Effectively Wild: A FanGraphs Baseball Podcast - Effectively Wild Episode 2408: Cease and D. Cease’d

Episode Date: December 2, 2025

Ben Lindbergh and Meg Rowley respond to the responses to their response to a recent listener email, discuss (14:38) the Blue Jays’ Dylan Cease deal (including a Stat Blast about pitchers with big ERA-FIP gaps at 34:11), Anthony Rendon’s potential retirement (47:23), and the Orioles’ Ryan Helsley signing (1:05:37 ), before scrutinizing ESPN’s annual offseason survey of MLB executives (1:15:53). Audio intro: Andy Ellison, “Effectively Wild Theme” Audio outro: Luke Lillard, “Effectively Wild Theme” Link to EW Episode 2407 Link to T20 cricket Link to Baumann on Cease Link to team SP projections Link to contracts draft results Link to Canadian currency wiki Link to ERA-FIP gap findings Link to ERA estimators study Link to Rendon report Link to Rendon EW episode Link to The Force Awakens scene Link to Helsley starting post Link to Helsley signing post Link to Helsley BP player card Link to BP pitching leaderboards Link to Ben on Alcantara in 2022 Link to Trueblood on predictability Link to Sam on the Crasnicks Link to new ESPN survey Link to Patreon gift subs Link to Secret Santa sign-up  Sponsor Us on Patreon  Give a Gift Subscription  Email Us: [e-mail]  Effectively Wild Subreddit  Effectively Wild Wiki  Apple Podcasts Feed   Spotify Feed  YouTube Playlist  Facebook Group  Bluesky Account  Twitter Account  Get Our Merch! var SERVER_DATA = Object.assign(SERVER_DATA || {}); Source

A baseball podcast, analytics and stats with Ben and Meg from Fangraves. Effectively wine. Effective in life. Hello and welcome to episode 2408 of Effectively Wild, a Fangraphs baseball podcast brought you by our Patreon supporters. I'm Meg Raleigh of Fangraphs, and I'm joined by Ben Lindberg of the ringer, Ben, how are you? Doing well. I've given thanks. How are you? I have also given thanks and felt gratified to do so. Yeah, well, we have much to give thanks for including our reader mail. And to forestall future messages, I must respond to the

responses to one of the listener emails we discussed on our last pre-Thanksgiving episode. Yeah. On 2407, the, I believe, second email we answered, which was from Mark, a Patreon supporter, who suggested a zombie runner alternative where each team would play one single extra inning when the game is tied after nine. and the winner would be determined by how quickly each team scores. Right. So it would be first to one run, essentially.

Each team would get a crack at it in the top half and the bottom half. And the winner would be determined by who used the fewest plate appearances to score. And one of the objections that we raised was that this system could be gamed. Yeah. Because you could essentially put people on. base in the bottom half of the 10th, I suppose. If the team that was visiting scored in the top half of the inning in a certain number of played appearances, you could then advance the home team's counter to more played

appearances than that by just say walking the bases loaded if you were in a certain situation. And so it could be manipulated and we ruled it out on that basis, maybe not only that basis, but partly that basis, because we were willing to entertain the thought that there was something compelling about the idea of fastest to score, and it would inject some extra suspense and pressure into a situation that already comes with extra suspense and pressure. However, we got an email from many people. This was maybe a popular topic of discussion around the Thanksgiving table. I don't know. But we heard from Nat and Tom and Tim and Kelly and maybe more people who pointed out that one solution to that would be to use outs instead of plate appearances. So it would still be fastest to score.

Another objection we had was that this would sort of render outs irrelevant because it just wouldn't really matter how many outs you recorded. It would be all about the plate appearances. Right. So in this version of it, you need to score with the fewest possible outs recorded against you. And that would help because it would still make outs meaningful, and it would prevent the type of gaming that we were talking about. So I think that is a better wrinkle. That's a better spin on it, probably. And sometimes we publish a podcast, and then we immediately get three emails pointing out something, and I think,

dart it, I wish we had just thought of that in the moment. but you can't always think of everything. But that's why we have the wisdom of crowds, which I questioned on that episode, but it does apply to the effectively wild listenership. Yeah, a clever group by and large, you know? Yes, I would say so. Yeah.

We're still going to get a bunch of emails, you realize that. Probably. Yeah, but at least some people will hear this and will say, you know what, I was about to email, but now I don't need to because other people had it covered. Other people responded to that to point out, that another way you could get around that, this was Zach and Matt D,

said that you could use at-bats instead of plate appearances, which would do away with the walking someone to put someone on and use an extra plate appearance because a walk is not a bat. It's just a plate appearance. And so that would kind of get you around that specific thing that you couldn't just walk the bases loaded because that wouldn't add any plate appearances to your tally. That would be good because it would remind people or inform people for the first time that there is actually a difference between at-bats and plate appearances, which is an important distinction in my mind.

And you know I try to keep those two straight on the podcast. So it would be kind of nice, I guess, to have that reminder for everyone that these are not synonymous with each other. I disagree that it would be nice to have the reminder because we have a very high pain tolerance. So when it comes to pedantry, we invite it. At this point, even if we were to come out and say, we hate this, we find it tiresome. The emails would still come, Ben. You know, we don't hate it, and we mostly don't find it tiresome. But even if we did, we've made our bed.

And now we must sleep in it, you know, or lie in it at the very least. We are a bed-bound sort of group here. Yeah, we might lie in it sleeplessly. staring at the ceiling, pondering the pedantry. Right, that possibility exists. We have to allow for the possibility that one does not need to be asleep in order to be in bed. So anyway, this, like, minor digression on the state of our being whilst in this bed of pedantry that we have made, perhaps drives the point home. But other people, they don't enjoy these sorts of distinctions.

And I appreciate that, like, you know, sometimes one might. You must eat one's vegetables. We like vegetables. You ate vegetables to the point of illness one time. You know, that's how committed to the bit, the Brussels bit, you are. But other people do not enjoy pedantry in the same way. And I think having it hinge so much on, like, minute details that other people don't get behind makes it less appealing as a solution for something that is meant to sort of be easily. digestible and thrilling within the context of extra innings, which, look, again, people should eat their vegetables. One could argue that inviting people to be more into the minutia would be good for them in any number of ways. But I think there's a balance to these sorts of things. Also, if we were to become known as the advocates of such a system, and we were to offer as one

of its selling points, that it would give you the chance to really engage with the tiny differences. People wouldn't like us. No, I wouldn't lead with that. If I were trying to sell people on the system, I wouldn't lead with the fact that finally people could keep straight. Finally. That there's a plate appearance and there's an at-bat and they are not fully overlapping.

So, yeah, I think if we could go back and start over and do it all again, I wonder whether we would even need at-bats. Could we just suffice on plate appearances alone? I guess there are still some times when I appreciate it. having both at-bats and plate appearances. You still want to calculate a batting average every now and then. I guess you could calculate a batting average with plate appearances as the denominator, but they tell you a slightly different thing.

I don't mind having both, but I do mind when people use them interchangeably. I understand that's not a universal concern. They are not the same. And again, I would just offer that, like, I do think it's an important distinction. And I'm maybe being a little ungenerous to people. by saying that it is, oh, so complicated, you know, it's, it's not, it's not that complicated. It's not weird. It's one of those baseball quirks that sets the real baseball knowers apart from the fledgling baseball knowers.

But like, you know, OPS isn't that complicated either. And there's a preference for even simpler things, right? I was going to say, Wobah isn't even that complicated. but I get, you know, that takes a little, it takes a little minute to develop your intuitive sense of woeba, you know, can take you a second. So I think OPS is like a more relatable, you can grab on or like index stats anyway. How can you not be pedantic about baseball? We can't not. We can't not.

And veggies are delicious. Veggies are dessert for me. So I don't know what you're talking about. Do you ever find yourself in a spot where you have to actively intervene on either the, well, the pedantic impulse, but even just the, I guess what I'd call editor brain, do you ever find yourself in the spot where you're like, I'm at a party with people, you know? And I know this is going to sound like I'm giving you, I'm nagging you almost. I know that you at a party with people isn't a scenario that you have to, like, deal with very, by your own choice. This isn't me saying you're unpopular and don't have friends. The party is just wherever I am.

Right. You're just not a big party guy. You're not like a dinner party guy. But if you were, you just spent a holiday with people, did you have to go, I'm going to keep that in my editor brain. I'm going to keep that thought in my editor brain. Do you ever have had that experience? I think I do do that automatically. I do muzzle myself.

And people in my personal life don't even ask me all that much about baseball. I think they probably know I get my baseball thoughts out there in the world in other forms. And I don't need to express them on my off hours, off the clock, off the mic. So yes, I appreciate that. And I think we have probably exhausted the intricacies of this particular question. But the reframe. version, I'm kind of into it. I would watch the fastest to score in outs instead of played appearances.

I do think that, yeah, the out edit, it improves it improves it meaningfully. Yeah, I think that's a very strong edit. I'd still just rather watch regular old baseball. But if it's that or zombie runner, yeah, this would be kind of compelling. And one other point that we got from a couple people, including at least one mat, maybe multiple mats, but one Patreon supporter, Matt, argued that it would lead to more small ball, significantly more small ball, the score and fewer plate appearances proposal, because there would be more bunting, because you would want to push that run across, because outs wouldn't matter. So maybe if we add outs, then maybe that makes people a little less likely to bunt, and that would be kind of boring if it just evolved into bunting, which sometimes the zombie runner does, as well. So you'd have to balance the need to expend that out with the urge to get someone

in scoring position, which is typically the case in regular old baseball. And the last bit of feedback we got to this question from Peter. Patreon supporter wrote in to say, I'm sure I'm not the only one to say this. And he actually was, although many other people said other things about this question. Peter said the extra innings challenge proposed in the latest episode is just clearly reverse cricket. In cricket, the rule is you can score unlimited runs until all the players are gotten out via wickets, and then the other team will go and try and outscore that team.

If they do score enough, the game is immediately over. So the proposed version is basically the opposite of that, one run with unlimited outs as a cricket enjoyer. I think cricket has the better option. So maybe we just have fewer cricket enjoyers than baseball enjoyers in our audience, which would track because this is, after all, a baseball podcast. Not a cricket podcast, but sometimes they do overlap.

And I'm always delighted by the differences and the similarities. There's the at-bats and plate appearances of batted ball sports, baseball and cricket, kind of. Do you think that that's the first time that cricket and immediately end have ever been so proximate to one another? Maybe, yeah. My understanding is that it can go on for quite a while. It depends on the type of cricket. They've really sped up. They've got some abbreviated

speed cricket types, but yes. I bet cricket purists hate that, though. I bet they think that's terrible. Are there cricket podcasts or there are too pedantic? Well, no, I know they're... Hold on. Let me ask the rest of my question. It's a massively popular global sport, Meg.

I understand that. Yeah. Yeah. Where people are as pedantic about cricket as we are about baseball. Right. Yeah. And do those people similarly?

hate. They don't call it sped-up cricket, do they? What do they call it when they... Like T-20, cricket? T-20, okay. Do they feel the way about T-20 that we feel about the zombie runner? Or is it less controversial? Maybe it's not controversial at all. Maybe cricket old heads are like, yeah, that's a good note, you know? Fundamental to the sport in some ways, but an improvement nonetheless. I think both can coexist. Yeah. If you want to settle in for your three-day match or whatever it is then that's there for you but if you would want to people camp you know i don't know i don't know if they camp out is it like going to a concert at the gorge where you can camp and then walk over because like what do you do i mean probably go back to your house

or your hotel or something in between but so you just have like a ticket and they let you come in and out i assume so yeah the bathroom situation must be horrifying if they if they camp because this is a lot of I don't think it's like Woodstock every time they play cricket. I think they've probably sorted that out. Very dignified game. Well, yeah, I mean... You got to wear whites a lot of the time, so the muddy bathroom situation would probably be problematic in any number of ways. Okay, let's talk about actual baseball and baseball news, because there has been some, some of which is old news, but is new to effectively wild because it broke after we posted or at least recorded our last podcast.

I had an outro note about the Dillen Sees signing, the Anthony Rendon deferral talks. There has also been a Ryan Helsley signing. So we can discuss these things a little bit, the biggest news being the Dillen Cs signing. Dillen Cs heading to Toronto, seven years, 210 million bucks. Yeah. Broke on Thanksgiving Eve early enough for Ewan to get the blog up pre- Thanksgiving. I must give credit where it is due. That was a Matt Martell edit.

Yes. Matt saved the day because that news broke like 15 minutes before my parents were scheduled to roll up. Inopportune timing, yeah. It was really inopportune, but that match sure great. And so, yeah, I wouldn't dream of taking credit for that edit. So if there are any typos, that's his fault. You wouldn't dream of taking credit, but you'd dream of delegating blame. if there is any, but I'm sure there isn't.

It was a perfect blog, well written, and well edited. A partial pre-write, I presume. Yeah, it was pre-assigned anyway. Yeah, and then the specifics were filled in, and the specifics were somewhat surprising, at least the contract terms. Yeah. That's a big number to 10, with deferrals.

With deferrals. Yeah, present-day value was 182, something like that, which is closer to the range that was predicted, still above the fan graph's estimate. made the AAV-26 million, am I recalling that correctly? The reaction, the reaction to this signing was so fascinating to me because I have not seen so much consensus in quite a while because people's reaction unfolded, I think, primarily in two parts. Well, for me it was three, the third part being, oh dear, my parents get here so soon.

But the first two parts were Dylan Cease's very good pitcher. He was our top ranked pitcher in the top 50 free agent ranking. Third overall free agent, you noted that making more than either Ben Clemens or the crowd estimated and at a much longer deal. Did I take Cease in our contract overender? No, I did. And I took the under on 189, which was the MLB Trade Roomers prediction. Yeah.

And so in present day value, it was lower than that. Yeah, but that's not how we count. No. And I'm not arguing that we should change midstream. But we should, I don't know if we should reevaluate going forward in future years. I'm open to a conversation about how we should account for deferrals and the reality of deferrals. because obviously it is a meaningful mechanism for teams, right? Like, you know, I'm sure being able to get CIS's AAV down to 26 million

was certainly a feature, not a bug for the Blue Jays, you know, that's what they wanted to do. So, yeah, I'm open to a conversation about that. Yeah, because what we're predicting in that draft is essentially the net present value. I mean, yes, we are predicting just the raw dollar figure. That's what we've always done and what we're still doing this offseason. but what we are trying to assess is the net present value. So maybe that's what we should actually use. It's just, it's kind of confusing.

We'd have to agree on the actual calculation on that. It's not as if it's announced usually. It's something that people calculate. John Becker calculates at Fancrafts, but it's not in a press release. Here's what the net present value is. So it's maybe a little harder to calculate. And then you could really get into the weeds

and shouldn't every deal if it's a long-term deal, even if there aren't deferrals, doesn't the net present value kind of differ just because it's over more years and there's going to be inflation and depreciation and all that? So it's just simpler to use the actual dollar figure. Right. But what we are really trying to predict is what this guy's going to get in then present value. We're not really trying to predict will his contract include deferrals or not because that's kind of unpredictable, right? And not really the way that, you know, while you're sitting around the Thanksgiving table talking about don't cease, you're not like talking about the frills. But setting the free agent contract draft aside for a moment and returning to the cease of it all, I mean, I think that most people agree that cease is very good. His ERA can kind of waffle a bit, you know, he has periods where he's like really on it periods where he's not.

We'll talk about some of the benefits and drawbacks of his specific profile. in a second. But, you know, clearly the top, I think, for most outlets, free agent pitcher on the market. And also, given some of the facts about him and the way his performance looks, boy, that's a lot of money, Ben, you know, just seems like they overpaid by a good bit relative to expectation. Now, Dylan Sees is, as Bowman noted in his write-up, I think has qualified for the ERA title for six seasons straight. He takes... a turn every time he's asked to. And, you know, pitchers are pitchers, so that's true until it's not. But he has been remarkably available. And he's a big strikeout guy. And teams

love strikeouts, you know, and they will pay and pay up for them. And I also think that when you're looking at Cease, you would probably note a chasm is too strong, but a meaningful separation for him between his ERA and other other estimators. So, so there's the, there's the cease of it all. You're like, okay, he strikes out, a ton of guys. His FIP was a run better than his ERA. And other estimators agreed. His XERA was even lower than that, XFIP lower than that. But then you're like, hey, you know what, you know what the bugaboo for Dylan ceases. It's all that hard contact that he gives up. So, well, sure, his ex... And the wax.

And the wax. But sure, so sure, his ex-fip looks great. But that takes the worst part of his game out. And that part's been kind of sticky to him for a while. So I will just say that, like, I think it's really great that the Blue Jays, coming off a disappointing World Series loss, said, we like Dylan cease and we're going to go get him. And we're comfortable overpaying a little. bit to do that, particularly once you factor in the deferrals, we think that he is going to, you know, give us another real front-line starter, a reliable front-line guy. I think that's great.

I also think it's a lot of money. So I think those, I think those two things are true simultaneously. Yeah. Yeah, it's funny that you just invoked Blake Snell in the context of the free agent contracts over underdraft because he is a Snell-esque pitcher. He's so much more fun to watch than Snell, though. Yeah, Snell lights both in terms of how good he has been and also how painful he is to watch, but sort of similar. He's snow-like, just less extreme in every way, I guess. But he hasn't missed a start ever, I don't think, at least not since his rookie year in 2019. And when he came up in July, he has been on the IL twice, both times in 2021, but didn't miss a start in either of those cases either. He was on the COVID IEL early that year, and then late that year, he didn't miss a start

because he got hit by a comebacker, but x-rays were negative, and it was like toward the end of the season. I don't remember if the season just ended or if he came back to start after that, but he didn't miss a start one way or another. So that's kind of like when we say that a pitcher is cruising within a single start. It's not always predictive of whether he will continue to pitch effectively. sometimes things just fall apart and pitchers fall apart too even if they've been durable even if they've been cruising their whole career from a health and availability standpoint those guys will break too but it's your best bet and it does predict future absences past absences so if you don't have any of those then that's good i guess you could always look at it in terms of well he's been accruing mileage on that arm wear and tear but i think it's better to have someone who's who has more miles on the odometer, but just has not had any serious injuries.

Just 32 plus starts every year, going back to 2021, 12 starts in the pandemic season. Yeah, if one of the best abilities is availability, then he has that. And everything else, yeah, you look at the strikeouts and you figure he should be better than he's been. And so sometimes he will dazzle you and then you'll wonder, how is he not better on the whole? and he hasn't had one season where he just, like, totally put together the dominant ERA and peripherals, except for, I guess, 2022, he was excellent. But, yeah, it's been sort of up and down a bit. And, boy, if you could show an old school baseball person, this kind of contract with his old school back the baseball card stats, like two of the past three seasons, he has had. a four-and-a-half ERA with a losing win-loss record.

So to strike gold like this, this kind of free agent windfall coming off a season where he was eight and 12 with a 4.55 BRA. Yeah. Yeah. Only in 2025 could that happen, really. So that's just another data point, not that we needed one to show that teams are evaluating pitchers quite differently. Yeah. The total was a lot, even taking into account the deferrals. And I wondered, because I speculated late in the postseason run in the World Series,

whether the Blue Jays would have an easier time procuring their top targets in the offseason. Because for a few of the past winters, one of the big stories has been the Blue Jays going after everyone and not getting their top targets usually and then settling for someone else. And they've spent in various other ways. But they've whiffed on some of the number one free agents available or the guys who, seem to be number one on their wish list. And there's a bunch of speculation about why that was, and it's a different country, and it's the currency, and it's just, you know, all the extra little hassle or considerations that come with playing for the one team that does not play in the United

States all the time. And also just, you know, concerns about the organization maybe or the farm system or the direction or the fact that they kept falling short of the playoffs or not winning games in the playoffs. And so I thought having this season where they win the AL East and they have the best record in the American League and they then make a deep playoff run and are close to winning a world series, would that make them a more appealing destination? You don't have to sell me on the virtues of Toronto. I'm just saying free agents in general. So I don't know whether this is evidence that that is already paying dividends or it's just evidence that they paid Dillon Seas a lot of money. And in this case, it worked because I guess the Dodgers didn't bid the same

amount or something, right? So I don't know how much to read into the fact that they got arguably the top pitcher on the market and the number one guy they went after. Is that because they paid a premium? Or is it because they just won a pennant? I don't know. I guess we'll find out. I'm curious whether, especially because he's like the top guy, were they basically like, we're not losing out on this one? You know, did they sort of bid themselves up? Which that often happens when you're playing at the top of the market. Like, you know, Bowman reminded reminded me of the, you know, with the line at the end of his piece of when he's dubbed the Friedman principle, which is if you, you know, approach every, this is Andrew. Friedman to clarify for those who don't remember, or Friedman's law, excuse me. But, you know, he said if you're always rational about every free agent, you'll finish third on every free agent. I think that's true even when you don't have the potential peculiarities. That's a hard word to say of being a team in Canada, which, you know, depending on the person might be a hindrance

to signing or might make it a more attractive destination. I don't know. But they have sort of been the bridesmaid a lot. And I think that they are serious about trying to get to the postseason again and really get this thing done. And so they went and got the guy who they think is going to be able to help them do that. And other than, you know, bringing back Bichette, another frontline starter is what they needed, right? Like, Bieber's coming back. You have, you know, whatever you're, going to get out of Trey Savage, which he was dazzling at points in the postseason, but he's also very early in his big league career. And so I think counting on him, you know, being the postseason version of himself, at least has the potential to be the cart before the horse, right? You have Gaussman and you have Burios, and it's like, okay, we need, we need one more. You know, they don't have Chris Bassett anymore. Max Scherzer is gone. So I feel like they did a good job with that. And now they can go find some bullpen arms with children who have typically spelled names and they'll be in business.

They still maybe, you know, need a middle infielder. Yeah, you get Burios back and you hope that he's effective. And then, yeah, if you have Sees, Gosman, Berrios, Bieber, you savage, that's pretty darn solid. That's pretty good. Yeah, it's still early in the offseason. but that's a top 10. That's a number eight projected rotation right now. And I take the over on that.

If anything, that seems like quite a good unit there. So, yeah, I saw a Facebook commenter in our Facebook group said that the contract would age like milk. Did not specify whether that would be bagged milk or not. But I don't know. I think if you're the Bougays, you have to make this move with the guys you've got. But this kind of move, it probably also helps to have Vlad signed forever just to send a signal to prospective signees that they're in it for the long haul and your franchise guy is signed for his professional lifetime.

That probably bodes well or inspires some confidence. And Rogers has all the money in the world. So they could probably afford it. So, yeah, I think it's a good signing, whether they overpaid or not. Yeah. It's the old, it's not my money, and it's not even Blue Jays fans' money. So if it precludes them from doing other things, well, then you could reconsider it. Or if he does pitch poorly at some point in the future and then it prevents you for making other moves, okay, you can cross that bridge when you come to it.

But they needed someone like this and they got him. So good for them. And you don't have to have a whole offseason. While you're still smarting from the World Series loss, you don't have to be. be spurned by some other top free agents and that probably feels good too. Yeah. In a weird way, what backing up a Brinks truck, are they Brinks trucks in Canada? I will note that they were like, I love other Canadians were like, what, we already did Thanksgiving.

What's your problem? Yeah, I saw many jokes about Canadian Thanksgiving having happened already and the exchange rate and how this wasn't Canadian dollars, et cetera. Yeah. But, you know, I think that there is a Brinks Canada, I have confirmed. Thanks, Canada. Okay, so the funny thing about backing up a Brinks truck in this instance is sort of in keeping with the Vladia of it all, you know, saying, hey, we're serious. We're so serious that we're planting this flag. We're doing it now. You know, if there are other guys who they are interested in trying to bring in, you know, this bolsters their claim to, you know, competitive aspirations. at 26 million a year, like, whatever. You know, that seems fine. I wonder if the Brinks truck in Canada needs to have a slightly larger storage compartment

because you just need more currency in there for the same amount. Probably not. Do they have different default denominations? Do their bills go higher? Oh, I don't think so. I mean, you have your loonies and your tunis. You got your $2 coin, which is more. More in circulation than the almost mythical $2 bill that you rarely see.

But, no, I think it's just your sort of 5, 10, 20, 50, 100 kind of thing. Do they do a better job of making their money different sizes, though? I'm serious. No. We, I don't think, I don't think that we're, like, unique in the world in this. But American paper money, like, being all the same size, isn't typical, I don't think. Often, there are a lot of countries that vary. the size of their paper currency so that it's easier for folks who are, have vision impairment

issues to tell by feel what denomination of bill they're grabbing. Yeah. What they do have is very colorful bills. So it's not just all. Well, that wouldn't help a blind person, Ben. No, but if you don't. Yeah, our money is boring and small and mean. It's like the worst.

Yeah. It's solitary, poor, brutish, and short in its own way. At least you can call it green, though, which I guess you can't if some of your money is also purple and blue and red. That's cold comfort. Yeah, but think about how cool purple money would be. Wouldn't you rather purple money? Oh, yeah. Whenever I go to Canada, it's just, ooh, fancy, so colorful.

Yeah. I'll take milk in a bag for that tradeoff. Well, I don't know what denominations still in cease will receive. Hopefully he'll get direct deposit because you would need many a Brinks truck to. pay him, given the size of this contract. Especially if it's in Loonies. Yeah. Okay.

Now that we've digressed in that direction. Now that we've covered that. Oh, I have a mini stat blast that's sort of prompted by the Dill and C signing and also the sunny gray trade. Oh, yeah. Blast away. They'll take a data set sorted by something like ERA minus or OBS plus, and then they'll tease out some interest. He did but discuss it at length and analyze it for us in amazing ways. Here's to taste of past.

Sunny Gray, we were noting that he's sort of underrated maybe because of the ERA being significantly higher than the FIP and the Defense Independent and the peripheral. and everything. And in his case, yeah, it was a 4.28 ERA last season and a 3.39 FIP. Seas actually had a greater differential this past season, which was 4.55 ERA and 3.56 FIP, so almost a full run there and XFIP in sort of the same range and XERA, et cetera. And I'm a believer in those ERA estimators. And I think that it's been shown, do a better job of predict. future ERA than ERA itself does, and I think that's largely because they do a better job

of isolating the pitcher's performance as opposed to all the other things that are going on around the pitcher, the luck and the flukiness and the defense and the ballpark and all those other things. Well, they're also ballpark sensitive unless you look at the ballpark adjusted versions, but you could do that for ERA too. But I did wonder for guys who have a huge gap like that, and it's not like they have every year or over their whole careers. But I couldn't help but think, even as a FIP believer and someone who subscribes to its

predictive value, I kind of thought that I would feel better about someone if the ERA and FIP matched. Like if I could only have one, I would take the FIP when it comes to predicting future ERA. But I felt like maybe there would be extra strength with their powers combined. You know, like if they both agreed or something, or that if there was a significant ERA minus FIP differential, that maybe it would not augur well for that pitcher, that, like, maybe there'd be some regression coming, but not as much regression. I was sort of being a bit of a FIP doubter when there was a huge gap, or at least thinking that if both agreed and, you know, sort of had the same conclusion independently, quasi-eat. independently than that might make a stronger case that this was actually that person's deserved value or whatever it is. So I wanted to look into that and see whether FIP is actually less

predictive when you do have a big ERA minus FIP gap. And I dragooned Michael Mountain into service here. And he looked at this a couple different ways. And I'm going to read some numbers and hopefully people will stick with me here, and then we'll have the takeaway, which should sum it all up. So he looked from 2021 to 2025, 590 pitcher seasons with at least 100 innings pitched as a starter. There were 287 pairs of back-to-back seasons by the same pitcher reaching those thresholds. And so he looked at the root mean squared error for ERA in year two compared to various ERA estimators or predictors.

So that's basically if you just predict someone's next year ERA to be equal to their previous year ERA, how close would you be on average? And did that for all of the metrics. So previous season ERA, the root mean squared error, is 1.08 runs. Previous season FIPP is 0.97 runs. So that again just goes to show that if you have only one number, then the FIP is more telling when it comes to predicting the next season. If you just said, oh, they'll run it back,

they'll have the same season again, then FIP will get you closer than ERA, X-FIP, even better, 0.91 runs, and Sierra, which you can also find at Fancrafts, another even more complex ERA estimator, 0.89 runs. So the hierarchy of predictiveness goes ERA, FIP, X-FIP, Sierra. But FIP is very simple, so it's handy to

have in that way. 46 of these pitchers, so 16% of the sample were from pitchers whose ERA in year one was at least half a run worse than their FIP. And that would include guys like Gray and Cease in past years. And for those people, the root mean squared error, for ERA, 1.19 runs compared to 1.08 for the full group. Previous season FIP, 0.91 runs compared to 0.97 for the whole group. And X-FIP, 0.93 versus 0.91.

Sierra, 0.87 versus 0.89. So, very little difference. If anything, FIP is more accurate for the guys with the big ERA minus FIP gaps or ERA is less accurate. So Michael concluded the difference in magnitude between the two groups could be noise or small sample, but the relative ranking of the predictors' tells you that FIP or other ERA predictors still do a better job predicting future performance than RA ERA, even among players who notably underperformed their FIP the year before.

There's obviously still a lot of unexplained variance regardless of which metric you choose the R-squared for X-FIP and Sierra significantly better than for FIP or ERA, so he would lean toward using one of those if you have the option. And if you just use plain old strikeout minus walk rate, that's maybe even better than FIP, because the home run per fly ball rates, they tend to be pretty noisy. That's the difference between FIP and XFIP for those who are wondering. It's just the normalizing for, you know, you give up a lot of fly balls, and sometimes a lot of those fly balls leaves the park and or the yard.

I never know whether to say they didn't leave the park mostly. Right. They went over the fence. So, yeah, and home run per fly ball rate just assumes that you have a league average rate actually becoming home runs. So Michael concluded there that there was no big difference for the ERA minus FIPP gap guys.

And then he looked at it one more way and found that there were 471 pitcher seasons from 2021 to 24 with at least 100nings pitch as a starter. The median is 150 and a third. The median ERA, 3.87. Median ERA minus FIP, negative 0.08 for all those pitchers the following year, whether they met the 100-inning pitch threshold or not,

the median innings pitched is 131 and 2-thirds, so the median innings pitch goes down by 20 or so. There's a bit of attrition. The median ERA, 4.04, so that goes up by 0.15 or so. Guys get worse, aging, whatever. Regression, and the median ERA minus FIP, negative.03. 77 pitchers with ERA minus FIP greater than half a run in a 100-inning season. Those are the guys we're talking about with the big gap. Their median innings pitch goes to 134. Their median ERA 4.82, their median ERA minus FIP, 0.76. That was in year one.

And then the next year, their innings pitched 139 and two-thirds. So that's actually up. They throw more innings in the next season. Median ERA, 3.91, down by almost a full run from 4.82. and their ERA minus FIP goes to negative 0.18. So basically, they regress all the way, more or less,

and the 160 starting pitcher seasons over that span, Michael Fahn with the highest ERA in at least 100 innings pitch, regardless of FIP, median innings pitch 137, median ERA, 4.82, median ERA minus FIP.

028, same median ERA as the FIP underperformers and the following year, 108, so they go down in innings by almost 30. Their ERA 4.37, that's down a bit. Their ERA minus FIP, negative 0.09. So he concludes pitchers who significantly underperformed their FIP from 2021 to 2024 on average saw twice as much improvement in their ERA the following year compared to a group of pitchers with the

same median ERA, but less significant FIP differentials. They also saw a modest increase in their workloads the following year compared to the just plain bad pitchers who saw their workload declined by 20% and neither group had a significant gap between their collective FIP and ERA the following year. If anything, the FIP underperformers in year one were more likely to outperform their FIP in year two. So I think the takeaway is that I was wrong to doubt FIP and that when you do have a big significant ERA minus FIP gap and you underperform your FIP, as in your ERA is higher than your FIP, then you do tend to improve a lot the following year. It does come back. It reverts to what it quote unquote should be. And it doesn't appear, yeah, that there's any more error when it comes to

FIPP's predictiveness with the big ERA minus FIPP gaps guys than there is with anyone else. So I think my initial inclination was incorrect that I should feel any misgivings, any qualms about actually buying into someone who had a big ERA minus FIP gap, it appears that the FIP is still just as telling in that case, which is good news for the Red Sox and Sunny Gray and good news for Dillon Sees and Toronto. So both of the AL East teams there, they've significantly improved the front of their rotations and do not need to be scared by the superficially pedestrian or worse ERAs. Now, you know, maybe in Gray's case, you could worry about the fastball speed slippage and how much more margin for error there is there.

But that hasn't been a concern with cease so far, and he has not even turned 30 yet. He turns 30 later this month, so not the same age and stuff kind of concerns that Gray had there. So apologies, FIP, sorry for doubting you. When you have a strong stance on someone who had a high ERA, you will probably be right and you are no less reliable than usually. And I think, you know, I think it's fine to note that pitchers have more control over, you know, the quality of that contact than they are sometimes assumed to by FIPP and that you can be nervous about cease and all that loud contact if you want, particularly, since it has sometimes come with walks. Like, that is fine to have a little bit of trepidation about, but I think it does a pretty good job. That doesn't mean that there aren't guys who don't regularly outperform their FIP in a way that ends up being notable and meaningful. But in general, assuming sort of a league average on that stuff works out fine.

And we should note here that, like, he sure threw in front of a god-awful defense last year, you know, when people are like, why is there such a big gap? Well, part of it is that the Padre is like, some of that feeling was real bad. And the Blue Jays have generally done better, as we've seen. So that might be really exciting for him, you know, collapse the gap, as it were. Yeah. And in Gray's case, I guess the Cardinals, we think of them historically as a good defensive team. They're not as good as they were in some years. They weren't bad, but they were pretty decent.

But the Red Sox should also be good depending on how the rest of their. offseason shakes out, but yeah, that outfield should be great in theory pending future moves in the actual alignment there. And I guess Gray is not an extreme flyball guy. He gets fewer grounders than he used to when he was a real ground ball guy. But even the infield could be solid depending on what it actually looks like come opening day. Maybe the Red Sox will decide to have a first baseman this year. That would be exciting. We'll see. What if they just decide not to? What if they're like, we don't want to fill that position actually?

Well, that probably wouldn't be a good idea. Probably not the best idea they've had. Yeah, wouldn't be great for Sonny Gray's ERA either, but I guess it wouldn't hurt his FIP so much. I shouldn't waive that non-trade clause. No trade clause. No mistake. Yeah. Okay.

Did want to just note the Anthony Rendon news, which is not news yet, but it was reported by Alden Gonzalez at ESPN that Rendon and the Angels, perhaps unsurprisingly, are trying to work out a way for Anthony Rendon to retire. To not be an angel anymore. Yeah, which seems like something that is maybe of mutual interest at this point. And I've been an Anthony Rendon defender or at least someone who's been sort of fascinated by Anthony Rendon and his actual motivations. And we've done deep dives on all the things that he said about his.

enthusiasm for baseball and his effort level and desire and all of that over the years. And I've sort of stuck up for him at times, at least saying that baseball is not an all-encompassing interest in his life, that there are other things that he considers more important, et cetera. I almost found it to be kind of a healthy corrective to the mentality that it's everything. But I think there's a happy medium probably. It doesn't seem as if the Angels or Angels fans or even Rendon himself. at times have been happy about the arrangement that they have come to. And he has not played in a long time. And he has not played much at all during his tenure with that team.

And so it does seem to be in everyone's best interest that they work out a way to end this. He has one year left on his deal. Speaking of seven-year contracts that don't always age well, you know, Anthony Rendon was coming off a hell of a year when he signed that deal. But, yeah, it quickly went south. And now he has one year and 38 and a half or so million left. And it sounds like they'll work something out so that he can retire. And, you know, they'll come to some kind of compromise where he'll still get all or most of that money. But he won't be kind of hanging over the team and where is he and why isn't he speaking and how's his rehab going and how's the hip and all that stuff and all the clubhouse clashes.

and quotes and all of that. I was amused that, according to the story, they might work out a deferred arrangement to... Oh, my God. No. Be done. Because just to give the angels a little more flexibility this off season, so they might defer at least part of what is owed to him.

And that is funny because that means that there's the potential for Rendon Day to be an annual tradition. Oh, yeah. Like Bonilla Day. Yeah. And there are a lot of misconceptions about deferring contracts and whether they were actually bad ideas by the team and people not understanding the time value of money and inflation and all of that. And there's nothing really wrong from the Mets perspective with Bonilla Day. I mean, you know, they had all kind of Wilpon-Ponzie scheme investments gone wrong and all the rest of it. Yeah, but the idea of deferring and.

paying out for years to come, smaller amounts, is sound enough. You know, people see it and assume that it must have been a huge miscalculation by the team because they're still given a million dollars to a guy years, decades after he retired, that kind of thing. And not always. Sometimes it makes perfect sense. But it would be amusing if there were a Rendon day. And, you know, like Rendon being even more notorious tenure with the Angels than Bonilla's with the Mets and that contract just being continually reminded of that for years and years to come.

I hope Anthony Rendon gets deferred dollars for the rest of the century or something, and we're just kind of reminded of the Anthony Rendon days for the rest of our lives. Like, on the one hand, like, we've joked about him being, like, quiet, quitting, king. I do think Anthony Rendon, like, legitimately suffered injuries. that made his participation untenable. I also think that, like, it would be good for the angels to be able to move on from a signing

that made a tremendous amount of sense at the time. Like, to your point, he was coming off a fantastic year. We had all kinds of conversations when he was getting ready to sign that deal about how, you know, the nationals picked the wrong guy to give an extension to,

and they should have brought Rendon back and this and that and the other thing. Yeah, instead of Stephen Strasbourg. Right, yeah. You know, kind of pick your poison. I feel bad for both guys, but yeah. I feel bad for both guys. And I do feel bad for, I mean, it may sound so.

I mean, quote unquote, bad, you know. They got enormous amounts of money, but feel worse for Strasbourg because it sounds like that has impacted his quality of life at times and just, you know, not even just being a baseball player. That's right. It's the sort of injury that, like, you know, you're mindful. of when you're like trying to be a dad and like pick up your kids

and stuff. Right. And people haven't questioned to the same extent, Strasbourg's effort and desire to return fairly or not they have with Rendon for years. Right. Do I think that Anthony Rendon seems to have a relatively healthy perspective on like the place that baseball occupies in his

life relative to his family and other interests? Yeah. I bet he wishes that like the way his career was going to be remembered were different than it is because this is just what people are going to associate with him, I think. You know, and that'll become more true over time if, one, they do end up working on some sort of deferral situation so that we keep relitigating his degree of effort.

And also, you know, there are going to be fans who, gosh, this happens to Angels guys a lot. I was going to say sort of like Poole's where it's like people didn't believe us about Albert Bulls, you know, like young fans who never really got to experience his peak with St. Louis were like, what are you talking about? And it's like, no, you don't understand. This was the best guy. Like he was just like, or one of the handful of best guys, right? And it was obvious. And Rendon was never quite that good, but he was a very good player. It made sense for him to get that contract when he got it. Like, no one was sitting there going like, oh my God, what a horrifying overpay for Anthony Rendon. He's washed. Like, that wasn't the impression that people had.

had when he signed that deal. It was like, oh, my God, look at the angels, taking themselves seriously. We might have questioned the validity of that choice, but we didn't think that the target was wrong. So, you know, I'm sure that he, or I imagine anyway, I don't know him, so I'm not sure. But I would imagine that he has some regret about the fact that this is going to be the way that he has talked about and the part of his career that's probably going to be the most remembered is the part where he wasn't able to play very much. And when he was, there was a question about whether he wanted to at all. So that's kind of a bummer.

But also, he's got a bunch of money. And so that probably cushions the blow a little bit, especially because it seems that it wasn't just him trying to make people, you know, forget that he couldn't play. Like, it does seem like he really does care about other stuff in his life, maybe more meaningfully and significantly than baseball is fine, but it would be good for them to be able to move on because this is like a burdensome situation for them. They have to account for this every year. We have to, gosh, what what's what's our angels preview even

going to be about? What's it even going to be about if we aren't, you know, trying to figure out if Anthony Rendon's getting to talk to Sam Blum about his reference with Rendon. It's like, you know, a chapter of his, of Sam's life is closing too. That's crazy. Yes. You should write a book. But yeah, it's, gosh, I hope he does write a book about his whole covering the angels during these years. I would love to read Sam's book. The lows, which are really low and sometimes sad and tragic and depressing. Not just kind of baseball funny, but both, a little bit of both. And, yeah, I would imagine, given that he essentially was absent for large portions of his time as a quote-unquote active player. And, you know, when he was hurt, when he was on the IEL, he was not always around and he was not always accountable and he did himself. How many guys on the angels does he know?

It's a good question. I'm serious. And again, it sounds like I'm trying to like, you know, really, you know, take the piss out of him and really dig at the guy. Genuinely, I'm curious, like, how many of the dudes on the active roster is he even acquainted with? Yeah, it's a good question. Yeah, and he did himself no favors from a PR perspective. Yeah, and that even though I was sympathetic to him at times, you know, you're really not making it easy, Anthony, on yourself. A little eyewash, I think, would have gone a long way.

Yeah, it's true. I think if he had committed to providing just a little eye wash, it would have been good. And I don't know if he will care. I wouldn't be surprised if he walks away and cashes his checks when it's time. to and doesn't think about how he's perceived at all. So I'm not even sure if he will spare a thought for his legacy, right? And more power to him, I guess. I'd love to not think about being perceived.

That would be great. Yeah. But yeah, it is because he was certainly a top five player in baseball. He was fantastic. He was a great baseball player. Just all around, great, and help the nationals to that championship in 2019. And even when he was missing time, and he kind of got. the injuries under control there, more or less, for a few years, and he was so good.

And, yeah, it's like you were saying with Pujols where you're trying to assure people. No, that really, that happens. It really happened. The numbers on the page, the reference that came to my mind, and I'm sure also yours, is in the Force Awakens, when Ray is like, the Jedi were real. And Hans Solo says, I thought it was a bunch of mumbo-jumbo, a magical power holding together good and evil, the dark side and the light. The crazy thing is, it's true. the Force, the Jedi, all of it, it's all true. And it was all true of Pujols and Rendon for a time. And, you know, I wonder if Rendon would be remembered a bit differently and regarded a bit better by Angels fans, certainly, but even observers.

If not for the pandemic, and Anthony Rendon's reputation was not the number one victim of COVID-19. But he played spectacularly in 2020. He played at the same level he had. He was a two and a half win player in 52 games. Yes, and 52 of 60. He played in most of the games and was there and had a 152 WRC plus and did exactly what the Angels signed him to do. He was the same guy. He was the same guy. Yeah, he was never that guy again.

In fact, gosh, he barely played more games in any subsequent single season than he did during the pandemic year. He had years where he played fewer games than he played in the pandemic year. played no games this year, but yeah, even when he played. Even when he played is my point, yeah. And so if that had been a full season, now, of course, he could have gotten hurt if it had been a full season. Sure. Maybe he wouldn't have played any more games. But if you could extrapolate that over a full season so that he had at least one prime vintage Anthony Rendon season in an angel's uniform, because Poo-Hulls never had a peak Poo-Holls year.

Right, he never had a Poo-Hull season. Yeah. And even his last year in St. Louis. was below his previously established standard. And so Angel's fans never got to see peak poohalls. He was still a productive player at that point, but already a steep step down. On the one hand, I'm inclined to agree with you,

but on the other hand, on the other hand, Ben, I remember the way that Ken Griffey Jr.'s Cincinnati tenure was remembered, and his first year and since he was good. Yeah. He was like a five-and-a-half-win player in Cincinnati his first season he had 40 home runs and does anyone remember

I don't know why I'm yelling at you sorry I don't know why I'm in a register that only dogs can hear but it didn't it didn't do anything it didn't do anything now Griffey

I don't want to say he's better at eyewash because that makes it sound like I'm doing an insincerity thing that I don't mean but like you know I don't think that people viewed Griffey as being sort of recalcitrant

in the way that they do run down. But it didn't, it didn't change a whole heck of a lot, you know. It just, it just didn't. Yeah, it probably wouldn't meaningfully change how he was remembered, but. It might, if he had, you know, if he had been a totally different guy is really what I'm about to say, amounting to you, I was going to say, if he had been healthy and productive for one full season and also had done the politics. of it a little bit better than maybe, but I'm still skeptical of that, in part because I

don't think he, I don't think he would do the politics differently. Right. If he were the kind of guy who were inclined to handle that differently, maybe he would have handled a lot of things differently. A lot of things differently. It's hard to know. Oh, our Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program, Independent Programme, Administrators' Report came out, extra, extry, independent program administer, which, administrator, which they put in

parentheses IPA. And I'm like, you can't make it, you can't make the drug report have a beer thing in it. That doesn't make any sense, Major League Baseball. Get it together. We can breathe three words. We can read three long words. Sorry. Nothing too notable in the report, it looks like. Oh, I haven't looked at it. Yeah. It's something we get every year. drug tests that were conducted during the reporting period. The positive tests and the therapeutic use exemptions, et cetera. Ben, were you watching Sunday night football last night by any chance? I was not.

I was driving home from upstate. Otherwise, of course, I would have been glued to my screen. You were driving? Well, no, I was riding in the car. I'm the worst. Didn't stealthily get a driver's license without telling anyone. If that ever happens, I'll let you know. I was going to say we're going to have to talk about it.

Actually, what you should do is you shouldn't say that you're doing it until you have your license. You shouldn't because otherwise people are going to. And then it puts pressure on you to like tell the story of learning to drive. Right. Because I got a learner's permit one time and then false alarm. That expired. I haven't gone back to that well. So maybe someday we'll see.

Still hoping the robot car saved me. But that's a whole other conversation. Anyway, what were you going to say about Sunday at football? Yeah. The reason I asked is because and this email made me think of it. The, so last night, the Denver Broncos played the Washington commanders. The Broncos have a linebacker named Alex Singleton who was diagnosed with testicular cancer last month. And do you know how they initially realized that something might be wrong?

No. He failed a drug test. Oh, a life-saving drug test, potentially. Yes. Yeah, potentially. He had elevated testosterone levels that might have indicated, PED use, and he had not used PEDs, although, like, at some point, you know, we had to go through this whole existential freaking crisis in baseball with PED use. Meanwhile, in football, you tell

me, those guys are just as simple. Those guys are definitely choosing. Anyway, I don't know if Alex Singleton is, but he popped a test, and he was like, no, and they, that's when they figured out that he had testicular cancer. That's crazy. Yeah. He had to get surgery, and then he played football like a week later. That's also crazy. I think Trey Mancini, his cancer was caught, I think, in a physical by the team. Yes, it was a team physical. I don't think he failed a test.

No. But, yeah. He was doing his team physical, and they were like, um, that doesn't feel right. Or maybe it was a blood test thing. I don't know if they were, I was like, I don't know if they were feeling around down there. That feels undignified. I think Trey Mancini is a father. That's a weird way to talk about it.

Yeah. Stage three colon cancer, though, that probably did save. his life. Get your colonoscopies, people. I am getting mine soon, but we don't need to know about that. If you want to know about my colonoscopies, though, you can subscribe to the Patreon, and I will tell you about them on our bonus pots. Yeah, when Becca's like, Bent tells unhinged stories, I think she was mostly talking about the food takes, but I forgot that we dedicated half of a Patreon episode to you talking about your colonoscopy. It's not unrelated to food takes, I guess. I suppose not. It is important.

important. Both Tray Mancini and I are advocates for getting your colons checked out when you reach the appropriate point of your life, which can vary and differ depending on family history, et cetera. I started a little early, and it's not so bad. It gets a bad rap. I'm pro colonoscopy. Anyway. Because, and to quote the Patreon episode, I like to get anesthetized. Yeah, it's relaxing. I can just lay back. I like we're bringing. I like we're bringing. that we're bringing Friday show energy to the Monday show. That's nice. I mean, it's a good start. We just had a holiday, so I don't know. I meant to mention, by the way, gift subscriptions to effectively wild to Patreon. You can sign up and hear all about my colonoscopies, and you can give the gift of hearing about my colonoscopies to someone else, to a loved one, or to an enemy for all I care. We get paid either way. But yeah, patreon.com slash effectively wild, you can give gifts subs handy at this time of year.

Okay, last signing to discuss is Ryan Helsley, going to the Baltimore Orioles. Michael Ius had signaled that he was looking for a late inning option, and now we know who it is. It's Ryan Halsley, who briefly, for about a week there, last week, I guess, was being bandied about as a starter. And we've talked a lot about the fact that relievers are getting converted into starters, and is there any difference between them anymore? you have to draw the line somewhere, I think, and maybe that place is a pitcher like Ryan Helsley

who throws two pitches, essentially, or at least has thus far. I don't know what about Ryan Helsley's profile would say latent capacity to be a starting pitcher. You know, we talked about this a lot just because the bar to be a starter, it's relative to being a reliever. It's just, it's not that high anymore because you're not expected as a starter to throw that many innings, really. And so those roles have kind of converged to an extent. And a lot of relievers throw many pitch types these days. And so you can kind of see it. And we talked during the postseason about how starters were pitching in relief.

And, you know, there's almost no such thing as an innings eater anymore. It's like Dylan Sees is the new innings eater. And his career high in a single season is 189 in a third inning. So, yeah, it's just there's less of a distinction. and so it maybe makes more sense that relievers could flirt with becoming starters. But Ryan Helsley, I don't know that he really fit the profile such as it is. Anyway, he will be closing, or at least that's the idea. He will have to pitch better to continue closing than he did certainly after the Mets acquired him.

Even before the Mets acquired him, he was not off to the greatest start with the Cardinals. Good enough that the Mets thought he could be their closer and then quickly were disbused of that notion. But he's coming off a down year, but had previously been one of the best relievers and hardest throwers in baseball and remains one of the hardest throwers, but not one of the best relievers last year. So it's just a question of whether he will bounce back. And if he does, then he will be an Oriole for one season, presumably, because this is a two-year contract for $28 million total. And, yeah, he has an opt-out. He's 31. And if he returns to form and is a good closer in the absence of Felix Batista, who had shoulder surgery in August and will be out at least for a year, if not the whole season.

So they're hoping Helzley can slot in and be that guy. And if he is, then he will certainly test the market again next winter. So I'm kind of, I'm into it as a sign. I'm fairly bullish on Helsley as a bounce back candidate. Yeah. Oh, I should say more than just, yeah. Well, first of all, I don't know that they really expected that he would close for them, right? The Mets, I mean, they did have Edwin Diaz after all.

But he was one of several bullpen trade acquisitions for them as they tried to bulk up for October in October that for the Mets never came. but his issues seem to be relatively identifiable. Obviously, there was all the talk of him tipping. You know, then he changed some stuff and he didn't really get all that much better. So maybe it wasn't just tipping. As Baumann noted in his piece sort of entertaining the idea of Helsley as a starter and as Michael Rosen noted in his write-up of the signing, you know, he is mostly a two-pitch guy.

and he has this like extreme elevator shaft of a delivery like everything's kind of going from the top down and the predictability of what he was throwing in what count and and like the over-the-top nature of his delivery seemed to have had something to do with it too or at least that was a more compelling explanation to Michael Rosen than the tipping was at least on its own although you know like public side analysis of tipping can be kind of Well, I don't want to say Hocum, but it's hard to do with, I think, the precision that teams are able to do. Put it that way. Because they're just feeding the tape of these guys through a machine learning algorithm and being like, oh, that. So, you know, I think there are things to, nits to pick and potential pain points here that might persist beyond just, oh, I figured out the tipping of it all.

But, you know, he's been a very good reliever relatively recently, and he can sure throw the ball hard. and I think that it's a signing that makes a ton of sense from Baltimore's perspective. They're, you know, sort of late inning guys are, well, they're scant, and it wasn't a good group last year. So they needed to do something. They still need starters, but they know that, so I can stop reminding them. And I like it from Helsley's perspective, right? It's not a bad deal as a one-year contract, given how God-awful he was in the second half. He has the opt-out if he's able to course correct and and be the guy he was with St. Louis, who was, what, an all-star two or three times, he'll be able to hit the market again next year and sort of make his way. So, you know, he'll be a little older when he does that because he'll turn 32 next year. But so I like it. I think it makes good sense. I think it makes good sense for both sides. And if Baltimore is able to help him figure stuff out, well, then they can point to him as another example of being able to do. good player dev, so I like it.

I think it's good. It makes good sense. I think so, too. Yeah, speaking of big ERA minus FIP gaps with the Mets, at least, he had a two-run gap. So the ERA was 7.2. The FIP was a mere 5.19, which is not what the Orioles want his ERA to be either. But, yeah, another guy who maybe underperformed the peripherals. But, yeah, the predictability, you know I'm sort of a pitch-tipping skeptic.

But I don't know that it's even required in his case because he was predictable whether or not he was actually telegraphing his pitches by setting up differently or something. He was telegraphing just by throwing his two pitches in predictable patterns. And, you know, it's usually if you're a fastball slider guy, it's kind of like you get ahead in the count and you're trying to finish someone off. You throw more sliders. You're behind in the count. You're trying to throw strikes. You throw fastballs. And he did that, but he did it kind of in an extreme way and not even in the most extreme counts.

And he just sort of fell into a rut. I don't know if that was the whole problem, but his stuff seemed to be mostly undiminished, still strong, at least. And baseball prospectus has these arsenal stats that are kind of interesting. And they have one that's, you know, they have like stuff pro and pitch pro, the same sort of thing that you can find at, fan graphs with pitching bot and stuff plus, but they have these arsenal metrics that are about your predictability, essentially. They have pitch type probability and surprise factor, and that's just kind of about how easy to anticipate what you're throwing is for a pitcher. So pitch type probability, the little tool tip that pops up, it says the likelihood of batter would identify

the pitch type from release to decision point. Surprise factor is how unexpected a pitch is movement is, given which pitches it most appears like, and their movements. And so the whole arsenal is a factor here. And if you have two pitches, essentially, as he does, that you're throwing kind of 50-50, then you're behind the eight ball already, just because, you know, like Sandy Alcantra, who's coming off, not a great year either. But something I wrote about during his Cy Young season was that he had all these pitch types and they were just evenly balanced, like he would throw five pitches 20% of the time.

a piece or something and it was just hard to know what was coming and he still sort of does that and so I think he had the lowest pitch type probability which is just kind of like predictability basically this past season too and Healsley was not good

the average pitch type probability depending on where you set the minimums about 67% and he was at like 76% he was like 26th percentile or so in that and he was also below average in surprise factor, which is kind of like if you throw a pitch not that often, when you do, it takes the batter by surprise.

Ooh, surprise. I wasn't expecting that. And he doesn't get much element of surprise because he basically just throws those two pitches and in pretty predictable patterns. So that's always interesting to peruse. I don't think that really explains his drop off last year because his metrics there weren't so hot before that, even when he was very effective because, again, with the two pitches and everything. but they did get worse last year and or this year I can't say last year yet it is still 2025 but last season this past season we're getting there less than a month and we'll be able to say last year and have it be true speaking of pedantic things that don't bother anyone else but us but yeah he's kind of at a disadvantage when it comes to confusing hitters just because he he only has so many different weapons to show them but and you know you don't want them to be intertwined. changeable. If you're throwing a fastball and slider, you kind of want them to be differentiated because you wouldn't want them to look exactly the same. That probably meant they didn't have good movement or they just didn't have good pitch characteristics. And, you know, maybe that was a bit more of a problem for him this past year. Regardless, I believe that he could probably vary up the patterns a bit and have more things go his way and get good advice and bounce back. If not to peak healthily, then certainly good enough to justify this investment.

We'll see what else the Orioles do, but it's a start at shoring up that bullpen. And the last thing that I have for you here, because this is getting less timely by the day here, I missed this last week, and I guess even if I hadn't missed it, we wouldn't have talked about it because it was published the day before Thanksgiving and just before the C-signing, I think. but the annual executive survey of baseball types done at ESPN by Jesse Rogers. This was originated by Jerry Krasnick. We used to call it the Krasnicks, and we used to talk about it, and Sam would write about it and analyze it and discover that baseball executives, who in theory, should know a lot of things, aren't really any better than a coin flip when it comes to predicting what will happen over an offseason.

But Jesse Rogers has continued this tradition since Krasnick left to work for the players. Association, and surveys, front office types, and MLB executives, I think, is how he described them this year, and I think spoke to 16 of them and put some pressing off-season questions to them. And so what we do here is I ask you to say what you think they said, essentially, not necessarily what you think or what will actually happen, but what you think the common responses were. Okay. So I'll just run through these.

So one question. Will Kyle Tucker get more than $400 million and who will give it to him? And this has some bearing on our free agent contracts over under draft too. So what do you think survey says yes, no? Will he get $400 million or not? And this is, again, 16 MLB executives. 16. Yes.

I'm going to say yes. And the Dodgers. Yes, got six responses out of 16. So majority said no. And then as to the who will sign him, when it's not a yes, no question, obviously, the answers are always a little more fractured. The Dodgers actually came in second here.

New York Yankees, number one, with six responses, and the Dodgers got four. And then the only other team to get more than one was the Blue Jays. This was again pre-cease. signing. Sure, yeah. And then the Tigers, Phillies, and Orioles also receiving votes. The good news for Tucker, Rogers, wrote, is that nearly every executive who voted no on him making more than $400 million said it would still be close.

Okay. Okay. All right. Next question. Where will the top three free agent starters with MLB experience sign? And Rogers is defining the top three free agent. starters with MLB experience as they don't mean the guys coming over from Asia right so from bravaldez Dylan cease and ranger Suarez so and again this was published shortly before the

blue jays actually signed cease how many how did anyone guess put him with the blue jays yes okay um so i'm doing cease do you want me to answer for cease i don't know if you'll have different answers for each guy or whether you'll think it's be the same teams the same candidates for each guy because you'd think if you're in the market for one top free agent starting the rest so there's certainly some overlap here so i would imagine that baltimore is on that list from a need perspective although i don't think i don't i don't know man i don't know man i don't know yeah it's interesting yeah there are four votes for frambervaldez going to the oriels really but they're not the number one team and they don't show up they don't even get a single vote for c

or Suarez. Interesting. Yeah, I mean, I feel like they're like in the Michael King business. Maybe not exactly Michael King, but like that's the tier of guy who they're maybe looking at, you know? I mean, Philly, there's, it seems not impossible that the Ranger might just go back to Philly.

Yes, the Phillies are tied for first. Okay. For Ranger Suarez with four votes. And similarly, I guess Framber could go back to Houston, Although, I don't know. They seem like they're a reduction mode from a payroll perspective. Yeah, only one vote to the Astros, but they were on the board.

I feel like the Cubs have to be on that list for some of them because they need pitching. Yeah, you'd think. Yeah, Cubs, they got one vote for Dylan Cs, which obviously didn't happen, and that's it. That's kind of shocking. Are the Mets on there? The Mets are indeed on here. They are a strong candidate. They are number two for four.

Fromber with four votes, and they were actually the leading candidates for Cease with six votes, yes. Hmm. I'd say there's one team that's mentioned at least for a couple of these guys that we have touched on. Well, let me think. Well, who has a shi rotation, but is actually good? What? Do they, shh-de-do they, he doesn't describe it, but are the Red Sox on there? Yes, that's the team I was getting at.

And this is post-gray acquisition, but even so, Red Sox. That seems right. Two votes for Cece, and they were tied with the Phillies for First, for Ranger, with four votes. And I'll give you the rest. So the Blue Jays were the leading candidate for Frumber, actually, with five votes. Mets, four, Orioles, four, tigers one, Astros one. And then Cease was Met six, Blue Jays three, Red Sox two, Braves two, Cubs, one, one. And Suarez, Red Sox, four, Phillies, four, Blue Jays three, Braves two, again, Giants one. So

Braves showing up, giants showing up. But Blue Jays, correctly, it seems, showing up with multiple votes for each of these three guys. Again, pre-cease signing. So the market seemed to peg correctly that the Blue Jays were very much in the market for a top starting pitcher. And then they got one. Yeah, makes sense. Next question. A little repeat. heat here, but who will sign Japanese ace Tatsuya Imai? These questions are a little less interesting to me. I like the big picture questions more so than where will free agent X signed.

I don't really believe anyone knows where any particular player will sign. It's just, you know, like the big market. I mean, Dodgers have been a good bet in prior years, although if you take AMI. If you just bet Dodgers for everyone, you probably do decently. So if you take MI at his word, it sounds like he doesn't want to go there. Yeah, how about that? A little rivalry he wants to take down the Dodgers, or so he says. Has he indicated a West Coast preference?

I don't know, but it's not an unsafe assumption, I suppose. The Mets. Do they have him with the Mets? Let's see. The Mets are not mentioned for my actually. Interesting. I don't know. That's Senga's there already.

I don't know if that helps or hurts or was there, but Yankees were second. With three votes, Dodgers do get three votes, so maybe people not buying that the Dodgers won the running or that he wouldn't consider them. Cubs two, Blue Jays won, Padre's one. But the number one team, it was one of the ones that was mentioned as a lesser candidate for those three previous guys. Who is it? It's the Giants.

But, oh, is that what prompted the Giants to say we don't want to spend money? We're not in my market? Did you see that piece that came out today? No. But, yeah, this predated that. Yeah. Disappointment abounds. Okay.

Okay. What are some of the other ones, Ben? Yeah, I don't like these, like the family feud style questions. I don't know. Yeah. Yeah, give me something more compelling than who will sign for Agent X. Okay. Which of these hitters, Kyle Schwerber, Alex Bregman, Cody Bellinger, and Pete Alonzo,

will return to their original team. And by original team, I think it means the team they played for this year, not the first team they played for if that was different. So not pregnant, back to the asteros is what you mean. So Schwerber, Bregman, Bellinger, and Alonzo, who will stay put, who's the likeliest to stay put. I'm going to say Schwerber and Alonzo. Yes, Schwerber number one with seven votes.

And Alonzo and Bregman actually tied with four pieces. And you'll note that that adds up to 15, not 16. One thing that always perplexes us about these surveys is that people will abstain from it's just like, individual questions. Yeah, you're anonymous. No one knows who you are. Exactly. No reason for you. I mean, I guess if you're Jesse Rogers and you're talking to someone from that team, maybe you want to take yourself out of the running, but often multiple people will.

And it's, if you agree to participate in this exercise, then, you know, you might as well. Well, okay, all right, this one, this is hard to anticipate probably, but which free agent contract is going to raise the most eyebrows, which is, what does that even mean? What does that mean? Yeah, you could raise your eyebrows for any number of reasons. Maybe you think, oh, what a great siding. I guess it's meant to convey, oh, that sounds like a lot of money, I guess, or, oh, I'm not so sure about that one, or, you know, this might not be a good investment. So, like, which re-agent contract will be seen as perhaps an overpay or there will be doubters? Let's see.

Alonzo does not show up, actually. Wow, what restraint. Maybe that means that they just don't buy that he will actually get a big contract. All right, yeah, I don't either. I took the under on him, right? Did I take the under on him? Well, we're not even doing a bit. You can check it.

EWStats.com. And I can tell you quickly that you took the under. on Piedelonzo at 110. There you go. I mean, maybe people thought cease. Maybe. Nope, cease, not listed. Boba Chet.

Boba Chet is tied with, well, I guess, three other players with two votes. Yeah, you're not going to get as much consensus or agreement on kind of an open-ended one like this. But, yeah, Bobuchette got two votes, which is as many as anyone got in this exercise. So I don't know if you want to name anyone else or I can just list them. You could tell me who. Okay, so Bobeshit got to. Edwin Diaz got to... Oh, sure, yeah.

Yeah, just, you know, volatility of relievers, paying for relievers, fungible relievers. Schwaber, too. Okay. Yeah, how will he age as a DH-only sort of guy? J.T. Real Muto, too. Oh, okay. And then after that, the only other three players receiving votes, one vote apiece, one vote apiece. I guess people thinking that these contracts will not be a peach.

former effectively wild guest, Zach Lattel. It sounds just like singling out Zachletel. Like someone has a moment to pick an ax to grind just let the anti-Zakletel contingent out there. Like, are you thinking Zachletel's going to get some giant deal or something? I don't know, but someone's really

shorting Zach Lattel here. Lucas Gialito got a vote and Munitaka Murakami got a vote. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Not a Kami makes sense. Believer in the contact, I guess. Okay.

Okay. What will the Tigers do with Terek Scoobel this offseason? Three options. Trade him, extend him, or let it play out. I think that the guesses in descending order of frequency will be let it play out, trade him, extend him. Correct. Ten votes for let it play out. Three for trade him and zero for sign and extend him, which again means three people sat this one out for some reason. I don't get it. Maybe those people work for the Tigers. Maybe if, I mean, I'd think if I were trying to survey executives, I'd try not to have three of 16 be from a single team, but I don't know. I mean, Rogers is like a Chicago guy, right? So it's not like all of his sources would be Detroit folks.

But who knows? I don't know. But I think that's probably right that odds are they will let it play out and probably should let it play out. I mean, you know, if they could extend him, then by all means, but it seems like it might be difficult to do that. Yeah, I don't think they'll be able to extend him, but I think that has more to do with Scoobel than it does with their desire to extend him. And to be clear, you know, I think that that's a defensible position on his part. So. Yeah. Okay. Who is the top trade candidate of the winter not named Scoobel? Oh, the top trade candidate.

candidate not named Scoobel. I will say no clear consensus here. There's no number one guy by far, so. Well, I would maybe offer, like, one of the, I'm going to cheat a little bit by not offering a specific name and rather an archetype of player, but like a starter for Seattle or Kansas City? Let's see, some starters, but not for Seattle or Kansas City, actually. Wow.

The face. I don't know then. Okay, I'll give you Joe Ryan got two votes. I guess safe to bet on a twin being traded, all else being equal. Freddie Peralta got two votes. Oh, that makes sense. I should have guessed Peralta. That's a mistake on my part.

I should have guessed Peralta. Yeah, I guess he fits the bill sort of sadly, maybe, if you're a Brewer's fan. Yeah. Yeah, they've insisted that Wardruff coming back is independent of their decisions. around Peralta, but we will see. And then the only other guy who got two votes, also someone who has been mentioned or rumored, but more as a low probability guy, but Cattel Marte. Yeah.

And then, let's see, four others got one vote apiece. Mackenzie Gore got one. Interesting. Stephen Kwan, who's been rumored to be a trade candidate previously. Luis Robert Jr., I suppose that makes some sense. And a pirate starter. come on be bolder than that a pirate starter you know presumably you don't mean paul skeins so let's narrow it down a little bit

if you do mean paul skeins then say paul skeins have the courage yeah have the courage of your convictions yeah okay all right which smaller market team will make the most noise this winter presumably good noise because they're spending um i'm gonna put i'm gonna say Kansas city Kansas City Got three votes Which ties them for second Milwaukee Let's see

As Milwaukee mentioned What does noise mean? Yeah I guess Hmm Noise might kind of imply That you're not expected To do anything Or you haven't done anything

Like maybe the brewers Are too good to make noise I don't know They could still make noise It's not like people expect them To sign the number one free agent or something but right yeah i guess i don't know if that's the kind of noise that would qualify here but what if they trade him

for cartel martin why they don't need that would be noisy yeah it would it wouldn't make any sense for their roster but yeah i will say the the teams that were mentioned here were either not playoff teams or barely playoff teams if that helps okay um i don't know ben i don't know i don't want to torture you Who else? Well, we just established that one person thinks that a pirate starter will be traded. Oh, sure. Five people think that the pirates will make the most noise of any small market team.

So they're buying the hype. They're buying the pirates are spending this offseason, at least relatively speaking, idea. Primed. Primes. Yes, primed to spend, exactly. Primed to spend. They didn't actually make an offer. It came out to Nailer.

They were just primed to make an offer. to him. Right. There was primed to make an offer. They just never had a chance to, you know. They didn't actually do anything. No, but they were primed to, and then Seattle swooped in. So the Royals got three votes, the Reds got three votes, the Marlins got three votes, and the raise got two.

Okay. That's it. That's the last question. I would say this is a subpar crop of questions this year. Sorry to cast aspersions, but it's the storied tradition of the Krasnix. slash Rogers is. It's just not my favorite selection of questions. I'm a little surprised that were there any questions about like CBA stuff next year? Nope. I read them all. That was it. I'm surprised by that. Yeah.

Kind of surprised by that. Yep. Well, now we know what 16 unspecified MLB executives think. Yeah. Sometimes significantly fewer than 16. then yeah at least one but not always 16 and certainly not often okay that will do it for today and speaking of the holidays i will put in another plug for effectively wild secret santa our annual gift giving exercise among listeners the sign-up deadline is december 10th you can find the link on the show page and you can give us and yourself and as mentioned earlier someone else potentially the gift of supporting effectively wild and getting access to some perks by going to patreon.com slash Effectively Wild and signing up to pledge some monthly or yearly amount. Help us keep the podcast going. Help us stay ad free. And again, get stuff. As have the following five listeners, Luis Eduardo Velos, Adam Englehart, Justin Steiner, Ryan Norlander, and Greg. Thanks to all of you. Patreon perks include access to the Effectively Wild Discord group for patrons only, monthly bonus episodes, including our latest 49th bonus episode, which went up this weekend. We drafted Christmas

songs tis the season some of you may be sick of christmas songs in which case a draft of christmas songs might be the last thing you want to listen to but we don't actually play the christmas songs we just talk about them and sometimes sort of sing and hum them anyway we like them your mileage may vary but we think you'll like our bonus pods they're not all about colonoscopies in fact most of them aren't and there are 49 of them sitting under the tree already unwrapped just waiting for you to tune in you can also potentially appear on the podcast you can get prioritized email answers. You can get discounts on merch and add free Fangraphs memberships and so much more. Check out all the offerings at patreon.com slash effectively wild.

If you are a Patreon supporter, you can message us to the Patreon site. If not, you can contact us via email, send your questions, comments, intro, and outro themes to podcast at Fangraphs.com. You can rate review and subscribe to Effectively Wild on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube music, and other podcast platforms. You can join our Facebook group at Facebook.com slash group slash effectively wild. You can find the Effectively Wild subreddit at our slash Effectively Wild. And you can check the show notes in the podcast post at FamGraphs or in the episode description in your podcast app.

I will link to more information on that mini staplast related to ERA and FIPGAPS because I know that could probably be a bit tough to follow in audio form. Might be a tad easier to follow as a transcript. Thanks to Shane McKeon for his editing and production assistance. We will be back with another episode soon. Talk to you then. Baseball nerds, they'll still be speaking statistically, rambling romantically, pontificating pedantically, banter and bodily, drafting discerningly, giggling giddling idly, equalling effectively wild.