Effectively Wild: A FanGraphs Baseball Podcast - Effectively Wild Episode 2538: No Time Like Late September

Episode Date: October 1, 2026

Ben Lindbergh and Meg Rowley banter about “October” as a (somewhat imprecise) metonym for the playoffs and the popularity of postseason coverage, praise the Yankees’ pitcher-averse roster construction, recap the highlights and lowlights from the first wild card games, ponder the possibility of pushing relievers too far, answer a listener email about the impact of managers, sympathize with and criticize the Astros for complaining about being booed by their fans, and discuss MLB’s petition to play a game in a national park, Zack Gelof’s lawsuit against the Tigers, and more. Audio intro: The Shirey Brothers, “Effectively Wild Theme” Audio outro: PJ Harding, “Effectively Wild Theme” Link to Episode 1753 Link to new MLB tagline Link to Appelman post Link to play-in tournament Link to Baumann on the Yankees Link to packing post Link to Sheehan WC G1 recaps Link to Riley homer Link to Posnanski on Riley Link to Turner non-play Link to Miller AFL news Link to Taylor outing Link to Pope blessing Link to Ben on innings shortfalls Link to Tracy RP explanation Link to Anthony update Link to Musgrove fun fact 1 Link to Musgrove fun fact 2 Link to shutouts fun fact Link to Astros booing story 1 Link to Astros booing story 2 Link to Astros booing story 3 Link to Burke quote Link to Grand Teton story Link to public lands story Link to Craig on Gelof Link to Greene quote Link to lawyer explanation Link to Ruf story Link to Fowler story Link to FG on Phillies-Braves G2 Link to Harper article Link to Realmuto challenge Link to Ruth exhibition Link to Dihigo episode  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 2538 of Effectively Wild, a fangras baseball podcast brought you by our Patreon supporters as I crack my knuckles. I'm Meg Rowley of Fangraphs and I'm joined by Ben Lemberger the ringer. Ben, how are you? How are your knuckles? I'm doing okay. My knuckles are perfectly fine. I just returned from Sloan's kindergarten class where Jesse and I were doing a reading to the kids because it's Sloan's birthday. So we were the VIPs and we got to go in and read.

And my reading was critiqued by the teacher. I was told to speak up and project more because there was an air conditioner in the back of the room. I didn't pull rank. I didn't say, hey, I'm a professional podcaster. I do this for a living. I just spoke to the back of the room so that all the kids could hear me. And I was reminiscing because this is Sloan's fifth birthday. And so I was thinking back to when she was born.

and how we were podcasting right up until the last second. And we did an episode 1753, which I recall because Will Leach joined us. And we were discussing the St. Louis Cardinals on the eve of the 2021 postseason. And I broke the news to Will and also the listening audience that I was about to be a dad and that I had to go to the hospital. So we had to wrap up this segment so that I could go. it was not exactly an emergency, to be clear. It wasn't like Jesse was waiting by the door with the go bag and here I was talking about the Cardinals, though that wouldn't be totally out of character

for me. But it was a induced delivery. So we had a little time, plenty of time, as it turned out. But we were talking to Will about whether the Cardinals were candidates for posies and devil magic and how they had gotten to that point and whether they could maybe go on some sort of run. And you know what? They didn't. They lost in the ML Wildcard game to the Dodgers. And that was that. So they did not go on any sort of run. It was won and done. And here we are five years later. Sloan is five. The Cardinals are not in the playoffs, but the playoffs are beginning because it's that time of year. Even though it's almost not that time of year because it is still September as we are recording here. And so I have had to adjust to everyone referring to the postseason as October

when, in fact, it is not. It's a little awkward. I'm very much looking forward to later this week. Thursday, as of Thursday, we can start saying October without any kind of caveat about the fact that actually the postseason started in September this year. It's just the tagline for the playoffs is there's no time like October. And I guess it's true. It's. This is not a time like October. This is September. It's close to October, but not quite. So I have seen many people calling it October and then many pedantic people in various comment sections and replies observing that it is not, in fact, yet October.

But it's spiritually October. I don't know what to do about this problem. I mean, I think that the best that we can say, the one sort of saving grace of this whole thing, thing is that at least there are no regular season games that have blood into October. Because we've had years, Ben, where we're just playing 162 on like October 1st. And that was a nightmare. Like when I think that, you know, in a year like this, we're sure we are playing some playoff games in the month of September.

But no regular season games taking place in the month of October. You can just still say October baseball because people they know. Although, having said that, it is sort of a little rude, right? Because it sort of reintroduces this notion of like, does the wild card really count as postseason baseball? Which I think the fact that it's a full series has put that notion to bed for people. Like I don't hear people talking about the wild card as sort of postseason. and ambiguous. When it was a one-and-done, people felt very comfortable being like, wow, you know,

I'm not going to really in the playoffs. And I feel like that has ceased, I think, because it is a full series now. Even though a lot of the time, it's only one more game. Yeah, people talk about that with the NBA play-in tournament. Does that count? And that, you know, you're determining the last couple of playoff teams and seeds. And it's really, it's preliminary. You're playing in.

You're not yet in it. You're playing to get into it. But yeah, people treated the quick wild card series or single games as that same sort of, eh, it counts, but it also doesn't quite count. And if you didn't have a home game, can you be said to have actually made the playoffs? And I would say technically, yes, it's just a lower bar than it used to be. Playoffs used to be World Series. And that was playoffs.

But now it's a little more layered. But I do think that either way, we have agita because we get concerned about these things and we're editors. And of course, sometimes the postseason continues into November. And so what do you do with that? It is, I think, preferable, though, to have it be this way where we could, with full confidence and no caveats, say, refer to teams making it to October, which actually meant making it into the playoffs, which in many years it doesn't, because as you note,

the regular season tends to bleed over into early October. And then really all the teams made it to October, but didn't make it to October in the way people mean. I'd rather have this where we didn't have to worry about that at all, to be clear, we don't have to worry about any of this. We don't have to worry about any of it. We do, and no one else does, but we will share our worries with you. I think it's better to have this where we didn't have to caveat anything,

making it to October really did mean making it into the playoffs. But now we don't have to do any more caveats beyond this, because this year, the World Series, even if it goes to game seven, would end on October 31st, much to your dismay as a Halloween lover. But at least we will not have November baseball. And beyond these first couple days, we can just call it October with confidence.

I guess the only lingering problem is if we have some sweeps, and we are recording on Wednesday. So if we have sweeps and there are teams eliminated without actually having played October baseball because they lost on the 29th and 30th, can we say that they made it to October? Yeah. Right.

And I think we probably, we can't really, but we can because everyone will understand what we mean. But it is nice that baseball owns a month like that. Not that baseball is the only sport in town, Obviously, there are plenty of others going on and people care more about football in general. But it's not even the only postseason going on, right? Right. Yeah.

WNBA is happening. But there's other stuff. But it is nice that October is so associated with baseball or that when you say October, even if there's some squishiness in September or November, people know that's just synonymous with the playoffs, which most sports don't really have because the playoffs drag on over the course of multiple months in most other cases, whereas in baseball, historically, it was contained within October. And even now, it's almost entirely within October. And so it just, it stands for that. And it's very evocative just to refer to October and know what you mean.

With the exception of maybe March and college basketball, I don't know that there's another sport that sort of has a month like that that is just sort of shorthand for this is the most exciting time. This is playoffs. So that's fun. Yeah, it is, it is something, another one of those like particularities to baseball that, um, I don't, I don't think other sports really get to enjoy in the same way, except I guess for March madness. You're right. March madness is a vocative, as it were. We always celebrate that MLP seasons do not span years. So we don't need to say the 2026 to 27 season. We just can say a single year, isn't that a luxury, but is not available to people when they talk about any other sport.

It's really nice. It is a luxury. Yeah. Yeah. It's nice. We don't have to have any dashes or hyphens. We don't have to remember. Should that be an N dash or should it be a regular dash?

I mean, that's something we don't have to remember because it's just in a single year, a single self-contained season in a single year. Now, we are, as I say, coming to you. Well, I don't know when we're coming to you. It depends on you. That's up to you when you press play on this podcast. But we are recording on Wednesday afternoon as the Phillies Braves game is going on. And this week is wonderful.

Wild Card Week is great for fans, for people who like watching baseball. It is not ideal for three times a week podcasters because there's just no good time to talk, really. Whenever we talk, we're going to be behind a little bit. And if we hyper focus on a certain game and there's been a subsequent game and maybe that series is over by the time you hear it. So we'll do our best. We'll talk about some highlights from the game ones, the games won, and maybe some takeaways that we'll have a longer shelf life.

And I have a couple non-playoff related baseball banter topics, too, because, you know, most of the teams are not in the playoffs. And this is a national baseball podcast with people who follow every team and Eve team and just the sport as a whole, and they're not all necessarily plugged into the postseason action. For some of them, season's over, let's just fast forward through all of this and get to November, and then the lockout this offseason, but at least November and hot stove, and there will be some stuff happening at least for a month or so. And I was struck by that because in one of David Appelman's recent announcement posts,

he noted that October is among the busier months for fancour. editorially, which I do not need to tell you about, because you are editing recaps and previews every five seconds. But it is not, the traffic is not necessarily quite commensurate with that, which I don't say to dismay you or to suggest that your labor is not paying off. But it is interesting because it's easy to think of this as the highlight. This is the climax. This is the culmination.

but October is not as big a traffic month for fan graphs, which I think is probably reflective of just interest in baseball as a whole as say the start of the season, March or July trade deadline. And so even if you're publishing more, it's not necessarily getting more readership because a lot of readers have checked out. They follow one team that teams out. They're onto football mode or off-season mode or whatever. So I think it is important to remember that this podcast is not pitched purely for people whose teams are still surviving and that many of our listeners aren't even really paying that close attention to particular games or series.

So we can still offer something for them? Oh, sure. But can we say a little bit about the wildcard action we've already seen? Of course. Well, I just want to ignore it all. But yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

I did. One point I wanted to make. I see that Bauman has beaten me to the punch and just published a post about this right before we started to record. Speaking of things, I've been furiously editing. Yeah. But I must praise the Yankees for carrying a mere 10 pitchers on their wildcard roster. And everyone else had 12 except for the Padres and Braves who had 11 apiece. And I thought this was bold.

I thought this was smart. I thought it was something of a flex, a statement of confidence in their pitching staff, which was well deserved after game one, at least, because there's no need in a best of three to carry 12 pitchers. What are you doing here? In what scenario do you really need 12 pitchers? What emergency do you have to break glass for that you have to use all of those guys in a three game series? Especially if someone gets hurt, you can always replace them. It's just too many pitchers. And so I applaud the Yankees for breaking the mold and being bold enough to say,

no, we need only 10. Of course, 10 would have been a lot in an earlier era. Sure. They were playing best of threes in that era anyway. But really, it's overkill to carry 11 or 12. Come on. So good on you, Yankees. I feel like we should acknowledge.

And of course, Bowman did because he's responsible. Some of this is the particularities of their circumstance, which lend themselves to this, both because they have starters who they can feel very confident will likely go deep into games, right? Like when you have Cam Schlittler and you have Max Fried and you have Garrett Cole, well, that's great. And then you, you know, you move Will Warren and we're down to the bullpen. And, well, you're cooking with gas. You got your, you know, you got your bulk covered by your starter. and then, you know, you fill in the rest from there.

And then, you know, when you look at the way that their sort of position player group is set up, as Baumann noted, like, especially in the absence of judge and thinking of that spot as one to play with, they're platooning a lot of guys and they have a lot of bench players who, even if they aren't, you know, superlative bats, if they were, they'd probably not be bench players. They're able to deploy them in ways and in circumstances that are obviously useful, right? like you don't want stanton in the field but he's an incredibly good option at pinch hitter assuming that he looks good which you know um and you know you want caballero because he can steal a base and then he can be a competent defensive replacement later and you've got their backup

catcher and so like it's a it's a group that lends itself to this but they're hardly the only group for whom that is true and almost all the other rosters are just like i don't know like what if we need him it's like you're you know security blanked your load bearing, you know, like fifth inning guy in the event that your starter gets pulled early. And there is something very gratifying about thinking through this, like as we just had to deal with two teams bullpen gaming their way through game one. And again, a moment brought on by necessity. They're not going to do that if they have starters who are fully arrested. But it's just thinking through like how to do this, setting up your team and your roster.

so that if at all possible, you have starters who you can really lean on and you don't have to be quite so fidgety about the relief arms. Like, it's just, it's good. That's better. That's good. Because, boy, bullpen games, they take a long time, especially when both teams are doing it. And again, like, they're doing that out of necessity,

and they would probably tell you, well, we need all those arms because we knew we needed a bullpen game. But it's like, I don't know, can't Sean Burke just like soak up some meetings today? along with Hunter Brown and call it good. Yeah, it is a little deflating when you start the postseason with some bullpen games. Now, in the Phillies game, Jesus Lusardo ended up going five. There was some suggestion that maybe he would be more of an opener and Andrew Painter would have to piggyback or something.

But Lusardo was fine, which is encouraging, I guess, for the Phillies if their run should continue. But, yeah, the White Sox Astros game where it was just, well, where bullpen, bullpening. in game one of the postseason. And of course, both of those teams, their seasons had to come down to the wire and they had something to play for until the last minute. So it's not like they had a whole week to line up their rotation exactly the way they wanted it. But it was a little deflating.

And it was nice to then transition to, okay, here we have Schlitler versus Tolly and we have Chris Sale and then Luzardo actually going a little longer and, you know, Michael King and the Cubs don't really have a number one starter. So it's kind of tough for them to hold up their end of the bargain. But it was nice at least to have some non-bullpen games because we get bullpen games in October. That's the way it works. But often they tend to be in the middle of a series, like a longer series, because maybe you use your few top arms you really want to use.

And then you're just like, well, how do we kind of fake our way through this one and get back to the top of the rotation? So to lead off with a bullpen game. Yeah. Not ideal. But yeah, if you're the Yankees and you have the AL-Sai Young winner and you just throw him out there to mow down the Red Sox as usual, and then you have Blackburn and Schreiber just finish it off. And, well, that's how they drew it up. No need for, you know, nine more pitchers than that. Right.

So, yeah, I think security blanket is a pretty good comp, I guess, because it's just your used to bullpins being a certain size, but it's October. So you have to adjust your mindset for October. And teams do to a greater extent than they used to. I think they treat it with the urgency it deserves. And they try to concentrate more innings with the best pitchers for better or worse, which didn't work out perfectly in the first games, which we can talk about. But that should apply, in theory, to roster construction as well. And it is something I lament a little bit.

bit about just the super pitching-centric roster construction that we've had in recent years is that you just don't really have dedicated pinch hitters so much anymore. I mean, there just aren't that many dedicated bench bats. You kind of have one guy who can cover the infield, one guy who can cover the outfield. Sometimes that's the same guy. And then it's just bullpen arms all the way down. And it's fun in October when you don't need as many arms in theory. And then you can have just the dedicated pinch runner, the postseason specialist who maybe can pinch run or a pinch hitter or extra bench bats and platoon situations and the Yankees have a lot of those even without judge active.

So yeah, that was nice. It was somewhat specific to their circumstances, but I think it should be more generalizable than it actually is. Yeah. And I think that the important thing that, you know, Michael noted in that piece is that a lot of those guys, they don't end up getting used. Like they're, they're clearly there as a break glass in case of emergencies sort of situation, but they, they end up going unused a lot of the time, at least in the, in the wild card. And I think that it gets better as sort of time goes on

because you have longer series and so you have more, you have off days to play with. And I think that teams have gotten pretty good about figuring out how to like dial in what the right level is there. But for these short series, they're like super over. relying on relievers or at least having them gum up the works from a roster spot perspective. And, you know, like if you never use your bench bats, then maybe it's the right choice to have an extra arm or two, but it still feels like, you know, you're putting guys out there just so they can sit and twid and total their thumbs. Mm-hmm.

And who needs Aaron Judge, I guess, when you have Kim Schlitler and you have Ben Rice, popping. Boy, oh, boy. Yeah, the Yankees other homegrown guys really showed up and showed out and four hits and two bombs for Rice, drove in six, and then you had Schlittler doing his thing. And then you had decent games and contributions from Austin Wells and Anthony Fulpy and George Lombard Jr. with three hits. So it was kind of a testament to Yankees' player development and hitter. development and, you know, there are some of those situations where the Yankees in an earlier era might have just splurged and signed the most expensive free agent. And there are times when they probably

should have just done that. Right. Because they are still the Yankees and they got too cute or too cheap. But in this game, at least, they showed off what they can do just from within. And it's pretty impressive, really, because Schlittler was a seventh round pick. Rice was a 12th round pick. neither of those guys was a top 100 preseason prospect, as I recall, at least most outlets didn't have them there. And yet, here they are. And, you know, Rice was a little bit of a late bloomer, I guess. He's already 27 going on 28 and Schlittler's 25. I mean, it's funny because as good as Schlittler was down the stretch last year and then in the postseason, I certainly didn't expect that he was going to be the best pitcher in the league, just about the best pitcher in baseball.

He didn't have that kind of prospect pedigree. There were still some doubts about did he need more pitches? Could he just get by with varieties of fastball? Would that be enough? And yes, clearly yes. And whether he's motivated by Red Sox fans tweeting at him or not, he's just a really solid starter. I mean, he had the best Yankees pitching season. season, I've got to say, and I don't know, a quarter century at minimum, if not longer.

This was just not quite Ron Guidry in 78, but it's about as good as it's gotten for a Yankee starter. So, yeah, it's pretty impressive that those guys, it's not like they came out of nowhere, but they have both really blossomed. And that's a testament to Yankees' development. You know, they're among the best teams to do it, I would say. And we think of them maybe as being primarily a pitching development team, and they always find some bullpen arms, and they hadn't had the greatest track record with hitter development post-judge, and even Judge was a first-round pick. I mean, end of the first round, but, you know, he was a prospect,

though, of course, took some time for it to come together for him as well. But when the rich teams are also smart and good at developing, that's when everyone else is in trouble. and the Yankees, if anything, have taken it easy on teams by not spending the way that they used to relative to the league. But the name of the game is really getting those cost-controlled guys. That's sort of how you win regardless of how much money you have. Yeah, I mean, it's an important element to even the most sort of payroll-heavy teams. They do seem to have elected to play on hard mode a little bit.

But in a year like this, you know, especially with the AL as week as it is, maybe it doesn't. matter. And again, like if Camphillard's just going to do what he did every time he starts in the postseason, well, you don't need to score very many runs because he's kind of taking care of that side of the ledger for you and pretty effectively. So yeah, it was one of the better, I think it was, especially for a guy so young, moments like this are sort of career and profile defining for a lot of people. He was a Yankee and he was good last postseason. So I think he came. in with like an understanding that he was like a high profile guy and he's kind of one of the young in all likelihood but like years like this are the ones that cement new stars especially

when you're able to carry it into October and you know he looks poised to do that and then you've Ben Rice who he's so young looking in his face it really it messes me up every time Ben you know like it really screws me up that kid that kid looking like that it screws me up and then he hits home runs like that you know He's allowed to do that at that age. That's advisable. There's not like a restriction, you know? He's all grown up.

What's that about, you know? Anyway, so it was incredibly impressive, you know, for all their pitching depth, for all of the thought that I had that this would be a tight series. Like, Boston's just really up against it now. Yeah, there is a meme I was trying to summon because someone had posted. it in our Patreon Discord group when we talked about packing and unpacking before and after vacations regularly. And this was a post from several years ago.

Someone had that me regularly uses the same three things at home. Me packing for vacation, I wonder if I'll need four French horns or five, which is often how people approach packing. It's like, you would never need this number of things, this variety of things, and this many of the same thing if you were at home and why do you think you're going to be? Now, obviously, you go on vacation. You might be doing different things and living differently than you do at home. So, yes, pack accordingly.

Maybe you're not wearing a swimsuit when you're lounging around at home, but you're going to the beach. Okay, pack a swimsuit, but how many? And so there is a tendency to overpack. That's what I'm thinking of for wild card roster construction. I wonder if I'll need four French horns or five. granted, they use five French horns all season, so it's a little bit different. They are constantly using pitchers to get through the regular season. It's just that they should, it's almost a reverse, really.

It's like the packing for vacation in this scenario is the packing for the regular season, and they're using the same three things. That's the packing for the postseason. So you just have to adjust your mindset a little bit. Okay. I'll work on that. I'll work on thinking about vacation, like the same. as being at home.

And isn't it then you're just at home, you know? Yeah. Kind of falls apart there. You don't have a washing machine on the road is the thing. I mean, they do. Like in the playoffs, they have laundry facilities for the visiting club. But I take your broader point. You're talking about relievers.

That's what you're talking about. Yes, indeed. Okay. So, okay, well, going along with that, one reason why teams don't need to pack as many pitchers for the postseason is is that they do try to concentrate their innings in the best arms, as makes sense, especially in high-leverage games. And we saw this approach with White Sox, Game 1, White Sox Astros,

and also Philly's Braves, to differing outcomes. Now, the White Sox, yes, they were going with more of the opener bullpen game approach. Of course, the Almighty's abundant blessings had already been invoked in their favor. by White Sox fan Pope Leo. So who knows how that affected the proceedings. But they really pushed some guys or tried to, and it ultimately worked out, but it got a little bit dicey there. And it could have not worked out. I know that's brilliant insight by me there.

But, you know, they used Taylor for two and a third. And, you know, that's not his normal work. And they brought him in in the seventh to end the seventh. And then they kept him in to close out the game, which he did. But he ended up throwing, what was Grant Taylor's pitch count in that game? It was like 50 something. I mean, yeah, 54, 54 pitches. That's a lot.

And he looked pretty gassed by the end. Yep. And it worked. And I'm all for aggressiveness and pushing pitchers past their regular limits, even though it's the time of year when in theory they're probably the most fatigued and thus the least capable of doing that, aside from the adrenaline, of course. So worked out for them, but for the Phillies who tried to do the same thing with Yuan Duran, it did not work out. And it wasn't necessarily exclusively Duran's fault, but they tried, Mattingly put him in in the seventh, which was aggressive. managing. I mean, if anything, I applauded it and, hey, down in baseball, all right. You know what time

it is. Right. Oh my God, you know about leverage? What? Yes. So that was good. If I can interrupt you for a moment, it was also strange listening to the broadcast in that moment because it took a good like four or five tries for the booth to properly identify why Mattingly might turn to Duran in that moment, right? Like, they were like, what is he going to get, like a three-inning save? And as it turned out,

like, maybe that was Donnie's intent. But I was just like, this is top of the order is coming up. Like, this is, if he does his job and, and the guys come after him, do their job, like, you're putting your best guy

into probably the highest leverage moment of the game. Like, what, this is good job, Johnny, you know? Yeah, and it, yeah, it seemed like the plan was, if he got through, the first two and was good to keep going that he would leave him in to try to finish it off.

And if that didn't happen and if you just got two innings, then that would be fine. And if they were good innings, then whoever replaced him would be facing the bottom of the order. And so, yeah, it did seem to make some sense. And if you're ever going to do it, then this is the time to do it. Now, they don't do it generally. Duran, he pitched two innings once this season in August. And that was an extra inning game. It's just, it's not something he is normally asked to do.

And it might have gone okay if the Phillies had a better defense or if. And, you know, look, that play was not exhibit A for why Trey Turner is not a good shortstop, which is something that has come up on effectively wildly. That was a tough play. It's in the portfolio, though, you know? Yeah. Like. Yeah, I'd like to know what percentage. of the time that play is made by a better fielder because we know he's not one, but it wasn't, it was, it was tough, like, at this stage of his career.

And this, you're adding Trey Turner specific caveats to the toughness, though. I, I grant you that it was not like a, you know, an easy play. But he's not just like not a good shortstop. He's the worst shortstop getting the amount of a playing time at short that he is getting in major league baseball. It is a problem. It has been a problem all year. It was an anticipatable problem when they entered the season. If you had the foresight and were good at guessing, it was an anticipatable problem at some point when he was in prospect. Like, I just, I rarely find myself more frustrated with teams than when the glaring, the glaring hole goes so remarkably unaddressed.

You know? And it's just like, was he this bad last year? No, but he wasn't good last year either. I grant you that it wasn't like a given that that play was going to get made. But boy, there are short stops on big league rosters that make that play. Yeah. And trade sure. Yeah.

And you'd like to see that happen in the playoffs. And maybe if Aiden Miller hadn't gotten hurt, who knows what would happen. So that he's, he'll be in fall league. So you get to enjoy Aiden Miller. but Philly's fans don't know. I want to see how that goes. Yeah, it was just, I saw some descriptions of the play that were just like Tray Turner threw the ball away or whatever. I mean, you know, he did throw it wide.

He did throw the ball. He did, technically. But, yeah, the throwing it away wasn't so costly. It's just, even if the throw had been online, I think it would have been late. So what you're saying is that the throw failed in multiple ways? Yes. I'm just going to. I'm giving him the business.

in part because as we were recording, I, like, as I face my mic, the screen in front of me is this game. And there, you know, there are two outs and two on and a tied game with Drake Baldwin up. So what could possibly go wrong? Yeah, well, it's a shortstop, I guess, but or somewhere in the vicinity. But it was, it was Michael Harris the second.

It was a, it was a slow bouncer over the mound, but to the right side of second base. He had to cover of fair. amount of ground depending on positioning and all. I think a lot of short stops just would not have, they might have made it look a little bit better, but I don't know that they would have actually gotten him out. Anyway, that was just a prelude to the big blow.

It set up the big blow. But, uh, okay, he got the out just now, but I will note that the throw is not exactly where I need to be. Sorry. It's just making me crazy. It's just, it's just, it's, In part because I can't, sorry, I know I'm being rude by interrupting you and disrupting your thought. And I will do penance that the Pope would approve of.

But I just, you know, I'm going to, if we have to keep listening to the freaking chop and have blooper looming in the background, fleshy monstrosity. My God. Anyway, continue your thought. So yada, yada, yada. lose. Duran's left in for too long. Well, that created the conditions for the failure, ultimately. But who would have anticipated the big blow struck by Austin Riley against Duran?

I mean, we had talked about Riley in our playoff drinking, our ranking draft. I mean, we talked about what happened to that guy. That guy was great. And boy, he hasn't been for the past few years and he sure wasn't this year. And that should have been a good matchup on that. paper. Now, Durand maybe lost a little command because he was wild to Albis and he hit Albies. Even Albies, who would have expected him to get a big hit in that game too? He's been bad for a while. And so that's why we didn't do dedicated wild card round previews. How the heck are you

supposed to preview a single series? I mean, it's sort of, it's silly, right? And we would have said, boy, you don't want Austin Riley up against Yuan Duran in a big spot. Sure. And that's exactly what happened. I love how you're like, how could anyone possibly preview a series as if that is not what every

other baseball podcast did. Instead, we're like, let's do a weird draft ranking and invent the word Did you say drinking? Dranking, yes. Yeah. I get nothing out of the wild carbure. I mean, kudos to everyone who puts work into those. But it's just, it's two games, it's three games.

There's just no way to predict it really and then it's over before you know it. And so, you know, this would have been highlighted as, ah, the Phillies have the Braves where they want them. They have Austin Riley. Atlanta as a whole hasn't hit VLO very well this year. I don't know how predictive that is, but I saw a number of people pointing it out. And that's especially true for Austin Riley. And yet, he hits a hundred-ish mile-per-hour pitch out for a three-run homer right. on right. There's just, there's no way. I mean, that's very much a, you can't predict baseball,

Susan, and that's how wildcard games and series swing on these things that you absolutely would not predict, which is part of the pleasure of the postseason. It's just that, you know, it's hard to say that the Duran move, I mean, it misfired because he, you know, gave Riley a cookie, and surprisingly, he did what he should have done with it. But, and he had come up empty in an earlier spot Riley as well and didn't come through and just, boy, I wonder how many Atlanta fans were happy about that matchup and feeling good about us and Riley in that spot. And then he hits the big over. And that's, that's October for you, or at least September 29th, I guess, in that case. So, so yeah, I hope that Mattingly is not discouraged, even though he got burned by that move.

I think it was the right move. And maybe if Turner makes that play, or Duran doesn't hit Albys or whatever. Maybe it works out fine and he retires Riley and we're all celebrating how aggressive Maddingly was and lumping them in with Grant Taylor and the White Sox and hey, he actually finished it off. So you're always trying to influence your win probability in a positive direction. And usually it's a percentage point here, a percentage point there. You want a percentage point added to your ledger, not subtracted, but ultimately it's not going to determine the outcome.

you're right to note that we can never know the counterfactual if he retires Harris and they go, you know, to the top of the ninth, who's pitching the bottom of the ninth for them, right? Like, presumably they maybe don't send him back out and say, this is an opportunity for us to bring in someone, you know, clean inning, what have you. Maybe they say, well, we trust, I don't know, Alvarado or whatever to deal with the bottom of the Braves lineup when we're up. by a run. I don't know. Like, it's not like they were assured the win if they had been able to get out of that inning. Their odds were a lot better. I would hazard, you know, and so. He threw 27 pitches, which is half as many as Taylor threw to get one additional out. So if he had just gotten through that inning, then he had been efficient enough that they maybe could have brought him back out. Maybe, yeah. And so let's talk about the tailor of it all because, you know, I didn't mind maddingly bringing Duranen where he did. I thought that that made good sense and was like, you know, forward thinking in a way that was productive. I think you can argue that he maybe left him in too long, particularly after the hit by pitch for the command reasons that you're noting. But there was at least good process on the front end of that decision. I'm curious what you thought of the Taylor stuff because. I thought that prior to the tailor of it all, that that had been a very well-executed game on the part of the White Sox.

Now, the White Sox players put their coaching staff in a position for it to be well executed because they executed, right? So it's a lot easier, if you're Will Venable, to be able to, like, pull the right levers when your relievers are getting outs for you and your, you know, your club is hitting all of these. Relevers. Yeah. your club's hitting all of these singles and managing to score despite a couple of very frustrating double plays. So then you're describing the scenario where he brings in Taylor his best relief arm for the final out of the seventh. I get wanting Taylor to be in to face the top of the Astros order, but I feel like he got a little too cute by half. Like I, if it had been me,

would have allowed either someone else to finish off that frame, even if you're bringing him, bringing in another arm or let someone else pitch the ninth and deal with. Because by that point, the ninth inning was like the bottom of the Astros order, right? Like it wasn't their big boppers. Those guys had all, Taylor had dispensed with all of them in the eighth inning. So I think that, you know, presumably today will look much more conventional for both of these teams, right, because you have Hunter Brown going for Houston, you have Sean Burke going for Chicago, even with Taylor burned and presumably unavailable for today, their bullpen situation

is set up much better than Houston's. And we're going to talk about Houston's bullpen usage in a second because I got some notes. I have some notes about what they did there. But I just felt like they put themselves in a position even though they were up three runs where they used them just a little too long. And it might not end up mattering, right? like Burke could pitch great. Burke could get blown out.

Like their other arms could rally. It might not end up making much of a difference. But it did feel like, you know, you could have preserved some of, of Taylor's bullets. And Benneble decided not to do that, which like it seems like he is often, he understands leverage. And his understanding of leverage is, well, now Grant Taylor's going to throw. Right. Like it is a very, that seems like that is the move for him where. He's like, and what is higher leverage than this entire postseason game?

So here's Grant Taylor, you know. So I don't know. That might not end up being to their benefit eventually. Yeah, it depends on the team because sometimes if you get blown out, if there's a lopsided loss, as we saw in Yankees' Red Sox or Padres Cubs, then you can console yourself with the thought that, well, we didn't have to use our top bullpen guys. And so we'll be all, you know, we'll be ready for bear in the next game. Now, some teams don't really have top bullpen guys.

You know, it's like, can the Cubs console themselves with, we didn't use, who would make you feel good about the fact that you didn't have to use them in game one, really? But with some teams, that obviously makes a major difference. And, of course, it works the other way, too, where if you're the Padres, you're saying, well, we shut out the Cubs in game one. we didn't have to use Mason Miller. Like, you know, we're ready now. Yeah.

That's the bonus, obviously. Oh, yeah. But yeah. You're able to give Joe Musgrove a soft landing. Like, you couldn't have worked out better for them. Yeah, that was fun. How about that? Joe Musgrove come back.

Haven't seen a game in a big league game in quite a while. I saw the Sarah Lang stats was he's the second player to appear in a postseason game directly after not appearing in any game of the two prior regular seasons. Yeah. And joining Clyde McCullough in 1945. But, of course, he was at World War II. So that's a little bit different. And then, of course, there are other...

Yeah, he was just at it. He's just sightseeing. He was just auditing World War II. No, he was... Yeah, but... No, it's like... And obviously that doesn't count some of the players who have made their Major League debuts in the postseason.

Sure, sure, sure. bit different. But yeah, that was, you know, all those roster decisions that come down to the wire, who's in, who's out, who's healthy, who's not. And aside from Judge, everyone was in. So Garrett Crochet on the roster, Kevin Gossman on the roster, Joe Musgrove on the roster. Crochet was not used in game one. It could have been maybe, but it probably wouldn't have made much difference because the Red Sox didn't score any runs, which is a precondition. You kind of have to have at least one of those to win. And more in that. particular case. But yeah, so you always have to think ahead, especially in this era, I think,

when teams are wary of using relievers too many days or games in a row. And yes, the postseason is different, but only to an extent. When I wrote about pitcher usage late in the season, I noted there wasn't a single relief outing this whole year where someone was used four days in a row, just not once this entire season, which used to be, it wasn't like, well, it was an everyday occurrence if it happened to you four days in a row, but it didn't happen all that often, but it was not that infrequent. It was not something that would make you do a double take if someone was in four days in a row. Now, in the playoffs, usually you're not playing games on four days in a row, so that's not as much of a consideration. But yeah, you do

have to think of that. If you know, I guess you get to a a certain point. I don't know where that point is with Grant Taylor. Obviously, 54 is beyond the point where he's going to be available for the next day. But maybe if it's, I don't know, 30 or something or you're beyond that point, you just, you feel like, well, in for a penny, in for a pound, pot committed. He's probably going to need a day anyway. So I guess we'll just keep riding him as long as it works. But you do have to really think, well, you have to think in advance. You have to think ahead and say, when do we have off days and who's going to be available and how does that all stack up? And then in recent years, people paying more attention to the possible familiarity effect

and you're using relievers repeatedly against the same team in a short series. Does that maybe make them a little less effective? But yeah, in general, teams are both less willing to have guys go long in their outings and also are less willing to have them pitch frequently. And so something's got to give there. And in the playoffs, it does. And I do applaud that people just managers at least flip a switch psychologically and say, oh, okay, yeah, we got to pull out all the stops here. But can you do that if you're a pitcher? I don't know that everyone can reliably. And yeah, maybe that's your guy. That's your leverage guy. But is that leverage guy going to be as good after two-inings? You push them to a third.

You're trying to, you just don't ask them to do this. And it's multiple innings and it's multiple ups and downs and sitting and getting back up again. And so I do wonder how feasible it is in this era of really backing off that kind of usage during the regular season to just say, well, now it's late September slash October. So you're suddenly goose gossage again. Like, does that work? They're not prepared for that. They're not conditioned for that. You haven't asked them to do that.

Even if they're willing, even if the spirit is willing, will the body be? Will the arm be? Who knows? There's no way to know. We're just going to have a lot more, like, religious metaphors than are. As long as the White Sox are around, we're going to pop it up in here. I think it's a really good point and a fair question. And it is a tricky thing to navigate.

Here we are maybe asking them to do something impossible, which is like, don't overuse your guys. but don't carry too many pitchers. And they might be looking at us like, well, can you too make up your mind about what you actually want? And perhaps that's a fair criticism. But I still think that even within the confines of like trying to, oh my God, you really,

and he even fell down. He even fell down a little bit. You can't try to field it, Chris. You got to, you just got to let it go. Donnie's got to look like I'm going to lose and then my son's going to have to fire me. Don't make Dumbraowski do it, right? They're not going to make...

Preston-Maddingly fire his father, right? You should be able to recuse himself from that. I think you should be allowed to call in sick that day. I don't know that they would have been able to get an out. Anyway, I'm just being hypercritical. He did fall down a little bit, though. Like, come on. Come on. Come on.

Anyway, returning to the White Sox and the Astros, rather than, you know, me providing play-by-play for a game that will be over for a while by the time anybody hears this. The familiarity part of it, I think, is important to think about within the context of why, say, some of the decisions that the Astros made were bad, not just the white socks potentially overusing and taxing Grant Taylor because it's like, okay, so yesterday you open the game with A.J. Blubaw, who I keep trying to come up with a joke about Bluebaugh as a name that isn't just Blue Balls because...

Me too. it's cheap ben you know it's beneath us that that is the only thing that we can think of i wonder if he had a blue ball experience trying to get a swinging strike um you go with your worst guy right like bluebaugh has not been effective kind of generally this season he's been really quite poor over the last month you open with blue ball he's not able to really do much for you and then you go to king who's also been bad he gives up run Then they bring in Uyola, who was good. He wasn't perfect.

He did give up a run, but he gave them three innings. He sort of did the thing that you hope for when you're having to bullpen game together an outing like this. And so, well, maybe you don't go with Blue Bob top. Maybe, like, see what Uyola can do for you and how bad it goes. And then you can bring in other guys because what they ended up doing, like, they had. Hendrickson, who's only barely been up, and Van Way, who's camel casing insistence on the back of his jersey does make me legitimately crazy. And I say that even though I insist upon camel casing for fan graphs, because we do not present our name in all caps. If we did, I wouldn't do this.

It's been, the lowercase letters are capitalized in everybody else's name. You know, generally I defer on this stuff, but this one strikes me as goofy. And part of it is, you know, that it looks bad. And so I am being offended by the aesthetic of it on his jersey. But anyway, they go through their bullpen. They go, they go through

Sousa, and then they end up bringing in their leverage arms anyway, right? And Brian and Brayu and Josh Hater didn't throw very many pitches, like 11 for a Brayu, 10 or 11 for Hater. Like, it wasn't, I don't think either of those guys are going to be unavailable today, but you're giving the

White Sox another look at those guys in a short series. And why is I on your roster if you're not going to have him just come in and soak up some of those innings on the back end? So like the way that they put it together, they ended up with the worst of all worlds. They lost the game. They used all of their arms. They gave the, and they still gave the White Sox a look at their leverage guys who, you know, are at least a little bit more tired today than they would have been otherwise.

So I thought that the way that they did it was really goofy and that they deserve to lose as a result of that. So there you go. Well, it sounds like you are booing the Astros, more or less, which is essentially what some Astros fans did as well. And Astros players were not pleased that Astros fans were not pleased. And I was kind of of two minds about this because I do understand the perspective of the Astros players. But I also think that it just never pays for players to criticize.

their team's fans. It just, it never plays well. It never makes the fans say, you know what, you're right. You got us. That's on us. Our bad. We shouldn't have booed. You guys were right. We'll, we'll do better. That never happens. If anything, if they're already upset with the team, then that's just going to drive the wedge even deeper. Yeah. So the issue was this was not a sellout. It was about 7,000 fans under capacity. They were 34,000 people there. and there was some audible booing, and some of the players spoke up about that and about how they were aggrieved.

Bennett-Souza reliever said, the fans here are definitely spoiled with a lot of ALCS and World Series runs. Again, spoiled, maybe a somewhat inflammatory word. And we have to earn that right to bring this team back to that position. That being said, when this team was in their first playoff series 10 years ago, Minute Maid Park was probably packed,

it makes a big difference. If we were in Chicago, it would probably be loud as shit. Christian Walker said, it's not an excuse, in my opinion. The lack of support each year is its own thing. You can't assume a team is going to win 100 games every year. It's really, really hard to get to the postseason. We had to do a lot of things right along the way. We had to face a lot of adversity.

I don't know exactly what he's referring to there. Obviously, things went wrong for the Astros. Things go wrong for every team, but also they're the worst division winner ever, maybe the worst playoff team ever, so I don't know how much they triumphed really, even though they did technically. And Sousa

went on to say, as a team, we know we lay it on the line every day, we've been working our ass off, we've been playing hard, we got in the playoffs, we just really need the support of our fans. And I guess there's kind of a please clap aspect to this for the 81 and 81 team

that just barely made it into the wildcard round, despite the weak competition. So do they deserve as much acclaim as previous editions of the Astros? Maybe not. Walker also said, though, it's extremely frustrating as a home player. We're here playing at home. We need cheers.

We need energy. We don't need booze. What purpose does that serve in the moment? Whatever fans are feeling, we're feeling it tenfold. We're the ones out there. We're the ones in the fight. We worked our butts off this whole season to put ourselves in the spot. Okay.

calm down. You're 81 and 81. You made it. You're entitled to be there, but again. And for guys to get booed, it's frustrating. Sousa said, I'm not going to lie, I was pretty pissed off in the dugout when I came in about the booze. This team has laid a lot on the line to be in this position to give the fans a playoff game, a playoff series. We want their support. Anyway, you get it, right? There was more in that vein. And Sousa subsequently apologized for calling the fans spoiled. He says, I'm sorry for the comments I made about our fan base. Anyone that knows me knows how much I care about this organization, this city, and our fans, et cetera, et cetera. One thing I would love for people to know is no matter how bad they feel about me or anything like that that I'm feeling it 10 times worse. He said he was emotional after an emotional game. Yeah, I feel that way too. And that's why I am somewhat sympathetic.

I would just say, don't say it. There's just no purpose in saying it. You can say it to each other. You can say it to yourself, but to express it publicly, I think, is just counterproductive. I do understand why there's some frustration. Look, when I was a fan, I didn't boo my team's guys because I figured they were trying, and they probably felt bad about being bad. and I just, you're entitled to boo.

You buy your ticket. You can say, well, not anything, but certainly you can boo within the bounds of propriety. But I never really felt moved to do that. Booing bad off the field behavior, booing bad character, that kind of thing. Okay, but, you know, I guess unless someone is really demonstrably exhibiting low effort and makes it look like they don't care,

and not just like reading body language and leaping to conclusions, but someone really not hustling in a very costly way or whatever. Okay, maybe that's one thing. But if your team just isn't that good and just didn't have a very good game, I would also agree that it doesn't really serve any purpose to boo beyond just venting, which I guess is a purpose that's a sufficient purpose for people to do it. But like, yeah, if I were a player, I would appreciate support and cheers or at least not booze.

And I would always feel like, well, booing, even if I feel like booing, it's just going to make that guy feel worse. Like, if I don't have anything against him personally, is it going to make him play better? Not really. Probably it might make him play worse. So I never really approached fandom that way. And I get why players would be somewhat upset about it. It's just that calling the fans out has never worked once, I don't think.

It just always makes the situation worse. it always turns them against you more because they are entitled to boo. They can, you know. They're allowed. They showed up. They paid their money. And also, you should play better, I guess, would be one perspective. And then they wouldn't have to boo you.

And it's not a very good team. Now, I don't think it ever really was going to be a good team. And again, I wouldn't really boo the players for not being better players because I just, I don't think it's a great. roster. And if you were expecting this to be an Astros juggernaut, like past Astros juggernauts, then I don't know what you were seeing because this team is barely holding on to contention at the tail end of this very successful period. So it's kind of a wonder that they've even managed to hang on this long. But it's just the bones of that roster are not very strong. So it's not like they dramatically underperformed expectations.

this season or anything. If anything, they overperformed, like, run differential and everything. It's just not a very good team. So I guess you can boo them for not being a very good team, but it's not a surprise. I don't know that anyone is necessarily surprised in that fan base. And I do think, like, the primary reason that fans boo is for the relief of it, right? They're venting the spleen. And so I think that, you know, when they say, well, what is the point of that?

And it's like, they're annoyed with you and they want to feel better. So they're booing you. But I also agree with you that like there's just there's nothing to be gained if you are a player in expressing it quite that way. Like this is where this is where you need a group chat, you know? Yeah. And it's unfair, I guess, that like the fans get to have this loud public. catharsis at your expense and you're confined to your group chat but you know especially for the players who are going to be around in future seasons who aren't just like one and done guys i i think that

it behooves you to fake it a little bit you know and to demonstrate some amount of sympathy for the instinct to boo even if it is annoying and i'm sure it is you know i bet it sucks i i i feel bad. Yeah, look, you're just like really chopping, lady. That's right. You're really chopping. That guy behind home should like at least chop forward more. You look, you're doing a different motion. I just want the Phillies twin because I don't, I don't need any more of this. I can be done now. I think you just got to say, like, I understand why they're disappointed. We're disappointed in the results and wish that our play had met the moment better. You know, these are, you just have to practice. It's like it's like being a pitcher and having to do fielding practice.

Do you hope that you're going to have to use it? No, but you got to do it. And you got to do it in spring training. It should be part of your, you need your, you know, get your coach to hit you some verbal fungos and practice. We are also disappointed. I understand why they're frustrated. We could have played better today.

We didn't, you know, rise to the moment. I wish that we've been able to drive in runs in the end. it whatever, you know, get your, get your reps in. Yeah. Yeah, this would be media training day one. This is media training 101. Oh, yeah. Just don't call out the fans.

No. Just say nothing or say something anodyne like what you just said. And of course, for reporters and podcasters and journalists, I'm not really rooting for players never to say anything interesting or provocative or inflammatory. If anything, it would be in baseball media members' best interests if players, if players were a little less media trained and would actually sort of speak more candidly and didn't speak entirely in cliches.

But this is one where it seems like because of the stakes and the emotions and everything, players just, they do make this sort of unforced error repeatedly where they just, you know, more people should come to the games. More people should cheer us. Yeah, it's just, it's never a winning approach. And I understand feeling, frustrated and wishing the day had gone better and then feeling there's feeling like there's sort of

like an insult to injury component to getting booed, you know, at home, right? I get why that would rankle. They are also disappointed and we can put this, you know, Astro season in the context of the sort of dynasty teams that preceded them. But that's not relevant to the career experience of a lot of the guys on this club, right? Like, what do they care about the glory days of Astro's baseball? Some of them weren't, some of them weren't even an affiliated ball and that happened, right? So the glory days or the, or the tarnished days that they had, that was not their doing. They didn't win the games.

They didn't do the cheating. So, yeah. And so I can, and I do think that, like, I'm not saying that fans should necessarily, like, visiting fans or opposing fans should feel bad. about like the psychic damage that the Astros players are taking. But like I could imagine getting kind of annoyed at that, you know, if I played on the Astros and I wasn't on those teams. And like your baseline level of booing at a non-home game is just like way higher

than it is for any other club because of the banging scheme. And you're like, I wasn't even there. You know, so I get all of that. You know, if you're Christian Walker, you're like, I wasn't on any of those teams. Like, what does this, what does this have to do with me? but also like hey man you know this is the season you had this is the team the team's season and they're going to be annoyed so you just got to i mean you're probably going to go home after today anyway so it doesn't matter yeah anyway maybe they were just upset that they had to watch

eight pitchers in the first postseason game which was it was a long that it was a long ass game And when you give your home fans a long-ass game and they feel like you had some choice in the matter, oh, you should have challenged that. Oh, you only have one left. And you still should have challenged it. That wasn't a strike. Isn't my commentary fun and incisive

and easy to track when it's so sporadic? I understand why they went with a bullpen game, but it's like you give them a long game. It's an annoying. It's an annoying game. They lose. You've burned all your guys. Their pets heads are falling off.

They're going to boo you. You know, that's what's going to happen. Yeah. Okay. All right. And there weren't too many other takeaways from that first day. I suppose it's not great for the Red Sox that Roman Anthony hurt himself again and hurt himself in the same way. I guess aggravated the old same injury, the right hand.

So that doesn't help. But they didn't look so hot in that game regardless. And the offense has struggled of late. And, you know, they were already dealing with Wilson Contreras. and Saddam Rafael and they're back, but are they fully operational? Who knows? And then after all of our praise for the Cubs position players, they got shut out by the Padres, whose rotation we didn't really praise, though.

Not so much because of Michael King specifically. No. He's the strongest part of it. But, yeah, he shut down those Cubs completely. He looks great. Yeah. It's one game, but it's a pretty costly game. It just doesn't really reflect the.

overall roster strengths that we've talked up or warned people about coming in. It was an interesting game because it goes to show, like, you know, that Padre's offense was so sort of off its game most of the season, right? Like, we've talked a lot about how long it took Tatis to hit a home run and, you know, his power outage extended beyond that. And then he really came on in the second half. I mean, he really came on from like May onward. Jackson Merrill got right.

Even Machado's been hitting better. And last night you have Tatis hitting the leadoff home run, Machado homering, even Bogart's homering. It is a good reminder. Like when that offense is clicking, it is a very potent group. And it is perhaps a potent enough group that I think that they can survive even if they don't get a performance like they did.

Adam Michael King, although holy crap, what a performance out of Michael King. And I just want to take a further note on the Musgrove thing. Like, I can't imagine a better setup to like reintroduce that guy to not only a competitive environment, but a postseason environment. It's like he's the hometown kid. He's in front of his home crowd. It would be so hard to goof that lead. Right.

And so let him go out there and like get feel for his pitches again and feel what it's like to be on a big league mound with pressure. You know, when he was rehabbing here in Arizona, Eric Long & Hagan saw him, and he wrote it up for Fangrauss, and he just came away from it being like, this guy can be a part of what's going on for San Diego in the postseason because, like, the stuff is there.

And you saw him working through some spots of, like, rough command and not necessarily being able to finish. And, and, oh, my God, bro. Oh, my God. They just deserve to lose. Like, just be done. Just be done. I am happy for Drake Baldwin.

That was an easy rookie of the year vote. Yeah. Unlike my rookie of the yearbo, those heroes are really hard. We didn't accidentally talk about that on the pod, did we? No, good. I don't think so, but we will when you're able to. When I'm able to. But yeah, I was just, I was thrilled for Musgrove.

It's a cool thing. Oh, you all. And it was right there in his club and then it was out of his club. Yeah, games. We won't have to talk about this one again because I've just been taking care of it during the podcast. Yeah, this has been your real-time recap of Philly's Braves game two, I guess. Yeah.

Joe Spada got the Meg memo about messaging. He said he understood the fans' frustrations. He understood both sides. He both sides did. He said, the way I see it, I understand both sides. There's frustration. Our players and the fans have the right to also show their emotions. and I get it.

But one thing I do know is that our players love our fans. We respect our fans. We need our fans. We need the energy from our fans. We feed off that. But he did also talk to the players and tell them how to express that frustration that they were feeling. I thought he handled that very well. Wow.

I can't believe the only one run out of that, honestly. Yeah, you sometimes end up with a situation in these games, though. It's like, yes, either you go to the low leverage guys and then you end up using. the high leverage guys anyway and lose worst of both worlds or sometimes maybe you go to the low leverage guys prematurely it's like sometimes you never should have gone to the low leverage guys that the game wasn't actually over you were still in it you should have hung in there and then you know i guess there were people who critiqued chad tracy's managing in game one again i don't think it matters ultimately it's it's hard after the fact to say that anything chad chasie

would have done differently, would have changed the outcome because the Red Sox got shut out. But, you know, when he took Tolley out and then put Alec Gamboa in, who has been effective for the Red Sox this year, but he was more of a low leverage guy for them and a guy who was getting three-inning saves and getting three-inning games finished and stuff. And then he came in when the game was still tight and still close and the Red Sox were theoretically, within striking distance. And then ultimately, yeah, like he used Miller and Weissert, but then Gamboa got in and then Olds got in. And then Beio was there at the very end of it. And so it was a little like, what's the script here?

And just because you're down by a couple games in a must-win series, you don't necessarily have to run up the white flag here. So, I don't know. Like when he took Tollia out when he did, that was fairly aggressive. And then, you know, maybe if you're saying, okay, I'm using our leverage guys and I'm trying to win this one. But then ultimately used lower leverage guys and Gamboa and Olds. And then, you know, it was 2-0 and then it was 4-0 and then it was worse than that after the rice slam. But, yeah.

So maybe it was like a little, well, commit to the bit of. using the high leverage guys. But again, really, in retrospect, probably wouldn't have made any difference anyway. And at least those guys are then available for game two. But would have like to see crochet in that spot. But who knows even what state crochet is in exactly until we see him. Yeah, this is one where I'm quite happy to defer to the manager having better information about the answer to that question. And, you know, I guess perhaps there's an argument to be made where if you're not going to turn to him in that moment, then why is he on the wildcard roster? Because, you know, those roster spots are precious. But I think in all likelihood, like, he knows

something that we don't about it that is perhaps informing that particular set of decision-making. And again, like, they just couldn't score any runs. So, you know, when Camp Schlitler looks like that, like, what are you going to do really? Like, the bigger problem was that curveball is crazy. Like, he's just, you know, he's just in complete command of that pitch in a way that. that is going to be hard for any lineup to deal with and that proved to be true for them. If your last name is Olds, it's not like a problem as a reliever name

or even an athlete name, but it is definitely one of those names where I would call a family meeting and be like, so hey, what do we have accomplished that we feel like we need to hold on to this one, you know? Because you're just going to,

it's just a weird old's, you know? Like you're going to, when you're young, it's a problem. when you're old, it's also a problem. You know, it's just kind of a problem, you know. It's not offensive. It's not problematic. It doesn't sound like your name actually is like penis in another language, but it is a weird one as a name.

So there's that, yeah. Yeah. People do get attached to their family names. So, yeah. I have as old as time. I have wondered about the impact of managers because we got an email from listener Matt, who was musing about. Dan Wilson and his impact and that dilemma of evaluating managers and their impact, which we wrestle with in the postseason, because as Matt wrote, the case of Dan Wilson has me thinking

a lot lately about the impact of a manager. I believe in the sabermetric dogma generally, and my feeling is that managers don't much matter. And yet, as an M's fan, it sure felt like Dan mattered a lot, an unbelievable amount. What to make of this. I did some of the back of the envelope math, taking the Mariners' difference in projected versus actual wins and projected versus actual war for the injured guys. Cal, Julio, and Nailer, who was reported tweaked to Hammy during the WBC and played through it. And that difference accounts for all but one lost win. As in, if those guys are healthy, Dan Wilson cost the M's a single win. But that doesn't

really feel right to my gut, especially given the parade of articles about a lack of clubhouse accountability and a leadership vacuum this year. And I wonder if y'all have thoughts, especially Meg. I think Dan challenges my factual and emotional realities. And I wonder if you are similar. Oh my goodness. Well, okay, so I think a couple of things and we can sort of generalize them away from the Mariners because I don't think there's anything unique to the potential for impact that Dan Wilson carried versus another sort of like not very good manager.

I mean, I think part of why it feels like a bigger deal when your manager isn't thought to be up to snuff is that, well, one, it is, they do kind of take on like a sin-eater role. for you as a fan, right? It's easier if you, if you love your guys and, you know, you got, you got Cowrallie's name on your back to be mad at Dan Wilson than to like grapple with the reality of like this guy you admire as an athlete and a, and potentially a person like just not really living up to his potential and costing his team like a shot at the postseason, you know.

So I think there is some of that where we just, we appreciate the emotional remove that yelling at the the manager gives us from, you know, having to hate our favorite players. I also think that managers do make decisions that can feel like they have a direct line to winning or losing the game, particularly around their management of the bullpen, right? Like if your manager brings in a guy and then that guy immediately gives up like a game losing home run, well, you feel, you feel furious at him and maybe aren't, you know, you're expecting him to have some amount of clairvoyance into the success of the player on any given day. And so even though it was the player who didn't execute, presumably, you're mad at the manager for having put him

in that situation. And then I do think that, you know, when you have sort of like an older school kind of guy and you maybe come to the game with an analytics lens as your way of understanding it, that you can feel frustration for, you know, some of the stuff that a more forward-thinking manager or manager where there's, you know, a more productive and sort of collaborative relationship between the dugout and the front office can theoretically avoid. So I think that is part of it. And I do think, though, that, like, some of the stuff that was the most frustrating about the Mariners this year, the coaching staff bears some responsibility for, isn't to let the players off the hook.

But like the Mariners played kind of sloppy at times in different seeming baseball. And if you believe in the manager as like a tone setter and a leader, then you can attribute some of that to his inability to sort of run a tight ship and keep the guys the right combination of like disciplined and loose. So I think that that's why we get worked up. about managers. And it is often, I think, I don't even know if unfair is quite the right way to put it, but like not grounded in like evidence that we have access to. We've talked about this where it's perplexing to me that even the beats who spend a lot of time in direct contact and

observation with the managers vote for manager of the year just because so much of what a manager does that's important is like HR, you know, or at least like interpersonal stuff that we don't see. And so, you know, it might not be, that frustration might not be really tied to anything that you've been able to see yourself. But the sort of like knock on effects of it on the field might be something you point to and say, well, surely this is the results of the manager not being able to like, you know, keep the clubhouse together or what have you. So that's why, for me, that's what I would say. Yeah, it's just, it's extra frustrating. It's just because it feels like unforced errors. It feels like it's one thing if the player messes up, baffles a ball, if someone else hits a pitch you through.

Well, that happens. It's athletic competition. It's tough. But if you're just sitting in the dugout making decisions, and yes, sure, there's more pressure on the person who's actually making that decision. And it feels like it's all moving faster. It's not quite as easy as it is sitting at home. But everyone is sitting at home armchair managing along with everyone else. And we aren't really armchair.

hitting an armchair pitching. And so everyone feels like, oh, I could have made that decision because, like, physically you could have, but, uh, which, you know, you wouldn't say the same about I could have thrown a better pitch there. Or I could have, maybe you would, but hyperbolicly, you wouldn't be serious about it. And so. Kyle Schwerber just a really big home run. It was just like a big old tank of a home run.

Oh, really, he really got that. That was like an outfielder's don't turn around home run. Wow. Oh, I like those. Yeah. Yeah. So I think that's a big part of it is that people feel rightly or wrongly that they could do it or that it's at least not as hard relative to everything else that's going on in a baseball game. And so if you have time to plan it out, it's not like a quick twitch reaction sort of thing.

You should have had this all planned before the fact and you should have known here's what I'm going to do here. And a lineup, obviously, you have hours. days to construct. And so those sorts of decisions that just piss people off, I think, even more. Yeah. Because it feels like it shouldn't be as hard to do. So, okay, tie game in the eighth. This is taken all. No, they're down a run. Oh, wait, no. Oh, are you ahead of me? Oh, how exciting. Did Bryce hit a home run? I'm so excited. Let's look. Oh, boy. So how about that. the Phillies offense, namely Kyle Schwerber and Bryce Harper helps bail them out. So anyway, this will all be old news to people who are listening.

But on our next episode, we will, of course, recap how the Wild Card series ended and set up the division series. But I guess we can close with just a couple non-playoff related notes for the people whose teams are no longer playing. By the way, the Red Sox did remove Roman Anthony from the roster. and evidently, according to Chad Tracy, he has suffered new strains to different muscles in the same hand. So it's not exactly the same injury. I don't know if that's better or worse. And if he is replaced on the roster, he won't be eligible in a potential division series, correct? Ooh, I guess that's probably right.

Yeah. Well, that's rough. It was reported over the weekend that MLB is trying to arrange a baseball game in a national park. So we've talked about how maybe there's a little less intrigue surrounding the Field of Dreams game and the various one-offs that we have seen here. And, you know, maybe a little of the luster has worn off. And we were talking about, well, how could they get it back?

And where could they play that they haven't played before? And it sounds like their plan is a national park. And no, not Nationals Park. everyone made that joke, but a national park, specifically maybe Grand Teton, it seems like they've been scouting out some locations. Obviously, they need approval to do this. They need approval from the Trump administration to do this. And I wouldn't doubt that that could be forthcoming. Obviously, this would have to happen after next season because next season's schedule is already set.

And beyond 2028, I guess it wouldn't be the Trump administration. administration's decision to make, but given the approach that MLB has taken to maintaining the relationship with Trump, perhaps there's a sympathetic ear there. So I was sort of struck by this because on the one hand, it's kind of part and parcel, I guess, you know, not that this was a Trump instigated idea reportedly, but they have not taken the most conservation-friendly approach to our national parks and national lands. And so I'm sure they would think nothing of just raising some wilderness to put up a stadium or something. On the other hand, while I wouldn't approve that, the idea of a baseball game in some sort of natural splendor would be cool.

Like I think that would be fun to see. And so if there were a way to do that without doing some lasting damage to some. pristine natural setting, then that would be cool. I obviously have my doubts about whether that's the way it would go down. You know, I've read that there are some places in parks that are sort of set aside already for just storage or whatever, you know, you wouldn't necessarily be chopping down trees and disrupting, displacing wildlife or something in order to put up a ballpark. And, you know, I guess this would be more feasible if they didn't have to erect a, a full stadium capable of seating tens of thousands of people and all the rest of it.

If it were more like a smaller scale, this is sort of disposable or short term, and we're just putting this thing up and then we're taking it down and it doesn't do any long-term lasting damage or anything. Again, do I have any confidence that that's the way that this would happen? No, not really. But it would be cool if you had some sort of nice natural backdrop to a baseball. game, I would, I would want to watch that. So in theory, I think it could be kind of cool. In practice, it probably wouldn't be worth it and maybe nothing will actually come of it. But I saw a lot of

people dumping on, on the idea, the concept. And I think the concept is cool. I just, all of my concerns are about like whether it's worth it and how it would be done exactly and how costly it would be, not, not in terms of money, but just, you know, damage done. I agree with you that like in a perfect world where you could precisely restore whatever change to the landscape you had made. The idea of that as a backdrop for anything is cool because like Grand Teton National Park is gorgeous. Like it is a beautiful, incredible gem of a place, right? So the notion that there would be appealed to that as a backdrop for baseball makes all the sense in the world to me. And there is part of me that it's like, well, I don't know if they're like building a minimally sized ballpark that they understand isn't going to have use beyond this one game.

It's probably the least destructive plan that the Trump administration could have for any of the national parks. So screw it. Let them do do it. And I do think you're right to say that like there are probably places where you could try to thread the needle and do something that isn't going to have much of a lasting impact. in an area that is already understood to serve a purpose other than being pristine wilderness. Having said all of that, it's a terrible idea. And I think that like one of the things that has been,

I think, redeeming about the league's quest to like put games in funny places is that like they have focused on putting major league games in spots where that facility can continue. to get use, right? And that it will serve a community after the league leaves town and, you know, you're not hosting a game with special uniforms there anymore. Even the field of dreams game like that field gets use as a facility for like youth athletics

and what have you. I think that it helps to make it feel like it isn't just, you know, coming to town and pitching a circus tent, but viewing it as something that is community-minded, right, that is weaving baseball into the fabric of a place where either it didn't have it previously or it had it previously in that, you know, those threads have sort of fallen into disrepair, right? This is, we talked about why, you know, the Rickwood game felt so cool was that, like, you were restoring this piece of very real and underappreciated baseball history and then letting it serve a community after you were gone.

And this, this, like, fundamentally feels like it's at cross-purposes with that because the only good version of this is one where you go to that field a year later and never know that anyone played a baseball game there at all, right? So I don't like it. It feels like if you are going to present your game as existing as an important part of, like, the American mythology. using it in service of, you know, doing damage to an area that is beautiful and meaningful to a lot of people just feels like it's working at cross purposes with that and like you're not sort of

respecting the story that you tell about yourself. Never mind what damage you might be doing to the park. And I don't want to overstate my knowledge or expertise about like how much actual damage it would do because I you know again I can imagine sort of like a minimally invasive version of it but I also know that like part of their appeal to this whole thing is that like they can pack people in there and sell them expensive tickets right yeah and so it's not like there's there might not be a lot of people there relative to a typical big game, but it's not like there won't be anyone there. Now, national parks have

visitors all the time. That's part of the understood trust is that this is a resource, not in an extractive sense, but, you know, a place that we get to come together and sort of appreciate his heritage. And I understand that's a fraught legacy because guess what?

Like, who lived down the land before we were all here? But, you know, I do think that like the park's system is is one of the good things I was going to say the few good things and that's maybe a little too pessimistic but there's like more,

there's stuff that's just obviously more important than your gimmick game, right? And I'm, I should be the target audience for this stuff, right? I'm a sucker for our national parks, but I... I love public lands. I do love public lands.

I do. I think they're really important. And I think that like, you know, it's a tricky thing to balance the question, of like how do you conserve that land and then how do you let people access and enjoy it and how you know that's that's a really fraught conversation at times but like you don't do it by putting a baseball field in the middle of grand teesons like what are we talking about you know the thing that makes it cool which is that you don't usually see a baseball game in a national park like that

is i guess what also makes it ill-advised because a national park is not really the appropriate place for that to happen. That's kind of like also what makes it intriguing is that, ooh, you don't usually see a baseball game here. So it would be kind of cool to see it once. But then also, why don't you? And I guess there are good reasons why you don't. So yeah, if they really embrace the idea that, hey, we're going to do just like the least

disruptive approach to this that we can. And so it's not going to be about selling tickets or having a huge attendance. Obviously, we'll try to make it a big broadcast event. And so you still have to have cameras and broadcast trucks and all sorts of things come in there. But if they did make it, hey, we don't even have to have a grandstand. We don't even have to have a whole stadium infrastructure because it's more about just playing in this place and blending into the environment. Then that might be interesting. I might endorse that idea if it were just like, hey, let's just whip up a field.

It has to be a nice major league quality field. But maybe we don't need all of the amenities that come with that. Maybe we don't need to have a whole, like, we don't have to build a weight room in a clubhouse or something. You know, we'll put you up in a nice place somewhere nearby. We'll get you a luxury hotel where you can do all those things or we'll fly you in and out or whatever. And it'll just be a beautiful field in a beautiful setting. And that's that. Then I might be on board for that sort of thing.

And, hey, just the natural wonder and splendor of this beautiful backdrop that we're not accustomed to with baseball. But if it would have to come with all the things that would, it would probably have to come with, then that's probably not worth it. But you could still sell it as a broadcast only event, I think. National pastime in the national park, you know, just sell that to Netflix or whatever. And it'll, I mean, that would be part of the hook. Part of the draw would be that no one gets to see this except people tuning in. There aren't thousands of fans here. It's just you and the fish and the elk.

and the caribou or whatever, depending on which national park we're in, and it's baseball. So that would be cool. I would endorse that sort of thing. And then you could do that with minimal cost and disruption in all sorts of places. And it could just be kind of a roving event. But is that what it would actually look like? Probably not. All right.

And then the last thing is we have an interesting lawsuit that is that is, that it is, is happening here. Every now and then, a player will sue because they hurt themselves in a ballpark. Yeah. And they allege that there was something negligent about the construction or something dangerous. And then they'll sue, which is sort of not the norm, not something you expect because you expect, oh, everything will just be collectively bargained and it'll be handled in arbitration or or whatever. So this came up because Zach Gelloff of the A's

is suing the Tigers because, or he's saying he was hurt by a piece of fencing along the third base side of the infield at Comerica. I mean, he was, I guess. He hurt himself on it. He was sliding to catch a foul ball.

This was back in July. And he got a cut on his knee and missed a month or so. Could have been worse, I guess, but bad. And the suit says that his right knee violently struck an exposed dangerous metal fence on the sidewall that protruded into or alongside the playing area.

And the claim is that the fence was sharp. It wasn't protected enough. And that the tiger should have known that this could be in play and they should have done more to protect the players. And Riley Green of the Tigers is now being cited in this suit because he said at the time that portion of the fence where he hit is metal, he kind of slid into it. and it's definitely going to hurt if you slide into it. So now the lawsuit is using that to support the claim.

And evidently, according to the attorney, at least, the Tigers added padding to that part of the wall after the injury, which I guess could be interpreted to suggest that they should have had more padding there prior to the injury. So every now and then something like this happens. And usually it's just, you know, it's all handled through the union and it's subject to arbitration and everything. but that doesn't apply to this specific kind of case, this premise liability case with allegedly dangerous conditions on the playing field.

And I'm quoting here from Craig Calcutera's right up. Craig is a lawyer. He's kind of cribbing from another lawyer's post about this. And Craig sums it up as short version. Premises liability claims arising out of dangerous conditions don't have anything to do with the player's labor arrangements. So federal labor laws that would funnel such claims into arbitration are not invoked. And by the way, both of Gellof's parents are lawyers. So I guess I don't know if they put them up to this, but they know what they're doing.

Maybe if they're involved also. So this has come up a couple times and with maybe even more serious injuries in the past several years. There was one involving Darren Ruff that I guess ended his career. He was with the Brewers in 2023. And he crashed into an unpadded tarp roller, I guess it was, while he was going after a foul ball in Cincinnati and hasn't played since, hasn't been back in the big leagues. And then in 2017, Dustin Fowler of the Yankees, that was an ugly one. That's the most sort of famous one. Yeah, he was tracking down a foul ball or a foul fly in Chicago.

And he crashed into this electrical box that was at like knee level. and unpadded and that was his big league debut. Right. And that ended his season and he sued as well. Both of those suits were settled. Yeah. Probably that's what will happen in Gellas case as well. But it's interesting.

You don't often see a player suing a team opposing or otherwise just because of there are usually other mechanisms set up for that. But I get it. It is kind of curious that there are really any still like exposed, you know, sharp metal areas. And, you know, people still talk about, like, the brick and Wrigley and the Ivy. And it's way better than it used to be, obviously. But just across the league, you know, you used to have all sorts of very hard, unpadded surfaces.

And now it's just here or there. But that can do some damage. And I am sort of surprised that in a very litigious society that they don't err on the side of caution there, not pure. for player health, but also to protect themselves so that no one would have grounds to sue them for something like this. It's interesting because, well, so he not only, at least so far, it has not proven to be a career-ending injury, he returned to play this season, right? And he hit reasonably well upon his return.

The injury happened on July 9th. He missed a month. and then from August 10th when he was activated from the injured list and then the end of the season, he had like a 112 WRC plus. So it's not like he was god-awful upon his return. I don't know if he has experienced lingering effects from the injury that are not so bad that he couldn't play, but that he, you know, they impede him in a way that is meaningful or maybe impede him away from the field in a way that he feels and doesn't, you know, enjoy.

But he's basically been... Or just kept him out for a month, I guess that alone if he's arguing that that shouldn't have happened. Yeah, but you're paid while you're on the injured list. So, like, that's the part of it that I find curious is that, like, he, he, you get paid while you're on the injured list. When you're on the big league injured list, it's not like he wasn't accruing service time, right?

So it doesn't have any effect on his pre-agency timeline. And so I would, again, I'm not a lawyer and I don't know what's going on inside of Zach Gelloff's knee. So I don't mean to suggest that this isn't like a, you know, that he doesn't have a point here that this is some sort of frivolous suit. But I will be curious to see how it sort of progresses because, you know, when you're injured running into an electrical box and it ends your career, basically, like I understand suing under those circumstances for all kinds of things for, you know, emotional distress. for lost wages, whatever. But, like, Zach Loff, like, played baseball, like, three days ago. So that part of it is just interesting to me,

and I'm curious sort of how those legal arguments sort of unfold because you would think, I was like, oh, was he hurt worse than I appreciated? And I was like, no, it doesn't seem so. But, you know, and maybe he views it as, hey, this was not good, and it could have been much worse. And so as a way of, like, you know, ensuring that future injuries like this don't occur in that ballpark.

You know, maybe he's doing it with sort of that sort of civic-mindedness. I don't know. But it is interesting that given the way this year has gone for him that he's doing this. Yeah. I guess if they already applied extra padding, then maybe that's done. But yeah, I don't know. Pain and suffering. Maybe that's sufficient.

Who knows. But yeah, we'll see how it goes. Or maybe we won't hear anything. And probably it'll just be settled. But yeah, every now and then, We get one of those and it always sort of surprises me to see. But it does make sense to have fields be safe, have walls be padded. Oh, totally.

I would want them to be padded if I were running into them at times. So, all right. Well, much more playoff talk next time. All right. Well, we were no longer recording, but Meg and I continued chatting after we finish the pod. And so I heard her real-time reaction to Alec Bohm, hitting a home run off of Didier Fuentes. The game-winning shot as the Phillies came back to. take game two, four to three in a game that ended on an ABS challenge. So Philly and Atlanta

will play game three. The Phillies defense specifically Bryce Harper taketh away. The Phillies offense specifically Bryce Harper giveth. Fun game. Also, in case there was any confusion, Meg was correct about the roster rules. Roman Anthony replaced by Curtis Mead on the roster meant that he would not be eligible for the next round, though he could return after that. However, he will not because the Red Sox will not be playing in any additional. rounds. The Yankees smacked them around again in game two. So they move on to an ALDS matchup with the Rays and the Guardians and White Sox who went toe to toe and finished neck in the AL Central. They will face each other once again in the division series. White Sox game two starter,

Sean Burke went viral thanks to a quote he gave to James Fegan about his motivation for the start. This is my life. No family, no girl, no kids. This is all I do. Well, I guess it's good for him then that his team will continue to play. Not that he was that great in that game. 8Ks, no walks, four earnings, three runs. Anyway, that's commitment, I suppose. Meanwhile, the Astros did not give their fans any great reason to cheer. The Padres beat the Cubs again also.

So three sweeps in four series, if you can call winning the first two games in a best of three a sweep. I'm pretty sure we have litigated that before. So San Diego moves on to face Milwaukee. And the Dodgers wait to see which NL East team will be their opponent. More on the rest of the wild card. action and division series previews next time. Also another version of that Sarah Lange's Joe Musgrove, fun fact.

Sarah said Joe Musgrove is the first player to appear in sequential postseason games in different seasons with no regular season games in between. Okay. No caveats, no fine print needed there. Before we finish the erot-a portion of the podcast, not erotic, erratah. Some stuff we screwed up. On our last episode, there was evidently a slight miscalculation in our draft of pieces of postseason teams, effectively wild

Wikikeeper and Patreon supporter Raymond notes, I think Meg erroneously foisted the Phillies defense on Ben. She picked only five defenses, Padres, guards, Brewers, White Soxas Cubs, Red Sox, Braves, raised Dodgers, Yankees. So the Phillies

presumably should have gone to Meg. Also, nobody cares. Raymond realized that evidently Meg had credited herself with taking the Yankees defense when in fact I took it, which means that the Phillies defense should have fallen to her So really that Bryce Harper misplay and all of Trey Turner's shortcomings at shortstop should be on her ledger. But I think it might have broken her to be saddled with Turner.

So I don't have the heart to bear a grudge. Also, when we were doing the mini stat blast about the best players whose final big league games were semi-overshadowed because an even better player was wrapping up his career two in that same game, sort of stole the farewell thunder. I referred to the biggest disparity in war between players who retired in the same game. as belonging to Babe Ruth and a few replacement players who played in his last game. However, that wasn't quite correct. Babe Ruth's last game was earlier in the 1935 season, not in September of that year, because his last act in Boston didn't go so great, and he never got the managerial job he wanted either.

But Michael Mountain and I figured out what happened. There was an exhibition game played September 29, 1935, between the Babe Ruth All-Stars and the New York Cubans, and that had not been filtered out of the retro sheet results. so that showed up in the data set. Bay Bruth All-Stars was sort of a misnomer. It was not a very talented team, the Babe aside, and they got their clocks cleaned by the Cubans. Starting for New York was Louis Tiant Sr.

And another Hall of Fame two-way player, Martine DeHigo, also played in that game for the Cubans. He was featured on episode 1680 of Effectively Wild. So the real biggest war disparity in two players' final game was between Henry Aaron and replacement-level player Marvin Lane. And finally, when we were praising the Padres bullpen, I was delighting in the spelling of the first name of one of their setup men, which is spelled as if it's Bradgley, B-R-A-D-G-L-E-Y. But it is not, in fact, pronounced that way.

It's Bradglay, Bradgley-R-Glae Rodriguez. I do endeavor to get player-name pronunciations correct when I can, and I could have there. Should have known, should have checked. I think I was so taken with the idea that it was Bradgley that I just went with it. But you know what? Bradglay is just about as fun. He pitched pretty well in game two. You can support EffectivelyWild on Patreon 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, two Hanks, Sean Medina, Amy Edgar Perez, Rob LaBere, and Eric AdSetz.

Thanks to all of you. Patreon perks include access to a third unrestricted episode each week. That'll be coming up next time. Monthly bonus episodes, membership in our Discord group for patrons only. exclusive live streams, including a couple of playoff live streams in October. Shoutouts at the end of episode's potential podcast appearances, personalized messages, prioritized email answers, fan graphs memberships, and more. Check out all the offerings at patreon.com slash effectively wild.

If you are a Patreon supporter, you can contact us via the Patreon site. If not, you can email us at podcast at Fangraphs.com. Either way, you can send us your questions, comments, intro and outro themes, and anything else that strikes your fancy. You can rate, review, and subscribe to Effectively Wild on Apple Podcast. podcast, 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 posts of 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 one more episode before the end of the week. Talk to you soon. What have you done? Something's never been seen. Something factually fun. Oh, there's so much of you,

but there's so little time. So thank God for effectively wild.