Effectively Wild: A FanGraphs Baseball Podcast - Effectively Wild Episode 2522: The New Funnest Fact

Episode Date: August 26, 2026

Ben Lindbergh and Meg Rowley banter about baseball’s new reigning fun fact (courtesy of Pete Crow-Armstrong and Randy Arozarena), Kade Anderson’s debut and Dan Wilson’s slow hook, a Cal Raleigh rally, and the firing of Astros GM Dana Brown, then Stat Blast (41:51) about a Phillies comeback, a strange Yankees streak, an unusual double play, getting hit by both pitched and batted balls, and consecutive same names in lineups, before finishing by discussing (58:37) follow-ups and errata pertaining to the previous week’s podcasts and (1:18:02) a sign-stealing/unwritten-rules controversy courtesy of the Cubs and Diamondbacks. Audio intro: Jonathan Crymes, “Effectively Wild Theme 2” Audio outro: Moon Hound, “Effectively Wild Theme” Link to PCA/Randy fun fact 1 Link to PCA/Randy fun fact 2 Link to FG post on Anderson Link to Sheehan on Wilson/Anderson Link to Cal homers video Link to Cal homers article 1 Link to Cal homers article 2 Link to Cal slump analysis Link to MLBTR on Brown 1 Link to MLBTR on Brown 2 Link to Nightengale on Brown Link to Clemens on Brown Link to Wells gear 1 Link to Wells gear 2 Link to Schwarber homer video Link to FG Phillies post Link to Twins comeback article Link to comebacks Stat Blast results Link to Yankees scoring data Link to Stanton injury update Link to Judge injury update Link to double-play data Link to triple-Brown name game Link to Gasper clip Link to HBP/batted ball instances Link to listener emails database Link to sign-stealing article 1 Link to sign-stealing article 2 Link to Sam on unwritten rules Link to sign-stealing EW episode Link to Ben on coaching/front offices Link to Miz/Sale article 1 Link to Miz/Sale article 2 Link to Miz/Sale box score Link to Randy Johnson EW interview Link to other case of Miz-taken identity Link to Kelly/Mikolas article Link to Mikolas article 1 Link to Mikolas article 2 Link to puck-tracking tech  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

Hello and welcome to episode 25, 22 of Effectively Wild, a Fangraphs baseball podcast brought you by our Patreon supporters. I'm Megrelly Fangraphs and I'm joined by Ben Lemberger the ringer. Ben, how are you? Well, we've got to anoint a new contender for the crown of most fun fact about baseball, I think. This will not be news to many of our listeners. This is not an effectively wild exclusive or anything.

It has been well circulated. It has made the rounds. But this might be now the new leader for if you have to cite something strange, some unusual coincidence, happenstance about baseball, some sort of you can't predict baseball, Susan sort of fun fact. I think it might very well be Randy Roserena following up Pete Crow Armstrong by duplicating the historic achievement that PCA had had less than a week earlier. So we talked about how PCA became the sixth player in MLB history to have a lead-off and walk-off home run in the same game. And the second to do so having homered on the first pitch, at least to our knowledge. So first pitch of the game and last pitch of the game. And he was the first and only since Vic Power in 1957.

And then Randy Rosarena comes along on Saturday, five days later, and does a lot. exactly the same thing. This is wild. This is incomprehensible to me that he did exactly the same thing that PCA had done. And for added style points, he hits the home run over PCA's head. Right. Yeah. That it came against PCA's team does add a certain narrative satisfaction to it. Yeah. It really just sweetens the deal because PCA is right there to witness. his accomplishment being equaled by Randy Rosarena. Rosarena also added a home run robbery to boot just to top PCA, anything you can do, I can do better, at least in the same game.

I mean, PCA can do that too, but he did that in the same game. And then another we're just gilding the lily here. This is a hat on a hat. But also, Pete Kromstrung was the first to do that, the lead-off and walk-off Homer, And then the leadoff Homer in the next game, too. And Randy did that also. He did. Randy did that also.

So my mind is reeling from all of this. I mean, this has happened twice in recorded baseball history prior to Randy Roserain, or once in recorded baseball history prior to last week. And then it happened twice in one week. It's just so improbable. It really was something, the home run robbery, perhaps the most surprising part just given how we might otherwise describe Brandy Stevens. But yeah, I mean, pretty remarkable, so fun. What a weird little baseball team they are right now.

Take two or three from the Cubs and get absolutely wrecked. Yeah. They're playing two modes of baseball right now, fun or bell rung. And like there's very little in between. It's like, allow me to get absolutely. absolutely decimated and have you question whether this team has anything to it at all. And then Randy does what Randy does. It's just like a perfect encapsulation of the Bairner season.

So they took two out of three from the Cubs with a negative run differential by a lot in the series because of the 19 to two loss. And then two walk off one run wins. So outscored on the series by 15 runs, I guess, but won the series. I'm pretty sure that was a stab last at some point. Of most negative run differential in a winning series or something along those lines. But, yeah, that was wild that PCA and Randy did that in such quick succession. And so sticking with the Mariners for a moment because they are an interesting team and a confounding team these days. Randy Rosarina's performance came in Kate Anderson's Major League debut game.

Yes. So that must have been exciting for you. What did you make of Cade's debut? I thought it was fine. I thought you saw the things about Cade that are good. I think you're seeing the difference between, say, the ball in AA versus the majors. Some of his pitches were moving less than they had down in the minors. But yeah, like, that's Cade.

The ball hides behind his head for a long time. Hitters do not seem comfortable when they are facing him. He will have to adjust, obviously. but solid debut, you know? Very exciting for the young man. I don't understand why we haven't perfected patch on hat technology better. Did you watch any of this game?

Because it came during Players Weekend. Yeah. Which is like, talk about a hat on a hat. Isn't every weekend Players Weekend? Like, I understand this is like a special thing and they get to be themselves for the first time all season. Not as much as they used to. A little less themselves or not with the nicknames

and all the hullabaloo. It's very gear-based now. It's a very gear-based weekend, commemorated by various special bats and chest protectors and socks and, you know, cleats and guards and what have you. And a lot of it's fun.

Don't get me wrong. But some of it is just like, oh, yeah, you all like hunting. Yeah, that's a big part of the vibe. And then also, and I want to assure our listeners, I am not making light of the great sentence I'm about to say, the collective trauma that was 9-11. But Austin Wells' Players Weekend Chess Protector was just like a never-forget,

9-11-themed one, and I was like, is that really what we're... Anyway, Austin, buddy, like... Okay. But they had these special Players Weekend patches that went on the side of the cap. And like, none of them were on there good. And I don't, this might have been a Mariners specific problem. But Kate Anderson's debut is happening during Players Weekend. He has his cap on.

There's a Players Weekend patch. And it's just flapping like a, like a sock in the breeze, you know? And I was just like, you can't, I don't know if they're sewn on or if this is like, you know, you, they have the, like the glue on the back. and you like iron them on. But the equipment manager, I had some notes, you know. I was like, get the young man's patch. I was just like, can somebody go squish the sides of his head and go, it's on there, you know. But yeah, Kate Anderson, there is, you know, it's exciting stuff.

I love these guys where they were just literally in college like 18 months ago. I know. And here you are, you know, facing down a good competitive Cubs team. a Cubs team that is trying its best to, like, assert itself in that division. I don't know that there's any flavor of home run robbery. I don't enjoy at least a little bit. I mean, some of them are kind of like cheapies, right, when, like, the wall is really low. But then if you go over the low wall, it's like, oh, you held onto it.

So that's exciting. But a home run robbery in a big league debut, that feels that, that's nice. That's exciting in a different way. It's like, see, they got you up here. Don't worry about it. Austin Wells was about one and a half on 9-11. Again, I'm not trying to, I'm not saying anything. I just am like, you never forget.

You don't remember. You don't remember. You know, like I understand that that is an invocation of a broader concept that is not specific to Austin Wells. You don't have to remember from personal experience. I guess maybe if you weren't around when it happened, it's even more imperative not to forget. So good on him, I guess. But, yeah. He was recently wearing a tribute to Thurman Munson, too.

Thurman Munson themed catchers gear. So I guess he's just very into memorializing plain related tragedies that predated or came shortly after his birth. So anyway, I guess he has an appreciation for history. So that's nice. Anyway, yes, I thought that Kate Anderson, was perfectly fine in his debut and Rosarino was amazing and Dan Wilson was not so hot

in that debut. I don't know whether you felt the same, but... I'm so excited to hear someone else complain about Dan Wilson. Yeah, well, Josian just ethered him and his handling of Kate Anderson in that game. And you certainly have had your complaints about Dan Wilson's bullpen management.

Yeah, and so in this game, he left Anderson in seemingly too long. I mean, it wasn't like he had an irresponsible pitch count or something. It's just that he left him in after he was clearly running out of gas and he had lost a few ticks off the fastball. Granted, maybe he had some adrenaline going in the early innings. It was his major league debut. But his stuff was diminished.

He was not getting whiffs anymore. He could have taken him out when he had a lead. and he was the pitcher of record. Not that teams are emphasizing pitcher wins and losses so much anymore, but still you get your guy the top prospect in baseball. It's a nice thing to do in the debut, you know? Yeah, right. And just leave him without a sour taste in his mouth.

Just, hey, that went well. And also, you want to get your team the win without having to rely on Randy Rosa Rino heroics there at the end. So he just left him in seemingly beyond all reason. And it wasn't that his pitch count was so high, but his pitch count was, of course, quite low in the minors, too, because he's been handled quite carefully there. And so he has not gone through the lineup three times very often at all.

And here he just sent him out there to start the sixth. And granted, PCA was up and it's left on left, and maybe you try to get away with that. And PCA got a hit. But then he left him in after that. And then there was. wasn't out on the bases, but then he left him out longer and Bregman hit the home run. And then he left him in longer and Bush hit the home run. And he just, it kept going and going. And it wasn't just

purely pitch count, but also just watching him the stuff, the Velo, the results. Clearly, he was flagging. And so it seemed like kind of classic Wilson not managing to the moment, not helping the team, not helping the player, and ultimately bailed out and maybe doesn't get as much attention for it because of the way the game ended, but not a fine managing display, I don't think. I recall when we spoke with Ryan Divish for the Mariners preview, and, you know, I, in a way that I tried to make sound neutral, asked him about sort of Dan's instincts around this stuff. And, you know, the context of it was his reliever decisions against the Blue Jays in the postseason. But this has sort of been Dan's bugaboo in his brief managerial career.

And my recollection of Ryan's answer was that, you know, he trusts his guys. He thinks his guys can handle multiple times through the order. He is, you know, his base instinct is to leave his strong. starter in for a little bit. And I think that there's, you know, if I want to exhibit some generosity toward Dan, we can recall that Ryan also said that, like, this is a meaningful thing to his team and that it has garnered him goodwill in the clubhouse. And so maybe this is part of him sort of keeping the room. And we can also acknowledge that there have been times this season, less an issue last year, but this season where the Mariners bullpen has been shaky and

unreliable. So, you know, you want to allow for the possibility that in any given moment, he is operating with more information than we are about sort of how available his relievers are. So that's me being generous. Having said all of that, this is wild. This is a wild set of decisions. And to your point, like, there were multiple decision points where it seemed like he made the wrong choice. Like maybe you do want to leave Anderson in to see PCA and you're like, well, you know, I feel better about him than some of our other lefty options. And so let's, you know, let's see what he can manage. But I would have to think, given not to your point, not the pitch count, but given the way his observable stuff was flagging, right, given all of the other indicators that you get of a starter who maybe doesn't have it anymore, you should have it be sort of a batter to batter situation.

And at every point, it's like, okay, great. This is a great place to bring in a reliever. This, hey, you got, you know what? You got out of it, right? You had a, you had an out on the base paths. Don't you want to take advantage of that? You know? Don't you want to just bring in a fresh arm?

And so I think that, again, for any given set of game decisions, you could attribute to Dan, more complete information than we have, and he is basing his decisions off of that. But taken in the aggregate, it's just like this is what he does. This is his instinct and proclivity, and it often does not serve them well, right? Like, there are many senses we can point to of it biting them. And some of that is a failure of execution on the part of the players, so I don't want to lay at all at Dan's feet. But I was open to the notion that that this guy who seems well-liked within the organization,

seems well-liked by his players, would grow in his second year, right? Like, Dan got brought in when Scott Service was fired. He wasn't the interim. He was just, as our listeners were recall, he was just hired as the manager, right? And there were other coaching changes that went along with that. And so it wasn't just service-leaving.

It wasn't just Dan being brought in. They shifted some other stuff around. There is connective tissue from services service, right? Maniac is still there, et cetera. But they brought him in. They didn't do a search. They made him the guy. Okay.

You're presumably doing that because you have some confidence in him. He has this very devastating, very public bullpen meltdown in the postseason, which again, some of that is on the players for nothing. executing, but you're not putting your, you're not putting your guys in their best position to succeed in the most important moment of your season. Okay, that's a learning opportunity. You learn something. No, he's managing exactly the same way it was last year. And, and so I think that that's the frustration. And, you know, I made the, I made the case that how far they progressed this season from a postseason perspective, if they managed to stink their way in,

that isn't what should dictate whether or not Dan Wilson keeps his job. Dan Wilson's job security should not be tied to that because this is like this is a weird ass pretty bad baseball team that might be able to take advantage of the weak American league field and and scooch in. I think they will ultimately fall a little bit short, but like scooch in. They do have good pitching. So like there's a there's an unlikely but plausible. scenario where they just like kind of mow their way through fucking pussies in field.

And, you know, if Cal Raleigh can hit three home runs in a game and Julio can homer, you guys, you couldn't spread it out. You're allowed to, you're allowed to score runs across multiple days, you know? And you're allowed to spread out the runs you allow also. Although in that case, I guess it's better to cluster them, right? If you're going to give, you might as well get it all. It was an actual pitcher who gave up the biggest complement of runs. So progress, question mark.

Well, if the Astros could fire their GM despite being ahead of the Mariners and maybe playoff bound, then surely the Mariners could also dismiss their manager. We'll get to Dana Brown in Houston in a second. Sure. But yeah, are we seeing the Cowrally rally? Is that happening here? I was surprised to learn that this was his first three-homer game, not just at the Major League. level, but according to him at any level or any professional level, or really any level, maybe.

So that's sort of surprising to me. But also, he didn't just have the three homers there. He had a couple homers over the week before that. And we look over his last eight games as we speak here on Tuesday. 309 WRC Plus. Maybe he's kind of coming alive. Maybe he's showing some signs of life. at least, he's almost up to league average offense for a catcher. Not quite, but close. And that's even with Austin Hedges, of all people, juicing the catcher offense stats with a 109 WRC plus. Who saw that come in almost two underplayed appearances?

So he's having a terribly disappointing season, but much of that would be forgotten if he went on a tear here over the last month and carried the Mariners to the playoffs. I've reached a piece with this mariner's season, which might surprise people, given how I've talked about them on the show very recently. It anything is, it's just gravy from here on out, right? Like, this team defies logic and explanation, and I will just take whatever I can get from a fan perspective. I find them bizarre and fascinating. As it pertains to Cal, like, I am just, I'm very willing to write this.

season off as hangover, exhaustion, whatever you want to call it from the 60 home run campaign and a long postseason plus, you know, WBC action early on. And then he was injured. And it's just like, I think that in much the same way that Cal's 2025, as exciting as it was, I tried really hard to not have it fundamentally alter my expectations of him. They do, I think, once a guy has demonstrated, he can do that. I think it would be silly to not have it adjust up your expectations to some degree, right? Because like how many guys have a 60 home run campaign? But you don't want to assume that Cal is like a true talent 60 home run hitter. That would be bananas also, right? So I tried, I'm trying not to overreact to this season in much the same way that I tried not

to overreact to last season because I think that some of his struggles this year are easily explicable within the context of last year and this spring and the injury and what have you. So maybe, yeah, maybe he is turning it around. I don't, I don't think that like he is this guy, this guy, meaning the guy he's been over a full season this year. I look forward, you know, it's just, it's so much more fun to be able to really care about Cowrolley's ass. You know, and we haven't been able to do that this year because he's been... I've heard hardly any dumper discussion. I know.

Well, you've got to hit home runs to, you got to hit home runs, Ben. If you're not hitting, if you're not dumping the ball in the stands, we're not going to care about the dumper. I know. It's been all big slumper discourse. That's all we've got here. And it's interesting because so many people have tried to puzzle out what's been wrong with him. And it seems like maybe he's just been a split second later. His timing has been slightly off.

and maybe you could chalk that up to fatigue and whatever injuries. And he's someone who catches the ball out front and pulls it in the air. And so if he doesn't quite get it out front and make contact there, then maybe it has a disproportionate impact. And also his plate discipline has suffered as well. Because I think he's been pressing. Yeah, it could be that also. As we noted when we were first trying to diagnose what ails Cal Rale,

it is hard to overstate how perfectly obvious. optimized his pulled air contact was last year. Yeah. Yeah. It was bonkers how effective he was at pulling the air for, pulling the ball in the air for power. It was crazy. So, you know, some regression, meaningful regression in that regard seems likely. I think that that's right, that the timing has just been a little bit off and because of the,

the contours of his production that was always going to hit him hardest. And then I think, you know, the likelihood that he has been to some degree pressing, because he's trying so desperately to be the guy he was last year seems likely to me. And then you factor in the fatigue and the injury. And it's just like wash it. You know, like I think that that's kind of where you have to land. I think that in all likelihood he's going to have a nice long offseason to recover. It's true.

Maybe that'll help. Both because of their likely absence from the postseason field and the state of, potential lockout. But I hope that whatever version of a season we get next year, Cal is just sort of in better spirits. I think that all of these guys, you know, appreciate that I can just imagine the pressure of their moment being a wait for a lot of them, which isn't to say like you got to hit the ball, but, you know, it felt like it was all there for them. And so for it to go so badly awry, does, I imagine could could lead one to press. And so yeah, maybe they'll turn it around and they will sneak in as a like a sub 500 team. You know, it wouldn't be the

weirdest thing that would happen in this in this year's playoff field, I have to imagine. No, because the American League remains a weird mess. But, you know, I think that the version of them that you saw yesterday against the Phillies. We're recording this on Tuesday. We know what the best version of this Mariners team looks like. The pitching is good. They hit a bunch

of homers and they're able to stop a nine game winning streak for the Phillies. And boy, Trey Turner, not a shortstop anymore. It's so rough, dude. He had a moment last night where I was just like, Trey. What's going on? My guy. Anyway, so I don't know, they're a funky, weird team, and they're the ones who've kept their management intact as much of the rest of the division, which is just like, get out of here.

Yeah. You know, what kind of job secure, Jerry has crazy job security. It's bananas. I'm just like, we're firing Dana Brown, you know. Perhaps we can use this to transition to the Astros change front office change. One thing before we do, before we shift away from Mariners weekend, we got a question from Patreon supporter Dane on the subject of the lead-off walk-off Homer combo. And Dane says, I was reading the Vic Power Wiki, some cool tidbits there you won't want to miss,

and was struck by how oddly the seven times this feed has been recorded seemed to be spread out in time. After Powers Icebreaker in 1957, there was a lengthy drought until 2000. Then, 2003, 2009, 2010, and 2010. And now two within five days in 2026. Since we can now expect this to be a weekly occurrence, I think we need a name for the lead-off, walk-off, home run sandwich. Oh. And Dane says, best I've got is bookend bombs.

Oh, okay. That's nice. And flank tanks. Would love to hear what you and other listeners might come up with. Flanktanks is really good. Flanktanks and bookend bombs. I like both of those, really. Those are quite strong.

Yeah. Gosh, okay, I'm going to have to think about that because I don't, you know, I don't think that I can best either of those answers. One possibility I was thinking maybe we could call it an open and shut case. Oh, okay. I like that too. You start the scoring, you end the scoring. You start the game. You end the game.

It's decisive. It's conclusive. I kind of like the open and shut case. But soliciting suggestions and I can share some of the best of them. on future episodes. Okay, so this weekend did not go great for the Astros, who dropped a couple of tough ones to the lowly A's, and Dana Brown paid the price for that, seemingly.

He has lost his job as Astor's GM. For now, he is being replaced by a trio of assistant GMs, plus Jeff Bagwell, plus owner Jim Crane, who is maybe just grabbing the reins himself and handling baseball ops. We've seen this story before. Or at least being transparent about how he's grabbing the ransom self. Well, yes, because, of course, the Dana Brown era was dogged by persistent rumors,

reporting that perhaps he was not always solely pulling the strings, that there were a lot of cooks in that kitchen, even when he was there. But we're flashing back now to the time after James Click was dismissed. And so I was saying, I mean, it seems sort of unusual that someone whose team was in playoff position a day ago as we're recording this and is, I think, tied in the last column for first in the AL West. They're right there. They still have pretty darn good chances to make the playoffs, whether via the Wild Card or the West. And yet the GM is getting the axe. Well, this is kind of a Houston tradition because, of course, Brown succeeded James Click, who was dismissed days after.

after the Astros won the World Series in 2022. So just being kind of tenuously in playoff position doesn't guarantee you anything. So yes, I guess it's an open question to what extent Dana Brown was really having final cut over the Astros roster anyway, but he was the titular guy. And now he's not. And so it's odd because there was some Bob Knight and Gill reporting that said that the Astros will probably go the usual route of interviewing candidates from various respected organizations that have won without spending a lot, just poaching people from the raise or from the brewers who themselves

poach people from the raise or the guardians, that sort of small markets competitive team, perennial playoff contender team path. Or they might just say Bagwell's the guy. So that seems like a diametrically opposite path, really, you're going. like small market sort of saber-savvy kind of the typical mode, or just old-school Bagwell, who has had some quotes about maybe analytics have gone too far. Right. I mean, maybe they did in the Astros case. If anyone, maybe it was the Astros.

But, or Crane will just sort of oversee things himself to some extent, even more so or openly. So we've seen this play before, I guess, because this just, this Crane Bagwell kind of, combo kind of happened in the post-click off-season as well with some dubious decisions there. But yeah, it does feel like the Astros are coming to the end of this era, this run of success. But then we've been saying that for a couple years. And I have been, if anything, somewhat surprised that they have been running on fumes and have managed to stay so close, where they're very, very near to playoff position as we speak and might well make it this year. and came very close last year too, despite having an extraordinary number of injuries, really.

So they have managed to sustain this run. I kind of thought, okay, it's all going to crash and burn and the core is getting old, and they're not replenishing it with the prospect pipeline and everything. But they've hung in there. Obviously, it helps that the competition is terrible this year. Right. You know, there was reporting that this decision was because, you know, they dropped two of three to the A's over the weekend.

and this is this embarrassment that they would lose to a bad team like that. But I imagine it had less to do with any like proximate embarrassment at the hands of the A's and more to do with like Crane just has a, he has a vision for what he thinks the team should be. He has a notoriously sort of meddlesome approach. He has preferred deputies, you just named them. And so if he's displeased with their inability to sort of grab the reins, in a weak west, well, maybe he thinks he can do better and he's not going to fire himself. So, you know, Dana ends up being sort of the sacrificial lamb there. And I don't want to

make it sound like he didn't get to have his say in the organization or have an imprint on it, you know, but I think Crane is just understood to be meddlesome and thinks that Bagwell has ideas about things, you know, they've seemed a, they have seemed an organization, sort of fractured and unsettled about who they are. And I think that there were parts of, you know, the hyper-efficiency McKenzie-oriented approach of the Loonow regime that were like, obviously bad. What?

Bold stamp stick, Rick. Yeah. You know, but I did, it did at times feel like there was sort of a baby out with the bathwater approach to the org and, you know, rumblings of them being sort of into, they're being factions that were internally antagonistic to analytics, often with Bagwell, sort of at the head. So it's just a, they're in a weird spot. It's a strange thing to do when, to your point, like, they certainly have postseason potential, even with, you know, their record a game under 500.

It's just like, you know, you have the best hitter hitter in the American League this year and arguably like just one of the best hitters in baseball year after year who's finally fully healthy and able to do it.

Like, Jordan is probably going to win the Triple Crown. We've talked about like where he's going to sit in the MVP conversation. And, you know, it's the end of August and you're moving on

from your jam. I always find these late August schisms to be so fascinating. It's like, are you trying to get a jump on the hiring market? Like, what is the, you know, do you really want to test out internal options internally? Surely you know who these guys are and what they're like. Because as you said, like, this has been the crew you've run back before. So I don't know. And I would be curious, you know, we often get more reporting on these things as time goes on.

like this was positioned as a mutual parting of the ways. And I imagine I wouldn't be shocked if there was something to that. Like I understand like, hey, it's embarrassing to blow a six run lead to the A's. But this to me feels like sort of the culmination of stuff that might have festered and to the extent that, you know, Brown was just like, hey, let me run this team or let me go. I wouldn't be shocked by that either. Like I wouldn't want Jeff Bagwell meddling over my freaking shoulder. Like, get out of here.

Jeff Bagwell? I mean, Jeff Bagwell, I understand the appeal of Jeff Bagwell to a certain kind of fan. I enjoyed him as a player. Sure. Bring back that batting stance. Yeah. Right. Sure.

Yeah. Definitely. Have I, at any point in his post-playing career, heard him talk about baseball and been like, Jeff Bagwell and I are on the same page about the game? Absolutely not. Absolutely not. And he probably wouldn't disagree with that. But I don't think there's much that firing a GM can do for this year.

You're right. It might just be getting a head start, getting your pick of the candidates, although I think many of the candidates would have misgivings about taking that job, giving Crane's reputation and everything we just said. But at least you get to start your interviewing sooner. It's maybe more impactful to change managers. And it can be disruptive, obviously, to do that late in the year. but because a GM can't do very much, you can't really bolster the roster in very significant ways at this point post-trade deadline.

But a manager, if you're concerned about a manager's tactical mistakes, then it does make sense to change them before the most meaningful games. Joshy and when he was writing about Dan Wilson had the comp of when the Brewers fired Ned Yost with a couple weeks left to go in the 2008 season. and then they finished strong and they made the playoffs and who knows if that was why. But if you are concerned about someone's tactical acumen, then make that change before it's too late

because you could fire. I'm not really actively calling for anyone's job. I don't have a stake in it exactly. It's just reading the tea leaves and the results. If you think that you're going to make a change if the Mariners end the season, more or less on the trajectory they're on, well, that can help you in 20,

27, assuming there's a season, but it can't help you for the rest of this season. So might as well move on quickly if you are pretty sure that you're going to. Right, exactly. Like I, you know, for all of my frustration with Dan, it feels bad to call for somebody's job, you know, unless they're like a monster. And that's not Jan. I do think that you're right to say, though, if you have an understanding that you're going to move on and you're looking out at the American league playoff field and you think that part of your underperformance is the result of, you know, managerial mistakes. You should make that move now because it, it's still,

sorry to go back to the Mariners, but you brought it up, so here we are. If this team ends up playing October baseball, like there's going to be discourse about a sub 500 team making the field. And to be clear, even as someone who prefers the Mariners to win rather than lose, I don't think it's good for some 500 teams to be playing in the postseason. I think that, you know, I don't think it's a disaster. I don't think that it requires, like, us reformatting the playoffs, which is what always happens. When one bad thing happens in October, we're like, we have to change the whole thing. And I'm like, we could just see if it happens again and then react to it, right?

Like, this does happen on occasion. Not that I'd be averse to making certain changes, but not just because of how the standing shake out one time. So I don't think it's like good. for baseball to have sub-500 teams in the field. Having said that, like, if you're the Mariners, you should just want to play in October. You don't have to, like, take one for baseball. You can just try to get in however you get in

and then see what you can manage to that end. If you think that part of your underperformance is because of Wilson, well, cut ties now. Cut ties now, both so that you have a greater potential to make the playoffs and also to make literally any other choice with your bullpen once you get there, right? So, yeah, if you know you're going to do it, just do it, just do it and see what you can do what you can do. And as you noted, the Mariners have done it before. They did it a couple of years ago, and that's when Dan Wilson took over and just never left.

And we were just saying we feel bad about calling for someone's job. I don't feel terrible about it in a major league manager's case. I feel worse about it just because it's hard to evaluate a manager's performance. And I'm not watching every single Mariners game. I'm not even watching nearly as much as you are probably. And so much of the manager's job is happening behind the scenes. And you never know. What do we not know?

And what is the front office's role in these in game decisions and availability of pitchers, etc. But while in most contexts, I would feel bad about dementia. that someone be unemployed. Dad Wilson made $30 million bucks as a player. He's probably doing okay financially and also there are only 30 of these jobs

in the majors and so it's typically something you have to really earn and continue to earn day in and day out and also he's a baseball guy he could catch on and get other baseball jobs for the rest of his life if he would like to. So yeah, it's not a job that you're just sort of entitled to forever.

You don't have to be mean spirited about it, but calling someone out, it's, you know, I don't think it's beyond the pale. Plus, managers know that this comes with the territory, and they are, to some extent, hired to be fired. So it's not a shock to them when that hammer falls. Yeah, I think that that's right. And again, like, you're right to say we don't know all the things. It is hard to evaluate. It continues to be weird to me that it's an award that the BBWA gives out, even though you have beatwriters in there who,

have a better sense of it than I guess anybody else. But when there are specific strategic failures, right? Like, no one is looking at Don Mattingly and being like, well, he's managing that pitching staff really well right now. It hasn't mattered for nine games, but yesterday we saw what happens. It's like, hey, why is Zach Wheeler still in this game? What's happening? You know?

I understand. Like, maybe your bullpen's exhausted. He just flew across the country. But, like, why is Zach Wheeler in there taking his licks? getting given up homers. No, stop. You're losing. Pull him.

Like, what's going on? What's going on? Yeah. It is funny how we often bemoan managers leaving starters in too long, while also bemoaning that starters don't stay in long enough. It's like those things aren't incompatible because one is we're looking at this from what's good for the game and what's fun from a fan standpoint perspective. And on the other hand, we're looking at it from this team is trying to win games.

perspective. And that's how we ended up in this situation where people commonly complain that starters don't go deep enough. It's because a lot of people realize that they probably shouldn't go as deep when you have fresh relievers available. But you do have to hold both of those things in your head where, you know, don't leave Kate Anderson in that long. Don't leave exactly or in that long. But also, boy, I wish starting pitchers stayed in the game longer. So if you didn't know the whole context, you might think that we are having some sort of a Jekyll and Hyde, just forgetting what we just said about starters. But it's two different contexts, I promise.

We're very sophisticated as the thing, you know. We can hold a lot of different ideas in our head at the same time. That's what it is. Okay, I have a few topical, timely stat blasts that I want to deploy here before they get out of date at all, and they will be prompted by some recent events and some from this weekend, in fact. So we'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 day.

So we got this question from Patreon supporter Michael. and it did pertain to the Phillies comeback on Sunday. So you mentioned that the Phillies nine-game winning streak had been snapped. But it looked like it was poised to be snapped a day before. And then the Phillies had this incredible comeback. It was really quite a fun one. I guess maybe I'll summarize for those who didn't see, but it was the sequence of events here.

I mean, they were down to one strike. remaining several times. And they just, they got off the mat. It was against the Cardinals and former effectively wild guest, Riley O'Brien, was not effective on this day. So the Phillies were down four to nothing, going into the bottom of the ninth. They'd been shut out on four hits over eight innings by five Cardinals pitchers. Wasn't even a save situation, but the closer came in.

Harper had a lead off double, but then O'Brien got. Arise and Brandon Marsh to fly out. So we're almost there. Four run lead. Guy on second, two outs. Then J.T. Real Muto singles. Runners on the corners, Justin Crawford walks. Base is loaded.

Edmundo Sosa hits a three-run double. Suddenly it's a one-run game. Brian Dela Cruz singles in Sosa. Now it's tied. And Kyle Schwerber hits a 459-foot walk-off two-run homer. Majestic. It was like such. It was such an emphatic thumping.

It was amazing. He knew immediately that he had gotten it to, which was great. Because sometimes you're like, it was boy, even for him, it was quite the home run. And he's quite the number. Definitely a no-douder. And yeah, he should have a feel for home runs by now. But this one is not a wall scraper. And the Phillies, as we speak, are three and a half back of the Braves.

They've had quite a resurgence. Here I am making fun of Donny baseball. And that team has really changed their fortunes in the last week. Yeah. And we've had some very exciting comebacks this season, as in all seasons. But there was that great twins comeback with the Cody Clemens' ultimate Grand Slam. That was super exciting. That was a three-run deficit back in late July.

So Michael, prompted by this Phillies comeback, says, The Phillies, notably down 4-0-0 in the bottom of the 9th on Sunday, came back to win in the same inning. I'm wondering what's the largest comeback for a team after trailing for eight and two-thirds innings being shut out. So shutout, scoreless with one out to go. And then having a big comeback. And Michael says, I have a suspicion that Sunday's game might be it, the biggest such comeback. But perhaps it's happened before. And Michael never bet against something in baseball having happened before.

Because if PCA and Randy Rosarena can have open and shut cases twice in one week, then surely there can be a bigger comeback than this, though not much bigger. So frequent stop-blast correspondent, Michael Mountain, check this out. Largest deficit overcome after trailing by X to nothing being shut out with two outs in the ninth is five to nothing, which was accomplished by the Chicago Cubs in Atlanta on April 29, 1979. They won six to five. The 1997 Mets won a game after trailing six to nothing with two outs in the ninth. That was September 13th versus the Expos. But they needed extra innings to take the lead and complete the comeback. So it was not all done in one go.

Most runs scored in a ninth inning after being shut out through eight and two-thirds is seven runs, which was done by the Reds at Cleveland on July 10th, 2018. They were trailing four to nothing at the time in one seven to four. So Michael concludes the Philly. These were one run shy of the record in each metric on Sunday. A 4-0 deficit has been overcome with two outs three times before. The aforementioned 2018 Cincinnati Cleveland game, Cardinals over Reds, August 8th, 2016, and Giants over Cardinals. June 9th, 1910.

A six-run ninth after two outs has happened five times before, but only the aforementioned Cub's victory over Atlanta resulted in a victory without going to extras. The Mets Expos game was a six-run ninth that went. went to extras, the A's and senators, each separately played a pre-integration game where they came back to lose 13 to 6 instead of 13 to nothing. And the Padres lost 7 to 6 at Chase Stadium on August 26, 1995 after trailing 7 to nothing with two outs in the top of the 9th. So, yes, sorry to break it to you, Michael. This has indeed happened before. But this was still notable.

All of this has happened before and it will happen again. I learned that from multiple fictional properties, including Battlestar Galactica and this Phillies game. So that was a good one. Also, we got a question from Patreon supporter Jake, who suggests a possible stab last. This was sent to us on Friday, and Jake said, the Yankees won six to one today, having three half innings with that final five-run lead. I couldn't remember the last time the Yankees even scored five runs in a game, so I checked. since the All-Star break, tonight matched the Yankees' entire post-all-Star game total

of half-innings with a five-run lead. They led by five exactly in the bottom of the eighth and top of the ninth against the White Sox on July 27th and the top of the ninth against the Mariners on August 12th. In fact, the Yankees' last lead of six or more runs was the bottom of the sixth against the raise on July 9th. Since that July 9th game, the Yankees are nonetheless 22 and 13.

So that's the interesting thing is that they have not had large leads But they have been winning at a pretty good clip And so Jake concludes Is this weird? How often do teams go this long Without a six-run lead? Or this few half innings with a five-run lead Or if this is not weird,

How often do teams on stretches like this have winning records Let alone a 628 winning percentage? So I believe that this streak is still active as we record here on Tuesday afternoon. And the Yankees, they've had some trouble scoring and might have something to do with the absence of one Aaron Judge. I think you could perhaps connect the dots here.

I don't know if we're jumping to conclusions, but maybe the decreased offensive output that has coincided with the absence of judge could be causation, not just correlation. And they did actually score eight runs on Sunday in an eight to three. win over Toronto, but still, that was a five-run lead in the end, and I don't think they ever had a six-run lead in that game. So this streak has been extended. But Michael answered this one on Monday.

So this is active because the Yankees were off on Monday, I think. So Michael says, good of Jake to note New York's record during this span. That's an important factor in making this a noteworthy stretch of games. 3752 team spans in the integration era exceed the Yankees. active streak of 675 half innings, that's through Sunday, without a lead of six or more runs. Only 41 of those spans were from teams that had a winning record during the streak. So 41 out of 372 such team spans. So if you're not ever having a large lead like this, it's pretty tough to win a lot during that stretch.

And none, none of those teams had a winning percentage as high as the Yankees 23 and 14. The Mets were 24 and 15 between August 2nd and September 19th, 2001. Other things that we can't forget from September 2001? Is that in poor taste, possibly? Without a six-run lead, that was 699 half-innings. That's the best winning percentage I could find over any span, at least this long. And within the year range that Michael searched, the longest team span with a record at least this good, despite never holding a six-run lead, belonged to the 1988.

Dodgers, who played 654 half innings, about 20 fewer than the Yankees' active streak, between August 10th and September 20th that year, and went 26 and 12. The Yankees only just passed that Dodgers team in streak length in their most recent game on Sunday night. And there is a spreadsheet to go along with that with all the long and noteworthy streaks. So Cody Bounder is back now, and Judge is maybe going to be back at some point, though not. John Carl Stanton because the other calf has now gone south on him. So just as he had gotten reintroduced to the bases, they're going to go back to being strangers again, at least until next season. So that might help, but it does sort of emphasize the extent to which the Yankees, when we think of for the big bats and the Bronx bombers and the home runs, but they have been very often a run prevention team over this recent stretch,

particularly, of course, when judge is out of the lineup. But they've got good pitching, and so they have weathered this. And speaking of, I mean, Ryan Weathers is also hurt now maybe, but they have had enough pitching to scrape by and to win despite having to scratch and claw for runs at times. It's why things haven't totally gone down the Schlitler. Oh, good one. Yeah.

So that is notable also well-spotted. I don't even know how to segue for that. You just sit there in awe. You just sit there in awe if I'll get the joke like you. You'd be like, oh, that may get it for joke. Yes. This aspect of your wordplay has rubbed off on me and maybe I've taken it too far at times, perhaps.

Right. I commented the other day that you've been on a heater and I realized it's just evidence of my bad influence on you. Really? Like, this is my fault ultimately. when you podcast with someone as much as we do. I know. You can't help but adapt some of the same quirks, I guess.

So we'll see if the Yankees can actually open up a large lead one of these days. One more here from Luke, also prompted by Cubs Mariners action this weekend. This was the Cubs Mariners game on Sunday when in the fifth inning, the Mariners turned a 625 double play. So that's shortstop to catcher to third base double play. And Luke said I read a few accounts after the game about it being rare, but none that I read had any data on exactly how rare that is. So I was wondering if you could help in finding out exactly how uncommon an occurrence a 625 double play is. And Michael did, of course, and found that it happened 31 times on record between 1911 and 2020,

including one game in 1914, where the out at 3rd. base was made on the batter runner, A's pitcher bullet Joe Bush, only eight times since 1988. The runners and fielders involved are in the attached spreadsheet, which I will link to. And Michael highlights a particular case that he enjoyed in 1955 that involved four future Hall of Famers, Pee Wee Reese throughout Stan Musial going home, fielded by Roy Campanella, who then threw to Jackie Robinson at third for the second out. the star-studded boys of summer Dodgers era rosters. So yeah, it's rare.

It's not impressive. It's not really that rare by the standards of this episode's fun facts and stat blast. I'm afraid it was tough facts to follow, you know, just really exclusive company this time, unfortunately. So it kind of pales in comparison. But still noteworthy and now it has been noted. And I also asked Michael about one that I was kind of curious about. And actually, this was also requested on Blue Sky, I believe. Someone tagged me and said it sounded like a stab blast, and I concurred.

So what happened here was that Mickey Gasper got on base because he got hit by a pitch. And then he was retired because he got hit by a batted ball. So he got hit by balls back to back. He got hit by one on the bases after he got. hit by one in the batters box, which put him on the bases. So poor Mickey Gasper of the Red Sox probably doubly bruised and insult to injury because he was out as well. Neither impact appeared to pain him particularly, so that was good.

But I wanted to know how often that has happened, getting hit by a pitch and then getting hit by a batted ball when you're on base after being plunked. And this is a tough one to answer because I think the. record keeping is not complete. But the answer is, at least as far as Michael could determine from the retro sheet record, this was the eighth recorded time that this has happened. Okay. And I suspect that that is not complete because there's one instance from 1922 when this happened to Taikob

on May 14, 1922. And then there is a gap until Matt Lotton on April 12, 2000. So I'm going to guess that this happened at some point between 1920 and 2003. And it was just not noted or they changed the coding or something. And Michael was scouring the event text and trying to find any indication that this was recorded in some different way. But he and I suspect that this is a data coverage issue. And this just wasn't really recorded reliably. But as far as we know, this was the eighth time that it has happened.

And even since 2003, it's only the seventh time. So it is fairly rare, obviously, that that has happened. And Michael says he didn't see any instances since 2020. So that is no instances of a batter being hit by a ball on the bases. So it seems like even now maybe the record keeping is not complete or something about it has changed. So unable to provide a definitive answer there. But it's rare is the point. It's pretty rare.

How rare I can't quite tell you. But rare. And then the last little thing, this was spotted in the Effectively Wild Discord group, Stap Blast Channel. Someone asked about names. This was Corey. White Sox have Braden Montgomery, followed by Colson Montgomery in the lineup. And Corey said, I assume this isn't that rare. Two same surnames in a row.

in the lineup, but has there been a lineup with three straight last names or more? And Michael was able to determine the answer to this query, and it turns out, back-to-back matching surnames, yeah, not uncommon. Has happened at least 5,500 times last season alone. You had the lows slash lous for the raise and Alex and Jeremiah Jackson for the Orioles. However, Michael found only one case on record of three consecutive players in the race. the lineup with the same surname. And it was in a single game for the 1999 Pirates. Quadrupley outfielder Emil Brown called up for the last week of September, started three games,

including one in Milwaukee, September 29th, where he batted second behind Adrian Brown and head of Brant Brown. So we have remembered some guys. We've remembered some guys named Brown, who on one day and one day only batted consecutively in the lineup. The longest streak of matching first names in a starting lineup is four. And that happened in two different Dodgers games in the spring of 88. Mike Marshall, Mike Davis, Mike Devereaux, and Mike Sosha batting fifth through eighth. But it feels a little less noteworthy with first names, I guess, because, you know, there's more overlap there. But then again, we had more of them four, whereas the max is three, four last names.

So that concludes today's stat blasting. Wow. Now, a few follow-ups before we finish. We posed the question last week about the third leg of the fun fact, the Connie Mack to Vin-Skully Fun Fact. And Sam had posed this in Pebble Hunting, his newsletter, and wanted to know who could carry this forward because we can say that Connie Mack and Vin-Skully overlapped. And so who is going to be the third person who overlaps with Scully and then goes on to be a prominent figure for, decades and decades so that you can kind of tell almost the whole story of professional

baseball in three figures. And I suggested kind of a sidestep of the question. Statcast might be a good answer. As someone in the Discord group pointed out, not only does it sort of screw things up the symmetry of the fun fact

to go from person to person to inanimate technological computing system, but also maybe it sort of spoils it because part of the fun of the fun fact is that people are mortal and have limited lifespans.

Whereas statcast could be eternal. I still think it's fun because you can link Connie Mac, old-timey Connie Mac, and new age statcast. But it is true that I was citing that as, okay, this could be a reason why this is the answer

that statcast could endure, but also that kind of detracts from how special it is. However, I think the most common suggestion we got from several people, emails, Discord group, everywhere else, was Stephen Vote. Got a lot of Stephen Vote suggestions. Yeah.

I liked that one. Yeah. So I had said I had a slight preference for someone who was not occupying the same position as Scully or Mac, just having been a player and then a manager or a broadcaster, I kind of wanted a third thing. and vote is more in the mac mold of having been a player and then a manager, though not a player manager at any point. But it kind of fits, right? It fits because he's off to a stellar start and a historic start as a manager.

And then also was a player who overlapped with Scully and so would have been known and cited by Scully but didn't overlap that long. He debuted in the big leagues as a player in 2012. and then he's been a manager just for a few years now, starting in 2024. And he's still just 41, so he could last quite a while. It's a little hard maybe because if you had, say, a rookie he debuted in 2016, you could get more longevity unless Stephen Vogt just lives a really long time. And manages for a Connie Mac type tenure, it could happen. But yeah, starting his career as successfully as he has with the manager of the year

awards and everything and coming so highly recommended and being such a desirable managerial candidate. It's obviously super early to suggest that he will attain that kind of prominence. But he's on the path, I guess. He's on a decent trajectory to complete the trilogy. I didn't see him all get the Mariners managerial. Because he was a Mariners coach, right? He was right there. I'm just saying he was right there.

He was right there. It's a shame for Seattle, but not for Cleveland. Also, the pitcher's duel that I hyped up last time, I would say largely lived up to the billing. I agree. Yeah, because as I said, you have to error adjust. We can't expect dueling complete games or anything. And it wasn't peak Ms. and peak sale, obviously. It wasn't like their most dominant outings of the year or anything.

But I would say they both held. up their end of the bargain. They both went a full six and sale allowed two runs and the MIS allowed none and they matched each other strikeout for strikeout. So yeah, I don't think that disappointed, right? That cleared the bar for okay. People were excited for this pitching matchup and it more or less lived up to the expectations. Yeah, I think that that's right. It was an enjoyable time. The one way in which it did not live up to my billing is that that Jacob Mizorowski threw with his right hand in this game, which was an interesting choice.

I don't know what happened. Because normally, just to peel back the curtain for folks, it is not uncommon for us to notice an error we've each made. Because we are but human, you know? And to interject and say, oh, did you say that? And for whatever reason, I don't know if I was looking something up. It didn't wash over me. I didn't go, oh, did he just say?

So anyway, I feel like I let you down because I, like, was either searching for something on the site or going to find my emotional support Zillow listing or whatever. I don't know what was going on in that moment that I did not immediately clock your mistake. I mean, it is a little bit. It's more on you than it is on me. I agree with that. But it isn't not on me. It's on me at least some. That I didn't go, did he just say that he throws left?

No, it's tough sometimes because we obviously, we're having a conversation. We try to listen to what the other person is saying. Right. Sometimes you're so in your head because you're thinking of how am I going to respond to this? What am I going to say next? I have to remember this thing. Or I'm researching something or whatever it is or someone just sent me a message and I'm distracted. Right.

And so, yeah, sometimes it's not always. Or you just kind of, usually we trust that the other knows what they're talking about. So I'm not like watching for a hawk for some sort of screw up. Yeah, I assume that you are right when you talk because most of the time you are. That was your mistake, assuming I wouldn't make one. But no, what happened? Yeah, so I initially and caught this after the episode went up. So some of you may not have heard this.

We actually. Very few emails about it. Yes, I'm very grateful for how few emails we got. Yeah, I think that you must have gotten. And I was like, uh-oh, here we go. So either other people didn't notice or I'm guessing probably they thought, you know what, probably someone else pointed this out. I don't have to bombard their inbox all weekend. But that was nice.

I felt like it was a reprieve. Yeah. And you did put a new, you put a fresh cut up, right? Yeah, because usually we don't do that. But if there's some obvious mistake and all it takes is a little snip of a mention and it's just a factual thing. I bet you got the new. Okay. So we recorded in the afternoon and then I got a message from you at a disgusting time of night about this, which was less disgusting on your end than mine. But sometimes Ben, I get notes from you and I'm like, Jesus, dude, when do you sleep? Like, I need to know what I need to know that it happens, you know? Like, because anyway.

And I always assume because I know that you put your phone elsewhere when you sleep, right? So I don't worry so much that I'm going to awaken with a notification or something. So I figure. I'm here. She'll see it when she wakes up at a normal person hour. You know what? This actually didn't come in at a truly terrible time. I got this message at 5.48 in the morning, my time. So like in the morning, but I... That's pretty much when you wake up. Right. Yeah. I know. I am an early, I am an early to rise to run the same. But so I bet that what happened, Ben, is that you got the edited cut up quickly enough that most people, if we hadn't said anything, most people wouldn't have you been known that you made that mistake. I could have, I could have, the cover-up, I'm spoiling the whole thing.

Many people would never know. Yeah, that's the thing. It's like if we fix something, that it's, you know, it's like you fix an article or something. You have a little note at the end or something. But also, I didn't want to mislead people all weekend while they were listening to that thinking, wait, is Ms. Amidextrous or something? Right. No. And we didn't have to re-record anything.

It was just snipping out a couple mentions. I think what happened here is that I was focusing so much on the, you know, the thing. the sail Mizorowski matchup and I was reading and quoting this article that was all about how the Miz had bottled himself on sale and like their body shapes were the same and he saw himself in sale and knew that he could make it or something because sale preceded him and everyone was kind of comping them and it doesn't excuse my mistake but I was not the only one to make this mistake, as some people pointed out in the Discord group, that there was an ESPN fantasy note also that referred to them as the ace left-handers, Chris Sale and Jacob Miers.

So I don't know. It's weird because the Miz is among the most visible pitchers in baseball. I mean, if we had to count the number of pitches that I have watched from a particular pitcher this year, the MIS would be at or close to the top of the list. And yet, I don't know if there's something about him that is left decoded. in my mind just because of his unusualness. But I think it was really just the coinciding with

sale and all the comparisons to sail. And somehow I just got over my skis and was like, oh, yes, it's the matchup of the two guys who've been the best and thus they must be alike in another way. Yeah, we've talked about how we are completely oblivious to jersey numbers.

Yeah, uniform numbers. I don't. I very rarely remember. And there is a similar phenomenon with handedness, which I don't feel like I have fully as much as I have with jersey numbers, nor do I care as much about jersey numbers, because I'm not making any effort to remember. It's not that important to me. Yeah. It's not like back in the day when that was the only way you could identify a player on the field, maybe.

There are many ways to tell who that is, and we don't have to really rely on the numbering system. Whereas handiness, that's pretty important, obviously. That has major in-game on-field implications. So I do try to keep that straight where I can. But I can't always. But I don't know if this was that so much as just kind of a weird, singular brain fart. Can you imagine, though, if the Miz were left-handed

and were otherwise the same? Yeah. That Velo, if he had a Roldest Chapman Velo, but not for an inning at a time, but as a starting pitcher as a lefty, oh boy. Oh, boy. Oh, boy. It's like...

Now I'm disappointed with just boring old, right-handed we have so many right-handed flame throwers give me the lefty starter who throws 105

it feels almost indecent to mention right like you sort of feel like you're talking about like what if there

were this kind of porn I liked better you know it's like should we be talking about that on the

podcast like I don't know man yeah it would be disgusting it would sure be something I think it's good

that we have these little moments of accountability I don't have the work I don't have the

handedness issue. Isn't it Sam who's talked about how he is routinely flummoxed by handedness? Or he just isn't, it's not part of his visual memory. Yeah. He has some degree of face blindness too, I believe. But I don't know if that maps onto the handedness as well. But yeah, it's not an uncommon thing. And there can be things that are left decoded about someone and it can be kind of confounding.

I don't know if that applies to the Miz other than maybe his build or something. or his strangest because he does throw so hard that that's not something you would normally associate with a lefty. That's true. That's definitely true. Yeah, I don't know. I wish I could tell you why in the moment it didn't. Maybe it's because he's so big. Is it? Okay. And now I'm terrified. I'm so afraid that I got this. I've made the joke before and it's so relatable to you because you're always talking to me about. getting flammex by brating your hair. But you know how like you'll, you get in your head about something and then you can't?

So like, let me tell you why I think you might have made this mistake apart from the sale of it all. Is it because Randy Johnson was a lefty? Oh, that's an interesting theory. Yeah. And I bring up the, oh, I am worried I'm screwing it up because I went to not only Randy Johnson's player page on Van Gogrofts, but also a baseball reference to be like, he wasn't lefty, right? I know. I was like, imagine if he was like, imagine if he was like,

Aroldus Chapman, who definitely famously throws with his left hand, right? I didn't somehow imagine that. But no, he's definitely a southpaw. I wonder. But Chapman is a funny one to comp because they're built so differently. Yes. Yes. He is prototypical power pitcher build, so.

Right. So I wonder if part of what was getting you messed up was, well, just like, you know, I love how we're constructing this elaborate reason that you would have made a mistake as if we aren't just people who make mistakes. Had to be some strange... Right, there had to be some weird things. I do wonder if part of what was maybe at work for you

is that now, Randy Johnson was a little taller. I mean, he still is presumably a little taller than Mizorowski. He's just not playing anymore. But, you know, a little taller even than the Miz, but was sort of, and was less gumbie. than and so intimidating too. Like in some ways

he is like dispositionally closer to sail right than the miss. Kind of cranky. But I wonder if big,

tall can throw really hard. I wonder if Randy Johnson is why you made that mistake actually. Sure.

Let's throw it onto the pile. Anything anything that mitigates my mistake. It's the big unit's fault. Did I tell you

about the time I saw Randy Johnson at Sky Harbor? I don't recall. We didn't talk, but I was coming home from a holiday. It was one of those trips where I ended up having to check a bag because we can't have a civilization anymore. So, you know, it was one of those. I'm at baggage claim at Sky Harbor and I'm looking out over the, you know, the sea of

holiday travelers, just Thanksgiving or Christmas. And there's Randy. And he's impossible to miss, you know, because he's so goddamn and so distinctive looking. And I was like, oh, that's true. Randy Johnson, and he lives here and is around the debacks all the time. He might have been, I don't know where he was coming from. But, you know, it's one of those things where you're like, you look around to see if other people also notice. I'm like, you guys aren't clocking Randy over there? You wanted to.

So, you know, we started with Randy and maybe we're ending with one, you know? Sure. Yeah. I have spoken to Randy Johnson and it didn't go that great. Poor Jeff Sullivan, his childhood hero. It went a little bit better for him. than the bird if we're ranking Randy Johnson encounters. But sometimes you got you are the big unit and you got units to move.

Yes. At least at least the birds never knew what hit him, presumably. Or her. I don't know. You know, we don't know about we are not that familiar with the bird. Yes. The bird just disappeared in a poof of feathers, whereas Jeff Sullivan had to endure an extended interview in the aftermath to it. And everyone can hear it.

preserved for podcast posterity for all time on episode 1238. Go check it out. You might learn a lot about grilling, less about baseball. Look, sometimes you got to sell those grills. They're not going to sell themselves. While we're doing corrections, I should also point out as somewhat observed in the Discord group, I think when we were talking about Brian Bayo and his historic starter reliever split this season, I think I referred to his transformation into a late inning reliever.

That's not what has happened. He has been a long man. He's been more of a bulk guy in his relief work, which, if anything, makes it more curious that he has had this incredible turnaround because he's still almost having a starting pitcher workload, and yet the results have been night and day different. And I know that he had some sort of issue with pitching in the first inning. And so maybe just bypassing the first inning. was kind of the key for him.

But yeah, he has still delivered the length with far superior results. Also, someone else pointed out that it was perhaps curious when I was talking about how we don't have tracking technology in the baseballs the way that we do with balls in other sports. And I was saying that that's probably because the balls are small and also because they're so disposable and players go through them so quickly. Someone else pointed out it might also be because they get. hit really, really hard by bats frequently, which could also be an engineering challenge, I guess. So I know that there have been sensor-embedded pucks to enable various kinds of data and graphics and stuff.

And obviously, pucks are getting slapped pretty hard, too, though they are harder, I suppose, than a baseball. But, yeah, I don't know where that ranks on the hierarchy, the reasons why we don't have tracking technology in baseball. I assume it's more about the optical tech working pretty well and the ball being small, and it would be noticeable or disruptive if you had a chip in the ball that weighed something. And also, you're going through balls every 2.5 pitches or something. Probably it's more about that than things getting hit hard, which happens in a lot of sports to some extent. But that does seem worth pointing out as well. Yeah.

Yeah, you're getting hammered by bats on the regular. So that might make the chips go on the fritz, I suppose. You're just a step on the boss man's ladder, as it one. I've gone this entire time without talking about how Dolly Parton died, and I can't believe it. I know. I know. I'm having a hard time, Ben. You've kept it in, but you are suffering. You are mourning, as is much of America, because if there's any bipartisan issue left in this country,

it was Dolly Parton's high approval rating. Yes. very low approval of her passing. So RIP to Dali, the great. Wrong 80-year-olds are dying. I'm just saying that there are some... If I were... Like, I wouldn't want to put anyone ahead of her on the list,

but if I was like, if I was forced to... I could, you know, if I was like... Forced to someone. That would be one note to end on, but I will say one more thing. It's getting the secret service called on us, but not that you're suggesting bringing it about. I'm not suggesting anything. No.

No. Okay. Anyway, we've covered all sorts of errata here and my Ms. mistake. They're calling it Lindberg's boner, and I've done my penance now. I just wanted to point out one more little story from the baseball action recently, which was a flare-up over sign stealing. legal sign stealing. But this happened in the DeBax Cubs game. This was on Monday, right?

Or no, on Tuesday? On Monday. On Tuesday. This is Monday. That's right. Today's Tuesday. You don't need to correct my days of the week. The future? I know where we are in time and space.

And yes, I know who the president is. And you may just have alluded to that. So there was a controversy over someone stealing signs. So Dback starter, Merrill Kelly, who probably does not share your opinions of the president. He was upset about Quentin Berry, Cubs third base coach. Kelly suspected Quentin Barry of stealing and relaying signs from the coaches box. And I thought this was kind of interesting because Kelly drew a distinction here between coach sign stealing and relaying and player sign stealing and relaying. That's right.

And what was interesting is that, speaking of this has all happened before and will happen again, Kelly said, stealing signs is as old as baseball. I think if it's a guy on second base and they see the grip in your glove or if the hitters can see something that you're doing with your glove, I think that's fair game. So it was the fact that a coach was doing it that was crossing the line literally for him. And Barry was actually in the box because MOPB's crack down on keeping the coaches in the coaches box. And so he was abiding by that, but he was breaking unwritten rules here, according to Kelly. And I thought that was interesting because stealing science is as old as baseball in any form, really.

I mean, I did an episode on that, 1505, just tracing all the many sign stealing scandals in baseball history. The ones that are totally illicit and using technology and people who aren't even on the field and electronics and all of that, telescopes and what have you, that's as old as baseball. and coaches stealing signs is also as old as baseball. There were many coaches in earlier eras who were reputed to be great sign stealers and were famous for relaying signs from the box or the dugout or whatever. So I don't know that this is any less time honored

than any other form of legal on-field sign-stealing. But it's interesting that he drew that distinction and I'm almost sort of sympathetic to it because of my objections to on-field coaching in general, and coaches and front office meddling in games and thinking I would like the players to decide things. And so there's part of me on this specific issue and probably not many more that almost feels aligned with Merrill Kelly, because I would like to see the players kind of crack the code themselves. But this at least is someone who's on the field, for better or worse, in uniform.

and this has really always happened in some way, shape, or form. And he probably is aware of that. I mean, he's probably played for teams that had coaches that stole signs and relayed them. So some of it is kind of pretending that you're so innocent because it suits you in that moment. But it's always funny to me that these things flare up over and over and over again. Because if you could document the number of times that there has been some jawing or something over signs stealing like this. It would just boggle people's minds because

this has been going on forever and ever and ever. And I always think if that were happening to me in a game, wouldn't I just say, well, yeah, this has always happened. So why would I get upset about it again? It will always happen. Am I really going to make a big stink about it this one time? But they always do.

They always seem to be just as affronted and aggrieved by this as they were a century ago. I mean, he was, when he exited the game, he was standing on the top step of the dugout and jaw on at the third base coach

relief her at Diamondbacks brought out immediately gave up two home runs and I was just like and the the devax broadcast was like Merrill stopped jawing and I was like I bet he did. Yeah at least one of those runs was charged to him. Maybe that's further proof

that they continued to steal signs. Maybe. It was interesting how worked up they all got. And There was, there was, you know, it was Merrill and the base coach. It was Jeff Bannister and the Cubs, like both dugouts back and forth. Yeah, it was really, it was, it was pretty funny, I guess. Is Merrill Gallagher noted righty?

You keep saying that. Like, I know, is he on record in a bad way? Yeah. I mean, not, and righty thrower, yes, but but also, I want to keep that. That's straight too. Well, anyway, moving on. It was also funny watching the D-BACs broadcast sort of worked through what was happening because they were like, he's in the box. He's in the box.

He's where he's allowed to be. You know, they were like, this isn't cheating. Yeah. And I guess part of this is also something Sam wrote about unwritten rules once, which is why are players so militant about these things. And I think it's often because they're trying to. to police it because if they think that someone has an edge on them, then, and you know what, I think I did not confuse Merrill Kelly's handedness, but I may have confused his political allegiance. I mean, probably not because he's a baseball player, but in terms of whether we know.

Yeah. I was going to say, did I miss something? Yes. No, I think I was thinking in this case, not of Randy Johnson, but of. Miles Michaelis. I think I was thinking of Miles Michaelis. Cool. Who has been his teammate at times and also has, you know, been around.

We are not confused about Miles Michaelis. We are very clear on his business. Merrill and Miles, very different. So apologies for potentially impuging the politics of Merrill Kelly. I mean. To be clear, I don't know one way or the other. I just was like, I don't recall. there being like an incident.

Not a notorious case. Yes. Yeah, I was like, oh, do I manage to? That's what I was thinking of. And unfortunately, I have placed what I was thinking of while we're recording. So that's, that's improvement for me. It would be funny if we got more emails about it, though, than the thing. I know.

I'm now seeing a headline from 2019, Arizona's Kelly hopes to emulate Cardinals Michaelis. So he has modeled himself on Miles Michaelis, perhaps not. That was when he was coming back from KBO probably. Yeah, but perhaps not when it comes to his politics. But his pitching. This is how we get in trouble, right? Because the Miz is modeling himself on sale.

Anyway. Anyway. Yeah. Yeah. I guess that's what I'm thinking of not even being teammates, but just when Merrill Kelly was signed by the Diamondbacks, I'm looking at the MLB.com story. The D-backs hope they've found their own version of the Cardinals, Miles Michaelis, in right-hander, Merrill Kelly.

Right-hander, not necessarily right-winger, but who knows. Okay, so what I wanted to say is that Sam made the case that unwritten rules just as an institution exists, really, because players are trying to get an edge. And so they have these outsized reactions to discourage their opponents from doing something that they don't want them to do because they think it helps their opponents and hurts them. So that's why, even though this has played out time after time after time, just time in memorial, people getting upset about signs stealing, and people agree it's legal. It's not something you're going to be punished or prosecuted for. And yet, people get so upset about it.

And a large part of that is because, well, if you think that they're stealing your signs and thus they are hitting you because of that, then you want to discourage that behavior. You want to make it taboo. you want to attach a stain to it and make it seem Bush League. And if your teammate was doing the same thing, would you say that? Probably not. Certainly not publicly. Maybe not even privately. But when it happens in a game, and this applies to not all unwritten rules, but many of them, when you think of that framework, just,

huh, okay, this is something that this player thinks is hurting them. And therefore, they want to have this maybe disproportionate reaction to it so that it doesn't keep happening against them. So it's sort of sensible, even though it so often doesn't make sense when you're not in the baseball world. Were they ever teammates? No, no, they were not teammates. Okay. I was going to say they were not teammates. And I want to make clear. They were teammates on Team USA, I think. Correct. But they were not teammates. But not in Arizona or same ways or anything. And I want to make clear. I want to make clear that I remember I said that like he likely he being Merrill Kelly likely said that

when he Merrill Kelly was coming back to the U.S. from the KBO but that Miles Michael is not Merrill Kelly was briefly in NPB which is a different league. We are not making a mistake there either. We're just catching ourselves probably why we're correcting all these other errors.

I didn't make a mistake. I didn't make a mistake. I'm just clarifying so that when people are thinking well why would she think that? Because he also he had three seasons in NPB right? It was was three. It was three.

And he came back from NPB. He being Miles Michaelis, not Merrill Kelly, who played in the KBO. Miles Michaelis got released by the Washington Nationals. So he doesn't play for anyone right now. Right. Real time fact-checking. It's not fact-checking. No, it's just clarifications of the people don't think of anything.

Staping off any possible confusion or for emails. Now we're going to be watching our words. Can we say anything without triple-checking? I'm so mad about it. out of sorts because of that. Miles Michaels was the one who earned the nickname Lizard King because he ate a live lizard, which I would not do myself and discouraged doing in general. Didn't, you know, and he keeps getting asked about this.

And he has said, you know, didn't he say something to the effect of you ate a live lizard one time? And it's like, yeah, man. You know, one time is all it's going to take on that one. There are some things where you do it one time and it shouldn't follow you. But when you eat a lizard in the bullpen in the fall league, yes, you are going to be known as the lizard king. Yes. This was more than 15 years ago or 15 years ago. He was in his early 20s.

21. Yeah. Look, a lot of young men do dumb things on dares at that age. But yeah, that's just inhumane and also gross. Both. I will at least put everyone at their ease that, like, you know, we have so many lizards here, but you still shouldn't do it. That's true. They're not an endangered species at least. Right. I doubt that this was like a protected lizard, but it doesn't mean that it deserves to get eaten. Yeah. Clearly that particular lizard was was not protected in that case. RIP. All right. Well, thanks for bearing with our mistakes or on that last episode, our Ms. Takes. And thanks to those of you who support the podcast 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. Jonathan Diggs, Michael Miller, Tom Martin, Bruce Hattendorf, and Paul, thanks to all of you. Patreon perks include access to the Effectively Wild Discord group for patrons only, a third unrestricted episode each week, a monthly bonus episode, the next one of which will be coming your way soon. exclusive live streams, prioritized email answers, personalized messages, shoutouts at the end of episodes, potential podcast appearances, fan graphs, memberships, and 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 sub-edit at our slash Effectively Wild. And you can check the show notes in the podcast posts at Fangraphs or Patreon or the episode description in your podcast app for links to the stories and stats we cited today.

Thanks to Shane McKeon for his editing and production assistance. We will be back with another episode a little later this week. Talk to you then. Do you calculate more? Does it come from the heart? Should we use? Defense have run safe Or follow the OAA way

Who's gone away With their quips and opinions It's effectively wild Effectively wild It's effectively wild It's effectively wild