmentalizing on a daily basis, right? So, like, to give Sean Murphy some benefit of the doubt in terms of, like, a question of potential concealment, right?

Concealment would be, hey, I'm a catcher. I get the shit kicked out of me every day anyway. And so, like, yeah, I'm always in pain. Like, I'm always uncomfortable. There's always something wrong. Is it something that rises to the level of, you know, requiring an I else scent, requiring imaging of some kind, requiring treatment? Eh, I'm a catcher. I'm always, I'm always, I feel terrible every day, right?

Like, this is, to my mind, something that happens with these guys, even when they understand themselves to be healthy. So there's that thought. There's the, hey, dude, you're like an important part of this franchise in theory. Like, go tell them when you have the ouchy, you know? And, like, you know, maybe he felt like he wasn't in a position to do that. Maybe he felt like he needed to be. out there but like in a year like this and maybe it's telling that maybe maybe we've learned

something about what sean murphy thinks of prior catchers he shared time with versus versus drake baldman who he holds in high regard that he was able to go like hey i got a i got we got to do something about this and then they were like yeah i guess i guess we do sort of fine it's mid-september sort of right right and even then he was like yeah i was going to bring this up after the season. But, yeah. And so, so some of this, I think, is like, hey, Sean, you got to raise your hand when you're experiencing discomfort, right?

You got to say something more than just, I'll take care of it when the season's over. Like, you need to be a proactive communicator with your team because they need to know if you are injured and they need to do something about that, right? So there's that. And it's like, I mean, he had a capable backup in Travis Darno. It's not like he didn't have his own bag. They were a good thing. Anyway, so there's that.

And then, and then there's this. Hey, maybe an unintended consequence of you guys playing your same dudes every single day is that they feel like they can't tell you when they're injured. Yes. You know, like maybe part of this would, should invite some self-reflection on the part of the Atlanta Braves because we have commented on this podcast many times before. Like, they just play their guys. Now, they don't.

play them when they're like obviously hurt. It's not like they're saying, hey, Ronald, sorry about that ACL, both of them get back out there, buddy. You know, they're not like. Yeah, their entire team was hurt last year, which could be, I guess, I mean, maybe you never know. It could be because there wasn't enough load management or days off or something. And I don't know the answer to that.

And that's not what I'm trying to suggest as it pertains to Murphy. I have no idea whether he was, you know, made more likely to be injured as a result of bad load management or whatever. That's not what I'm saying, but what I am saying is like, you have a culture of you guys play every day. And like, that's a good culture, but also sometimes guys need rests, you know, sometimes they need a little time off. And so it's just an interesting thing to parse. But yeah, like, I think that you should give guys more time off is my point. The other thing I will say is that like it puts them in an odd position because, you know, there had been speculation. And I don't know how well.

inform that speculation was, but there had been speculation that, like, the emergence of Drake Baldwin put them in a position where, hey, maybe they trade Sean Murphy in the offseason because they have this young cost-controlled catcher, now that Sean Murphy's extension was so onerous from a contract perspective, but, like, they have this young cross-controlled catcher. They're really excited about. He's doing well. Maybe they trade Sean Murphy to a catcher-needy team, which is most of them.

And then they're able to reinforce their roster in places where they view themselves as not having adequate depth. But this would suggest they're not going to be in a position to do that. So that's just the thing I would know. Yeah. I would say the fact that everyone was hurt on the last year's Atlanta team and quite a few guys on this year's team too, that would suggest to me, well, it could go one of two ways. You could say, well, all these other guys are hurt. So it's not really going to reflect poorly on me if I'm hurt too, I guess. Sure.

It'd be one thing if, like, everyone else was 100% healthy all the time and you don't want to be the odd one out. But everyone else, if your whole roster is the walking wounded, then you'll fit right in, right? But you might also feel more pressure to stay in the lineup because you are so short-handed and so depleted. And you think, okay, I've just got to gut through this because we've lost all these other guys. But you're going to be hurting yourself. That's the other thing that it always confuses me about why players do this. I understand it in certain cases. But in the long run, and usually even in the short run is the thing, it's not actually going to help the team if you are playing in a clearly compromised state.

Like let's say that L.A. Dela Cruz, if we tie his underperformance lately to an injury, which may or may not be entirely responsible, but just say it were, he might have thought to himself, well, 70% of me, 80% of me, whatever percentage it is, is better than whoever else we have, which might be a reasonable. thing to think. But even he has been playing at replacement level, essentially, since the All-Star game. So even a superstar who is hobbled by something might not be better than whoever's going to be the next person up. And at least give the team all the information. And they can make that decision. You can say, I'm willing to keep playing. And if they agree that this isn't going to hurt you long term, it's not going to exacerbate anything. And yeah, having you at less than 100, percent is still better than someone else, okay, they can keep running you out there, but everyone will be aware of what they're getting into. And so with Murphy, the usual reasons

for doing this don't seem to apply, because I can understand you're in your walk year, you're in a platform year for arbitration, you're a young guy, you're just trying to get established. You don't want to give a team any reason to get rid of you. And even that can be sort of misguided because, again, if you play and you play poorly, well, that's not going to benefit you either. In some ways, it's better if the team knows that you're hurt so that this is not a reflection of the real you. This is not your true talent because it can backfire. Okay, you don't get hit with a he's injury prone or something or they think you're a real gritty, gutty grinder or something. But also, maybe they think you're just not that great at baseball because

you're not playing that well. So that doesn't benefit you or the team either. But that's not even the case for Murphy here. He got paid. Right. He was a veteran. He got his contract. He got his extension. He didn't have to worry about job security or his salary or anything else. And this wasn't like a career ending injury. It doesn't seem like. And if he had gotten this taken care of when it happened seemingly, when he started to be affected by it and feel it, then this would be well behind him by now. So I just, I don't understand it. There does. still seem to be, whether it's a macho sensibility or whether it's kind of an ego thing, like, I just think I'm our best option right now.

And it might hurt him because, well, now he lost his job, you know? And maybe it works out okay for Atlanta, who knows? Because, hey, they have Drake Baldwin, and that's nice for them. But maybe that doesn't work out so well for Sean Murphy. I could see if it were just this year, and he's thinking, hey, we have this hot shot prospect, breathing down my neck here, hot on my heels, I better stay in the lineup because if I'm out of the lineup, then this guy's going to become a staple and he'll take my job, which is kind of what has happened anyway, because Baldwin just outplayed Murphy because Murphy

was not playing at his best self. But that wasn't even the case the past couple of years, unless he was worried about having his job taken by Travis Darno or something, which doesn't seem like, you know, Darno was a perfectly quality, competent, capable backup catcher, maybe one of the better backup catchers. Oh, sure. Which is another reason to think it would have been okay for Sean Murphy to say I'm hurt. Because we have someone who could start and has started, but unless he was, like, worried that, oh, Darno's so good that I can't be out of the lineup or else, I just, I don't get it.

But there's just too much of that mentality. And I don't know whether it's an ego thing or a fear. thing because look, you know, you're always on the razor's edge and the margins are thin and and I get it. I get why you're worried maybe about coming forward. But I think if you have your financial security, then there's just no reason for you to not disclose this sort of thing and manage it together. Yeah, I was joking a little bit before, but it's like it is sort of weird where you're in a position where the team can better than most orgs, whether, you know, you being out of commission for a little while to address this stuff. But also, I'll say this about labor

and tariffs, like, they do get worse over time. And it could be that in the early days of it, he was like, oh, this is like normal wear and terror. I'm exhausted. I'm crouching. I'm getting the shit kicked out of me all the time. Like, it is the sort of thing where I could imagine it degrading over time to the point where it gets to him being like, oh, yeah, I really should get this looked at. But once you've had that revolution, you should share it that day, you know. rather than being like, ah, we'll address it in the offseason. Mostly, I think that these need to be

sort of like mutually reinforcing instincts. Like that's maybe the better way to articulate all of this, where the player needs to have the wherewithal to say, hey, I have suffered injury, particularly if they're in a position like he is where it's like you've been paid. Like your position is somewhat assured, right?

And then the org needs to work to create a, a culture where guys feel like they can come forward. And that piece of it I obviously can't speak to with a great deal of specificity in the Braves case. The only thing I have to go on is the fact that they play their dudes so much of the time. And it's like, is that indicative of a culture where they're like, hey, just get out there, buddy, like, rub some dirt in it. That part I don't know.

But like the public facing aspect of this where they don't, seem to engage in much load management, even proactively, for guys who appear to be healthy, but maybe could still benefit from days off now and again. You know, maybe it's not a great indicator, but maybe that's a misunderstanding on my part. Yeah, I've always just been really confused by this, and I think probably the culture has become more accepting of being open about things like this, and I think it's probably less of an acute problem than it used to be, but it's still there. and I get how you could you could tell yourself what you want to hear.

If you just, you have a twinge every now and then, it's probably nothing, you know, everyone's a bit banged up. I get that. But yeah, if it's persisting, and he could have had this taken care of over an offseason. That's like, if this happened in 2023, there have been two offseason since then. He could have not missed any time and had the surgery and come back at first. full strength for opening day. So he didn't even have to take himself out of a lineup in order to get this looked at. So I, yeah, I just don't get it. I've never really understood this

aspect of the athlete mentality. And there are some injuries that you can play through and they might not affect your performance. And there are some injuries that you can play through and they might not worsen the injury. But there are some that they kind of have cascading effects. And in fact, mentioned in this athletic story about this is that, the oblique strain that he had last year where he missed 50 games, he swung at a pitch on opening day and strained in oblique, it says an injury the Braves now believe might have resulted from Murphy compensating for the hip ailment. So I don't know whether that's the case or not, but if they think that it also makes you more likely to suffer additional injuries because you are restricted in your movement

in some way, well, that's just another reason not to do this. you're going to end up out of the lineup anyway in that case you might as well get the actual root cause addressed so look like some some amount of injuries inevitable in pro sports and in baseball but there's just there's no reason to compound that problem i don't think by not disclosing them and not getting them treated so yeah i don't know it's just it's a weird one i would try to do whatever I could as an athlete to just tell guys like, I understand why you might be wary of coming to us with this, but hiding it is not going to help anyone ultimately. So just, we'll figure it out together.

Anyway, all right. At least that maybe perhaps explains why Sean Murphy has not been himself for quite a while now, which at least solves that mystery, seemingly, which has been on my mind for some time. Maybe. Maybe. Maybe. I don't know. Okay, here's one that I wanted to put to you. Have you been following or I wouldn't say I've been following it, but I've had this knowledge inflicted upon me mostly against my will just because it's everywhere. But the latest saga of the fan and the foul ball, the Phillies fan and the subsequent internet shaming that has taken place of this. a Phillies fan who had an aggro moment at a game the other day and got a ball. Wasn't a foul ball, right? Wasn't that a home run? Yeah, did I say it was a foul ball? No, it was a home run ball. Yeah. But it was in the stands. And look, this has gone mega viral. I'm sure most people listening have seen this or know of what I'm speaking.

But this woman came over. There was a bit of a free for all for a home run ball. And it landed in a spot where no one was sitting, I don't think. It wasn't like in someone's seat. And so it was bouncing around a little bit. And there were a few people trying to retrieve it, including the man who got it and brought the ball back to his kid, his, I think, 10-year-old son, gave the ball to him. And then this woman who was in the scrum for the ball came over to him and demanded the ball and said like that was mine and this guy not wanting to escalate the situation just handed the ball over that he had given to his kit and this lady walked away with the ball and to be clear the woman never had possession of the ball it's it's not as

if she got it and this guy ripped it out of her hands or something sometimes you do see that but that wasn't it like as far as we could tell she had no particular claim on this ball other than the fact that she was in the vicinity of it. But the man's claim seemed stronger based on what the footage suggested. Plus, he gave it to the kid. And, you know, people always yell, give it to the kid. Which in itself, I always feel like there's like a bit of a mob mentality, peer pressure aspect of things. I think it's good to give the ball to the kid.

But also, like, what if you're a baseball fan who's been to a zillion games and never got a ball? like, I don't know that you're automatically obligated. As long as you didn't rip the ball away from the kid, if you caught a ball and you want to hand it to the kid, that's a nice gesture and that's worthy of applause and everything. But I don't think you're like history's greatest monster. If you want to keep that souvenir for yourself one time, you know. I think it's good.

You give it to a kid, make their day and maybe make them a lifelong baseball fan or something. But you were a kid once and you've been a lifelong baseball fan. So I don't know. Maybe you deserve a ball, too. But point is, this lady has been roundly reviled online ever since. And not just online, because she was booed, I believe, in that section in the ballpark. And I think she flipped those fans off, too. So it was happening in microcosm in the stands, but it's been a much bigger story afterwards.

And, you know, what always happens with these incidents is that people are posting your and they're trying to identify who she is, you know, trying to sort of docks this Phillies fan. And, of course, people are calling her Phillies Karen, right, and branding her that way. And there were people, you know, someone took a picture of her, I think, exiting the park and she still had the ball at that point. And there are people, like, offering to give her money if she will hand the ball back and apologize. And to be clear, the kid got some swag.

and he got a bat, I believe, from Harrison Bader. Like, the kid was taken care of, so it worked out okay for him, ultimately. But there's just been a massive pile on on this Phillies fan, to the point that the man who surrendered the ball to her rather than get into some sort of fight asked people to lay off, essentially. And it's like, you know, she's had enough

and you don't have to go after her in real life or identify who she was or whatever. So what do you make of the? these incidents because they happen a lot. There was one at the U.S. Open with a cap. It happens a lot with foul balls. And it's, you know, not just in sports and not just in baseball. Obviously, these things, you know, there was the even more mega viral cold play concert affair exposure of the CEO and the HR co-worker and they were off having some illicit fling and they were caught on the big board at the cold play concert and this became a major story.

What do you make of this when this kind of takes on a life of its own after the fact online? Okay. So I think we should distinguish a couple of things here. First, I think that the cold play affair thing is, it's distinct in my mind from this because, like, my understanding of the cold play thing is that, like, they warned people that they were going to warned might not be the way that they put it, but like they alerted people that they were going to put them up on the big board on the JumboTron at that concert.

And these folks will continue to canoodle. And so it's like they did get a little warning. Now, I'm going to say something about sort of the surveillance piece of it, and then we can get into the particular behavior of the baseball fan thing here. I am fundamentally uncomfortable with like the degree to which, we are observed in public and recorded in public. And the degree to which the instinct to record other people in public settings seems to have like burrowed into us as a culture, I don't think that that is good.

And I understand part of it because I think there's like this general desire broadly for us to, like, sort of put our arms back around accountability and, like, shame because we live in a time where we feel like people are largely unaccountable and they are generally immune to shame and that that is having a corrosive impact on our society. And so I get the desire to, like, reinforce accountability and shame as sort of a public good. And I think there's something to that notion. But I also think that a lot of these like filming incidents are as much about like a grab toward notoriety as they are that. And so it's like let's, I think maybe one way to put it is asking people to be clear about their motives in those moments, which are not purely altruistic. So there's that piece of it. Let's dive in on this, this incident specifically. This might be controversial. I think that in general, Like, it is good to give foul balls to children. I think if you catch a home run ball, you have no obligation to give that away.

That's my opinion. I think that, like, it's nice if you do it, sure. But if you catch a home run, you get to keep that. That's my thought about this. Like, now, that doesn't mean that, like, you should snatch it away from a kid. The reason that the behavior at the U.S. Open was so reprehensible is that that guy would just yoint to that thing away from a kid where the, the player in question, it seemed from the video very clearly intended this child to have his hat. And then this, this CEO, yoinked it. And by the way,

yoinked it and then put it immediately in a bag. And it was clear like, that shit didn't mean anything to him. And it meant a lot to the kid. Now, my understanding is also that the kid was made whole here, right? Yes, I think so. And yeah, I think the, the CEO, subsequently said, who knows, but said that I guess it was for his kid or kids. Yeah, but he was a weird little jerk about it online. He was, like, threatening to sue people who said that he was a jerk. It was just like. That was fake, actually.

Oh, it was? Yeah, there was a fake, like, statements from him. Yeah, I did too initially, but that was not real, I believe. Okay, well, that's good. But that didn't make the round. That was, that exacerbated the whole situation. Okay. Yeah, he was like, yeah, there was this fake.

statement, I think, and that got everyone route up because he was the opposite of apologetic. But, yeah, he said, like, he claimed that he had been led to believe that, like, his kids had been promised something earlier in the match, and he thought it was intended for them. But, yeah, I don't know. Okay. Well, it, it looks, it, I still think that, like, there was a yoinking in that instance that, that puts it also in a separate category of behavior from what happened at this game, right? I will say, though, she didn't have the ball.

It wasn't like it was taken from her. And it wasn't like she had the ball and then like was being pilloried for not giving it to the kid. Like, finders keepers, she wasn't pushed, right? Like it wasn't like this guy aggressed toward her. And then she was like, hey, give me my ball back. That didn't happen. He got it. It seemed like fair and square.

And then she had an expectation because she was proximate to it. But again, it was loose that she should just have it, which is not the same thing. I stand by the notion that, like, if you catch a home run ball, that is yours. You get to take that as a memento. I think that kids are lovely. I think that the ballpark should be a place that is safe and welcoming to them. I think that if it's a foul ball, like, I'm fine with there being an expectation that those be given to children because it's, like, grow up, you know, like, have some self-respect. You, like, the foul balls aren't special.

No, stop. You should give those away to children. I'm fine with that. But if you catch a home run ball fair and square, I think you get to keep that. Sorry. Like, this isn't an anti-kid position. Kids are great. I like kids. I know several who are cool. I do know some little shhills, but we won't name them. Right. But like a home run is a separate category of memento. And if you catch it, I think you get to keep it. Sorry. I also think that you should control your kids in breweries. Like, this is a grown-up space. Sorry. Sue me. I'm not saying they can't be there, but I'm saying you got to watch them. That's all. That's all. That's all. People getting a little loose. People getting a little loose in public with their kids and also their dogs. You know? Like, I'm sorry. Mind your party, right? It should extend to creatures and people of all ages. Just be mindful of your party and how your party is interacting with the space around you. That's, I think, a more potentially neutral way to. to offer this opinion. I'm always thrilled to have a dog all up in my business. So if a stranger's dog comes up to me, thrilled, but I'm conscious of the fact that not everyone feels that way. Right, not everyone is. Right, not everyone is. So just be mindful of your party.

There you go. I think that we are going to, I'm dancing between raindrops, maybe. We're going to get emails that are like, you hate my child. That's not true. I think kids are great. I often enjoy them. I think that rando kids can be, pleasant in public spaces. We want public space to be for everyone. The public should be broadly

understood. Also, mind your party. So that's what I'll have to say, what I have to say about that. This lady was completely out of pocket. And I do not think her behavior is excusable. And I think that, like, in a prior era, what would have happened was she would have been booed, which she was, she might have met, directed, pointed appropriately rude commentary from those around her. Perhaps a beatwriter in search of color for a game might have noted there was some curfuffle in the stands. And then it would have been done. And I think that that's like, that would have, that's appropriate, that it be done, right? She should receive feedback in real time that her behavior is out of pocket.

We are trying to, despite all evidence to the contrary, have a society, right? We should exhibit care and respect to one another in public spaces so that the public can be broadly understood so that we can come together in communal space and successfully negotiate everyone being there together, which I think is good and important. But I don't think that what she did is something that should rise to an incident that follows her forever, right? Like, I just don't. Does that mean that she sufficiently learns the lesson if it doesn't? I don't know. I don't know that lady, you know? Maybe she would live on to be a rude Phillies Karen somewhere else.

She's a Phillies fan. Her capacity for rudeness could be endless. We don't know. I say this will love this. Phillies fans. You know I'm right. You know who your people are. You get it. They pride themselves on it sometimes. Right. So, like, I'm with you. I don't know. I don't know if she would have, like, learned a lesson and, and turned to the other cheek in the future. And I applaud this guy because he did two things that I find admirable. He de-escalated the situation by being like, freaking take it, lady. Like, I'm not going to fight you for it. It's just a ball. Yeah. It's just about it. Fine. If you're this worked up about it, then you can have it.

And I imagine on some level, in much the same way that there was probably a little voice in the back of this lady's head that was like, I'm going to hear about this later. There may well have been a little voice in the back of this guy's head being like, I imagine someone's going to make us whole, right? Like this was so aggressive on her part. The behavior was so out of pocket that like it is it is absolutely the sort of thing that is going to be remarked upon on the. broadcast, that someone is going to race to the team, that a team full of people who like probably want their fans to have a good time is going to be like, let's make sure this kid gets a ball. Like, I'm sure I imagine he on some level knew that this was going to be fine, but he de-escalated the situation, which we could all stand to do more often in public places.

And then he did the thing that people who have been treated to little presents are in a position to do often, but I think not to don't take advantage. of often enough, which is to be magnanimous, even though this person behaved badly toward him and his kid, right? Which was to say, enough. She's been given enough of the business. We can move on, right? And I think that that was a good thing to do also.

So the takeaways from... I'm broadly with you there. Yeah. The takeaways from this are, don't be weird and film people in public when the moment doesn't call for it because the moment very often does not, even though we act like it does. that's one broader takeaway, not really specific to this situation, but just something I wish we kept in mind more often. You will potentially be on the Jumbotronic concert, so don't bring your side piece and snuggle up with her because, like, come the hell on. If you catch a foul

ball and there is a child in your vicinity for your own piece and for the decorum that we have agreed upon, give that ball away. If you catch a home run, Meg says you can keep it. You can quote me on that publicly, but please don't because people are weird. on the internet, don't be a goblin at a baseball game, be a person who other people want to be around in public, and mind your party in public spaces, including, but not limited to any animals or children you bring with you. And also, if you see someone being out of pocket to animals and children, it is appropriate to intervene in that moment and say, hey, try and have a society, let's all have a good time.

Okay. Have I dodged greenups? I think so. We'll find out. I have a few thoughts. First, I need everyone to agree on how we're defining out of pocket, which I may have brought this up on a bonus pod before because a lot of people use it like you just used it to be like over the line, out of line, right? But also I kind of, I came up saying out of pocket to mean like you're paying yourself, right? You're paying out of pocket or you've lost money.

It can mean both things. those things, but then I also hear people say that it means you're, like, out of touch or out of commission. Like, I was, I'm away from the office. Yeah, I'm out of pocket. It means so many different things. It does. It does.

All right. Maybe that's okay, but I'm always just, maybe that's fine. You're like, I expected you to be an ally to me in this moment, and instead you were a traitor. So many things that aren't really all that closely related. They're not. I guess it's just a very, very versatile phrase. Anyway, that's a tangent. But yes, so I think it is a strange space to be in when you're in the stands at a big league bog park.

Because you don't feel like you're, I mean, you're in public, obviously, but you don't, you're not performing the way that the players are. You don't expect to be on TV necessarily, but you can be. And you should be aware of that fact. You're not just in private here. And so sometimes you can end up very much in the spotlight, even though. So you didn't really sign up for that. You're forewarned. You know what you're getting into.

You buy a ticket. You show up there. You could show up on national TV and everywhere on the internet. But you don't expect that to happen when you go in unless you're the sort of person who's courting that kind of attention. Which some people do. Some people do. But yes, you may end up in this situation. And so, yeah, this is not a situation where someone was filming.

You're just on camera because you're in a ballpark in a public space. etc. But then where it kind of just crosses the line, I think, with behavior like this is when you start, why do we need to identify who this woman is? Why do we need to figure out who she is? We don't have to hound her away from the park. Are you trying to get her fired or something? Now, I'm perfectly fine. If you're someone who is saying slurs and harassing people online and hiding behind anonymous account or something. Different category of behavior. Completely different. Yeah. So absolutely, sure. You can snitch on that person, you know, tell their employer, tell their whatever they work for that, hey, this person you employ is doing this incredibly harmful, toxic thing online. That's different. This, it's not that big a deal, ultimately. I think there is a value to navigating these things sort of collectively. And this is why we watch reality TV, if we watch reality TV, I think it's just because you sit there and you're like, well, I wouldn't do that in that situation.

oh, this is, this is, you can't do that. How could they do this, right? That's half the fun of watching reality shows is like, what would I do in this situation? What is the right thing to do in this situation? It's just kind of a way that we collectively decide what is acceptable in polite society. And so sometimes these conversations, if there is a debatable point, maybe there's some social utility to that. Okay, here's a situation and, you know, some real person maybe needs to be the butt of that. here's a, this is a teaching moment.

This is a moment where we can all just learn something, perhaps, from how this person reacted and what is the right way to react in this situation. I didn't see anyone defending her in this, you know, this wasn't like a 50-50 call where, oh, maybe she was in the right, maybe he was in the right. No, I think based on what we know, she clearly was in the wrong in this specific situation. So I don't know. Is there utility to like a little light shaming? Yeah, maybe like locally, you know, if you express some disapproval of some antisocial behavior and you promote pro-social behavior, maybe that person either learns a lesson and repents or just realizes this is how I have to behave or else people are going to be upset at me.

That's how we all learned how to behave. So yeah, there is like a can we have a civilization sort of aspect to this where, you know, within reason, yeah, if someone crosses the line and then, you know, you rebuke them. Okay. But here, no one was seriously hurt by this and we don't have to hound the person away from the park. There's also the fact that you don't know what's going on in this person's life and you don't know who they are. You can extrapolate from this one moment. Maybe it's the worst moment in that person's life. And maybe they're dealing with all sorts of stuff that has turned them into someone they're not normally. You know, for all we know, it's a perfectly nice person in 98% of situations.

And this was the one moment where, ah, I wish I could have that back. We all have regrets. We all have remorse. We all wish we had done things differently in some situation. And for most of us, that situation is not nationally broadcasted or retweeted and posted everywhere, right? So that's another reason to say. This should not haunt this person for the rest of their life if it wasn't seriously harmful because maybe this was an aberration.

You never know. And I also think that some people went after her specifically just in a bad faith way, just in a like, because of the way this woman presented and appeared, just, you know, jumping to conclusions or having some ax to grind where they were just thrilled to have someone who looked like this to go after for their other reasons that had nothing to do with this specific situation. So I'm almost putting that in a separate category. but yeah like we can we can leave it at the ballpark when it's this sort of situation we don't have to to take it into that person's real life i also like it was such obviously bad behavior that i almost wonder like how much utility does it have yeah you know what i mean like i guess there's utility in theory around her learning this behavior is at a part i imagine she knew very soon that that was true um and i I think the booze, the chorus of booze in the ballpark probably brought that point home. Although she was unrepentant in the moment with the booze. She was not chasing. Well, yeah, sure.

But like, there's being defensive, but that doesn't mean that it wasn't like, oh, you know, if you'll allow us to where I imagine on some level. Again, I don't know this lady. This is me speculating. And I'm, I'm reacting to it the way that I would. And I hope that the way I would react to a kid getting a home run ball would not be to, like, go do a like, nah, nah, nah. in a moment. But, like, on someone I wonder if she was like, yeah, maybe. Because you know

that, people know how the internet works, you know. Yes. So, it's not like, I imagine she is surprised that she's being splashed all over the place and sort of denigrated for this. Like, it's bad behavior. It's antisocial behavior.

And I think you're right that we want to, like, encourage pro-social behavior. And was there ambiguity about this where people like, oh, no, you should definitely, like, go give the business to a guy getting a home run ball for his kid, you know? Like, I just, I don't know, man. Yeah. Does the next person have a second thought before they act that way in the ballpark?

Because they remember, oh, remember when this woman got tarred and feathered? I don't want to be the next Phillies Karen. So I won't, I'll refrain from doing that. Maybe, like, maybe that'll happen. But in the heat of the moment, are you even thinking and processing like that? If you are, hopefully you're not doing that in the first place. And again, I'm not saying that, like, I wanted to be clear, like, her being booed in ballpark was, like, a completely appropriate reaction. I think that that was the right thing for people in that spot seeing that need to say, no thank you, right?

But I do think that it is worth differentiating, you know, we're constantly as a society trying to negotiate these, like, these questions. How do we come together in public space? How do we do that when we're in community with people? How do we do that when we're not in community with people, right? What are our baseline expectations of how we should treat one another? And when those norms are violated, how do we communicate that? Where am I from? That that was the emphasis on the word.

Look, do I know if I made any sense talking about Sean Murphy? I don't. I was so worried about the noise from the landscapers bleeding through. Who, who even knows what I said? That was 20 minutes ago. I have no memory of it. I don't know if I'm doing much better in this segment, but here we are. So I guess what I would say is like, this is a worthwhile conversation more generally and

and thinking through how we enforce norms and how we make public spaces, like, pleasant to be in with each other when we might be very different kinds of people. Like, I think that that's a worthwhile conversation. And I think that they're also, it's important for. people to be able to move on from things when the the amount of a program they've received is sufficient to the violation of norms that they've committed, right? And so we need to let people move on. That's important to do too. So I don't know how, you know, and like not to broaden this out too far, but like I do think this is like going to be a really important

conversation for us, like, as a society moving forward because there are norms being violated and how we address that stuff is, like, often much more important than, like, the home run ball. Yes, that's, yeah, that's why I'm interested in this or wanted to bring it up just more about the broader implications of this, because we talk about baseball for baseball's sake, but also baseball as it reflects society and human behavior and everything else. And, yeah, this is an issue writ large, and this is one specific instance. of it. I also think that we do need to enforce as a norm in the ballpark that like a home run ball is different than a foul ball when it comes to your kid obligations. Is that wrong? Am I,

am I out of pocket with that take? Do you think that's a bad take? I'm open to feedback on these sorts of things. Just generally maybe we need to relax about going after any kind of ball. I think it's one of the nice. Amen to that brother. Like good God. Okay. Right. Especially if it's not some milestone ball that has historic significance and will be worth a ton of money at auction. If it's just a ball, it's a nice thing. It's a great thing about baseball that it provides these keepsakes for fans and you can keep them. This is a really nice thing that baseball offers, that other sports, many other sports don't, or at least don't with the same regularity. It's a great thing to catch a ball. But it's not worth steamrolling someone. It's just a ball.

And yeah, it's freighted with some significance because it's a ball that was just held in a major leaguer's hand on a mound, was just just made contact with a big leaguer's bat. That's a cool thing. But it's not really worth bodying someone over. But anyway, I think we're pretty much on the same page. I imagine most people are. But it does just morph into a black mirror sort of scenario where you just get caught up in this urge to dunk and to say, like, I would never do that. I'm superior. And maybe you are. Hopefully you are. I think probably most people would have been in this specific situation. But when it becomes vindictive and kind of crosses the line with just a

campaign against this person, well, suddenly they're not the baddie anymore. You've become the baddie now because... Or they're at least not the only baddie, right? There can be more than one. There are so many baddies. Speaking of baddies, I guess we should transition to the final thing we wanted to talk about today. And an instance where I'm perfectly fine with naming and shaming, because this is a story that was written by Brittany Droly and Alex Andreev at The Athletic, published on Wednesday. Excellent story headlined four VPs, others affiliated with Detroit Tigers, accused of misconduct toward women.

Tigers on the field's pretty feel-good story the past year or so. last year, this year, fun team, good players. But the front office, this is a different story. So this is many men over the past several years and really continuing until quite recently, up to the present, accused of mistreating women who were also employed by Illich Sports and Entertainment. That's Illich, as in Mike and Chris, which operates the Tigers and also the Red Wings and Comerica Park and Little Caesar's Arena and other entertainment entities. It's this conglomerate that is kind of this combined entity where people work for Illich Sports

and Entertainment in addition to the Tigers, or it's the same thing, essentially, or, you know, you kind of work for the hockey team or the baseball team, but you're part of this larger umbrella corporation kind of, that's not important. The important thing is that all sorts of front office staffers for the Tigers, It's described as just a dysfunctional kind of toxic culture where women can't feel safe. It's just rampant boys' club behavior, comments about women's personal appearance, either to them or to others that was overheard, you know, even rising to the level of abuse, at least in one of these instances. Most of this is verbal. The best known instance of this was Sam Menzin, the Tiger's former assistant general manager,

who, like some other former baseball operation staffers for other teams, was sending lewd, unsolicited photos to women who worked for the team. He was dismissed after internal investigation, or I guess he resigned before he could be fired back in April. The others are staffers in various other departments. but the behavior ranges from just like commentary on appearances, off-color, comments, you know, sort of sexist stuff that made people uncomfortable. And also in one instance,

there was a man who was allegedly having a relationship that wasn't disclosed, a romantic relationship with a female coworker, and was, according to three people, cited in this piece, sources, pushed her. downstairs, and I guess that's the most serious allegation in here, but it seems to be a pretty pervasive problem. Yeah, and, you know, people with varying degrees of proximity to the baseball, which I don't say to in any way diminish the severity of the allegations in this, but I do think it's an important distinction insofar as people are thinking about sort of how.

they relate to the team. Like, this is seemingly a pervasive problem. Some of it is, to your point, very proximate to baseball operations. Some of it is more diffuse across business, broadcasting, PR roles, right? Which, again, I do not say to diminish it. I, you know, if anything, it is suggestive of a broader cultural issue across the organization sort of broadly understood. But I do think is like a useful distinction to draw here. And it's like, I think one of the things I was struck by in reading this piece, which, as you noted, is like, very well reported, very deeply reported and I think very convincingly written is how pervasive a problem it is across issues that might seem very small and issues that are also quite large in their impact on the ability of women in the organization to do their work, right? It's things as small as the organization being given, and by the organization, I mean sort of this illage group more broadly constituted, being given feedback that like, hey, we need like, they didn't use this terminology, but this is what they mean, like pads and tampons in the bathrooms at work, all the way up to we don't have paid maternity leave, which as an aside is probably they don't have paid parental leave, right, which is bad for men too in case people need that as a hook to care of. this um but you know stuff as small as we don't have tampons in the bathroom all the way up to i

don't have paid maternity leave you know people who's like physical safety at work seems to be imperiled people who are receiving harassing remarks at work i think that like all of this stuff adds up to one very clear message which is you don't belong here right you're going to be harassed You're not going to be able to take leave when you have a baby. There's a bunch in here about the organization not being welcome to older employees. That seems to cut across genders. And sadly, is not unique to the Tigers, right? The piece notes that some of the civil actions against the tigers have actually been tabled

while broader action is being pursued against Major League Baseball, particularly on the scouting side of things, where there are a lot of teams that have faced accusations of age discrimination over the years. But it's like, you know, when we talk about diversifying major league baseball, that is a project that I think people want to see actualized across a lot of different demographics, not just gender, but I think that one thing that people don't really take into consideration and that this piece throws into very stark relief is like it's not enough to hire. you need to retain people in order to have a diverse workplace. And part of retaining women is often accommodating them when they decide to have children, right?

And that accommodation isn't just about maternity leave, although dear God, it is often on maternity leave. Yeah. The story reported, by the way, that the Tigers are one of three teams that do not have a paid parental leave. And if you would ask me to guess the other two. other two? He would have been my other two. Yeah, the tigers, the angels who have all sorts of cheapness and mismanagement and everything. And yes, there's like a California policy. You can get some leave and time off in compensation. But it's not through the team. And they've cheaped out in any number of ways with the ways that they treat their employees. And then the Texas Rangers who are infamously the only team that hasn't had a pride night as well. Right. So I think that the reality is that you have to be able to be a person when working for a team. Now, mothers are not the only people whose time is like put upon when working for major league organizations, right? I think that a great many people who work for teams are asked to work a tremendous amount. They are asked to sacrifice time away from their families. This is not something that is only applicable to women working. for teams, but it is both within the context of baseball and just being in the workplace generally historically been a very reliable way to keep women out of senior roles in organizations.

Because if you, not all women have kids, not all women want to have kids, but if you don't accommodate women who do want to have kids, which is a lot of women, you're not going to end up with those women either staying in your organization in low-level roles and you're certainly not going to have room for them as they're trying to advance through their careers and occupy senior role. So it's an important question, right? And as someone who, you know, knows what it feels like when you work at a place that doesn't have freaking tampons in the bathroom, then you have to walk across the office with your tampon. It's a very small detail, but it was one of the ones that I really honed in on when reading this because it's like,

oh, you just don't want them here. Like, that's what it says to me. Like, front to back, from the most junior levels on up, you don't want women here. Yeah, or even explicitly in some cases with the comments about not looking a certain way and what is it, someone saying, you know, not hot enough to work in sports or something, someone who is just saying this repeatedly to people

or multiple people maybe saying it to multiple other people, which, I mean, that's sort of making it even more explicit, but all these other things are sending the same signal in their own way. And I'm sure that this does not apply to everyone who works through the team. And it sounds like part of what is going on here based on the reporting and the piece is that because there has been this consolidation across all of Illich's various sports and entertainment related properties, the HR team is being taxed to the point of not being able to adequately intervene on lower level HR issues. they are seemingly tackling the big stuff, but, you know, those lower level issues, one, still have an impact on your experience of being in the workplace, and as the piece of notes,

can sometimes be harbingers of future larger problems that were they addressed adequately when they were small, might be successfully nipped in the butt. So I think that, like, it's on the tigers now to successfully account for how they are changing the culture within their organization, right? And sort of illich more generally, right? And that's why I think having some understanding of this being a pervasive problem across all of their various sports and entertainment properties groups, endeavors. Endeavors is probably a better word is useful because this is a problem of the Tigers and also a problem of their ownership more generally, and now it's on them to successfully convince the people who work for them,

the people who might want to work for them, and the people who spend their time and treasure supporting their various teams, why it's different now. And, you know, I'm heartened in reading the piece to hear that they are going to institute a maternity leave policy. It sounds like a parental leave policy that will start in 2026. That's a very good and important step. It sounds like for these things in the United States will be a relatively generous leave policy. But the fact that this seems to have taken root

in every part of the organization as a cultural problem means that a maternity leave policy on its own is not sufficient to address this as a concern. And, you know, it's a problem. And if you don't view the diversity piece of it as sort of like an important value in it of itself,

I guess I would, just say to the tigers, like, women who work in the industry talk to each other. And I'm sure that this as an issue was well known among potential baseball ops folks already. But like, you will end up missing out on talent if you don't address issues like this. Because I do think there is like a genuine effort on the part of major league organizations, or at least most major league organizations, to try to diversify their workplace. And that means that when qualified female candidates come on the market, they often have a lot of options, weirdly,

despite how bad a job the league and its various teams have done in like a speedy amelioration of this situation. You know, when qualified women hit the market, they often have a lot of teams to talk to. And if you have a reputation like this, they're not going to want to talk to you, right? Because why subject yourself to this? It's already such a hard job, right?

Even if the organization takes a proactive approach to recruiting and trying to make sure that the various people that they are bringing into the organization are broadly representative of the folks who care about baseball, watch baseball, even if they are within the context of Major League Baseball teams trying to be accommodating to the reality of people having families, it's still super hard.

You're going to work so many hours for so much less money than people who are qualified for those roles could make in almost any other industry, right? And so you are diminishing your own ability to recruit talent that could have a meaningful impact on your organization if this is the kind of culture you put forth. That might not matter to everybody. can see reading the story some of the people who were implicated in it very well connected to some very important people in the leak, right? Yeah, I was going to bring that up. There's this one person named here as a vice president of communications in broadcasting who has some

close relationship with Rob Manfred, and this guy is accused of demeaning remarks about physical appearance and berating people and screaming at women and domineering behavior, et cetera. And the defense of him from the senior vice president of communication and broadcasting provided an on-the-record quote, which was that the athletic, quote, may have talked to the 10 or 12 people who were disgruntled, and that's unfortunate. When I read that, I was like, 10 or 12. Right. Do you think that's a defense?

Yeah. I was like, I don't think that that's standing up for your guy quite the way you think it is. There are 10 or 12. 10 or 12 so disgruntled that they're going to talk to. a reporter about your bad behavior, and that's a defense. I mean, that sounds like grounds for firing. If that many people are that upset with your behavior that they're going to talk to the press about it, then maybe you need to examine that behavior.

So that was, yeah, that was the defense. But I do wonder how much the scrutiny, because there's a quote here, they get a response from the team that, oh, yeah, we're going to implement a policy, leave policy next year. and they say that it's been in development, but how long does it take to develop a policy that just about everyone else in the league has? And so I wonder whether that was damage control or just, oh, well, you know,

the press is sniffing around, we better come up with something quick. Because even though it's not as if there was no accountability in this organization, because most of the men described here were fired, right, or resigned in disgrace after an investigation, right? So, but there was at least one person who was suspended and then another investigation was launched seemingly as a result of the inquiry from the athletic. Yeah, it did have a like, he did what kind of vibe to it?

Like, oh, we got to look at that guy again. Yeah. Yeah. So sometimes, you know, sunlight is the best disinfectant sort of thing where press brings attention to something. That's an example of what we were just talking about. where placing that spotlight and that attention, maybe that can improve things. And even if they are implementing a leave just to get people off their back, well, it's still a good thing. It's still going to benefit people.

So whether they had the right motivations or not, well, it's still better to have one than not. And, you know, we're not even getting into, I mean, this extended to broadcasters, Cameron-Mabin, Craig Monroe. Yeah, Monroe, who had more serious allegations connected to him. But, yeah, those stories. had already, I guess, made the round. So, you know, it just seems like kind of a top to bottom thing. And you read a story like this and you wonder, like, boy, how deep does this go? Is this just the tip of the iceberg?

And then, of course, how deep does it go league-wide, sport-wide? Is this a complete outlier? Or was this maybe a hotbed of this behavior? Or you just had some public-facing people and some people who came forward and it became a story? Is it going on in other places? Obviously, in some... in some degrees it is, even if it's just like unintentional sort of sexist stuff, you know, you mentioned just like tampons not being available, but also something that I'm sure you're

well aware of. And, you know, women in baseball have talked about is just like maybe there's no bathroom for, you know, there's like no women's bathroom or you have to go really far to find one, you know. Where am I going to change, you know? Yeah, or if you're breastfeeding or, you know, all these things. Like the facilities might just not be there. And so that's not even like someone decided to discriminate necessarily, but it's still one of these sort of institutional forms of discrimination just because of the whole history of it. So, yeah, this is like when I was working on the Ella Black series earlier this year, you know, it's 1890, but a lot of it sounded very familiar, which was one of the reasons I wanted to work on that and kind of tied it to the present at the end of that series is that like, yeah, this is 1890, but you don't have to.

go back to 1890 to find examples of very similar behavior. You can talk to people who have experienced it now. So, yeah, you hope that this is not an indication of just, you know, all the stuff that hasn't come to light, but is still just as pervasive. But obviously, it's out there in some measure. Yeah, I think that, you know, you're right to point out that action was taken against the individuals who have been implicated in this. And that's good. You want that accountability. I think that institutions can take a long time to improve, although it sounds like they managed to devolve in relatively quick fashion, right? Like part of, it sounds like part of what happened here was this consolidation across the different Eulich teams. And over time, although not that long of a time, this culture was able to sort of take root and impact a lot of. of people negatively, which is terrible, but the degree to which there has been change, we could view in an optimistic light, which is, well, if it devolved, in theory, it can evolve, right? It can change and you can have new perspective and new leadership brought in.

And there's going to be a ton of scrutiny on them now, right? And that's not going to make for a particularly comfortable working environment, but I think ultimately is probably to the organization's benefit because people just do better work. when they are able to feel safe at work, when they are able to be assessed on criteria that are directly related to their job performance and not like how they look when they don't have to worry about harassment

or texts that are weird, right? It results in better baseball, in better, what's the other team they have? Is they have hockey? Do they also have hockey? Yeah, Red Wings. Okay, right. Okay, I know stuff.

Right, you get better hockey. You get better, whatever. When people are able to just be comfortable at work, not comfortable in a send a gross text kind of way, but in a I'm going to be treated with respect by my coworkers. And, you know, I'm sympathetic to the idea that, like, it is a very strange workplace. We talk about that within the context of the players, but, like, you're working really long hours. You're with these people all the time. It breeds a familiarity. And that isn't necessarily bad, right?

having close personal relationships with the people you work with can be really rewarding. It can bring you together as a team. It can make you feel like you're pulling in the same direction. But you've got to be pulling in the same direction and you got to be able to feel confident that you're not going to be harassed and that you're not going to be the subject of retribution if you go to HR and say, hey, this is kind of weird and I need help navigating it. It doesn't mean that everyone's going to get fired every time. It doesn't mean that every time somebody does something that requires,

course correction that it necessarily merits being fired. But if you're talking about people's butts, you know, if you're telling them, you're not hot enough to work in sport, look, I'm not going to say that male broadcasters, personalities, whatever, don't face scrutiny for their looks. They do. They absolutely do. That's not cool either. Let people, you don't have to be hot to be in sports, but it does, I will say, and this is an

ungenerous thing, although I'm not going to name names, so it's fine. Men can look so many different ways and be on TV. And what? You're given women the business because they're not hot, quote unquote. Get the hell out of here with that shit. You see people on TV. You watch some of these guys on TV. They're not hot. And that's fine. They don't have to be hot. They just have to be good of their jobs. Not even on camera that much usually, but yeah. That's the other thing. They're not even on camera that much. But it's like, you know, the real range of handsome in in booths across the league and guess what that's fine yeah i don't need i don't need them all to be hot that's not the i don't need any of them to be hot they can look whatever they

i'm going to get myself in trouble now but you know what i'm trying to say it's like that's not a requirement that doesn't impact their ability to be good at their jobs and i need i need that reality to permeate for people when it comes to to women working in sports you don't you just look way you look, you know? Yeah, of course. You're fine. If you have it. If you don't, also okay, you know. Okay, a few follow-ups. One more suggestion for what to call an immaculate inning featuring only one pitch type comes from listener Chris, who says the first thing that came to mind as a coffee and baseball lover was a single origin immaculate inning. At least, that's how my friends and I would describe it if my Rockies ever accidentally threw one.

Hey, don't sell your Rockies short, Chris. Rex brothers threw one for the Rockies back in 2014, and Hermann Marquez through one in 2018. And they probably did it on purpose. I like that suggestion, though, for the non-coffee drinkers in the audience, which includes me, single origin coffee is coffee that comes from a single known geographic region. So it fits. Also, we talked last time about whether it's better for position player pitchers to throw super slow pitches or super fast pitches, by position player standards at least. And as some people in the Discord group said, And why not both? If it's sometimes advantageous to slow it way down, maybe it would be best to alternate between

very fast and very slow pitches, assuming you have the capacity to. And we did talk about an example back in May when Johnny Parada of the A's struck out Shohei Otani gave him four off-speed pitches in a row and then hit him with an 89.4 mile-per-hour fastball that Otani struck out on. Fowl tipped it, but still. So that was a fun example. I do like when a position player pitcher sort of sandbags you, pretends that they're tossing and then fires one in there.

But parades off-speed pitches were all in the 60s, not in the 30s. Patreon supporter Miff, however, noted that in a game back in August, minor leaguer Nick Kale, a position player for the Nashville Sound, the AAA affiliate of the Brewers, pitched against the Durham Bulls this was August 16th, threw a clean inning and varied his speeds in a way that even Zach Grinke might envy. I'll read you the pitch speeds. He threw 13 pitches in this outing. Here they are per baseball savant.

I will round up to the nearest mile per hour. 51, 52, 40, 87, 43, 40, 89, 40, 36, 40, 44, 85, 488. So bottomed out at 36, topped out at 89, a range of 53 miles per hour, not too shabby. And on that day, at least, it worked. No bull reached base. However, on the very next day, August 17th, he pitched again against the Bulls. Maybe this is the reliever familiarity effect coming into play. Probably not, but that time he got knocked around. Pitched another inning, but gave up four hits, five runs, all earned, on a walk, a hit by pitch, and two home runs. And on that day, he actually dialed it up to 90.4. However, his slowest pitch was 41.5. Maybe that was his problem. Didn't dip down into the 30s. Got to go off off speed. A real change of pace. Listener Trey, in response to a couple recent outro notes about the sound of baseball broadcasts, pointed me to an audio documentary that I subsequently listened to.

to on sound mixing on sports broadcasts. This was a BBC documentary from 2011 that was published by the podcast 99% Invisible in 2014. It's mostly not about baseball. There's a bit of baseball. But I'll link to it on the show page if you're interested in hearing more on that subject and hearing more of the sports you consume.

Finally, I'm delighted to announce that there's a new baseball show. It's called Task. It's HBO's new Sunday night prestige mini-series. Created and written by Brad Inglesby, who also wrote and produced the HBO series Mayor of East Town. This one, like that one, is set in the Philadelphia area, also a crime drama. In this one, Mark Ruffalo plays the head of an HBO task force that's going after a group of violent robbers in the area, and you get to see things from the task force perspective, the eponymous titular task force, as well as the robbers.

It just premiered this past weekend. It's going to be seven episodes. Point is, the first episode was a baseball show. In multiple scenes, Mark Rufflow's character, Tom, is listening to baseball broadcasts. And in another scene, he's drinking out of a cup that has some Phillies trivia on the side, which he shares with his friend. And it says who holds the Phillies franchise record for single season homers. And of course, I immediately said out loud, Ryan Howard, which impressed my wife moments later when Mark Ruffalo said Ryan Howard. Though you know, Howard hit 58 for the Phillies in 2006, Kyle Schwerber's only eight behind him.

and eight homers for Kyle Schwerber. That's two good games. By the way, I was thinking, could one void a contract if a player did not disclose a significant injury for an extended period? I imagine it might be possible, probably difficult.

Of course, contracts are fully guaranteed for major leaguers. They usually do contain clauses, I believe, that say something about the player's physical condition. You could maybe argue that if a player knowingly concealed an injury, that that was actionable in some way,

I'd expect that the players association would be very vigilant about that sort of thing because you wouldn't want to set a precedent. Guaranteed contracts are a big win for baseball players. You don't want to give teams any ground there, give them an in to void contracts willy-nilly. Seems like a slippery slope also seems like something that a team wouldn't do lightly because there would be blowback to that. And it might be difficult to prove. It might just not be worth the squeeze, especially if you want to maintain a relationship with that player and hope that they'll come back and be good again for you.

Anyway, my consternation on this topic is not really south. Not out here saying, won't anyone think of the owners being misled, defrauded by players. That's not my motivation here. I'm more interested in the effect on the team's on field fortunes than its financial fortunes and the effect on the future of the player. We are quite pleased when our podcast listeners improve our fortunes and secure the future of Effectively Wild by supporting us on Patreon, which you can do by going to patreon.com slash Effectively Wild and signing up to pledge some monthly or yearly amount to help keep the podcast going. Help us stay ad-free and get yourself access to some perks. As have the following five listeners, Jeremy Carl, Alexander Stedman, Steve Sacks, not like the baseball player, different spelling, Hannah, and Nick Pierce.

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 answers, personalized messages, discounts on merch and ad-free fancrafts memberships, and so much more. Check out all the offerings at patreon.com slash Effectively Wild. If you are 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 EffectivelyWild on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, music, and other podcast platforms. You can join our Facebook group at Facebook.com slash group, such effectively wild. You can find the Effectively Wild subreddit at our slash Effectively Wild. And you can check the show notes at Fangraphs or the episode description in your podcast app for links to the stories and stats we cited today. Thanks to Shane McKean for his editing and production assistance. We'll be back with one more episode before the end of the week. Talk to you then.

Thank you.