Effectively Wild: A FanGraphs Baseball Podcast - Effectively Wild Episode 915: State of the Standings: NL Central

Episode Date: June 29, 2016

As the regular season’s midpoint approaches, Ben talks to Joe Sheehan about the state of the NL Central.

It's call of central 209, get my baby on the line. Bring me my pawn, my blackmail, and find my rider in the world somewhere. Hello and welcome to episode 915 of Effectively Wild, the daily podcast from Baseball Perspectives presented by our Patreon supporters and the Play Index at BaseballReference.com. I'm Ben Lindberg of FiveThirtyEight. My plucky co-host Sam Miller is away on vacation this week and a couple of Baseball Perspectives alumni, Rani Jazerly and Joe Sheehan, have been filling in for him. Rani is a contributor to TheRinger.com and Joe She divisions, the NL West, AL Central, and NL East. If you've missed those, you can go back and catch up or you can plunge

along. Today, it's just me and Joe and we will be talking NL Central. So I will pick up at that point in our epic discussion right now. All right, the Midpoint podcast rolls on and I am still joined by Joe Sheehan of the Joe Sheehan newsletter. And we are moving on now to the NL Central. And, of course, we touched on the Cubs a couple days ago. And you were, I think the Cubs have probably proven you right at this point that you, you know, injected a slightly conservative note when the Cubs were on pace for 130 wins or whatever it was. You pointed out that there are a lot of teams or, you know, not a lot, but it happens that teams will play at a 130 win pace over, you know, 30

games or whatever it was at the time. And you don't really notice as much if it's right in the middle of the season as you do at the start of a season. And so there was even, I think one of the teams you pointed out, maybe it was like a Brewers team or something that had not even made the playoffs or, you know, had managed to do what the Cubs had done. And maybe, you know, the underlying stats weren't as impressive as the Cubs were at the time. But record wise, at least the Cubs success was probably enhanced, burnished somewhat by the fact that it came at the start of the season. it came at the start of the season. So I think they have come back to earth at least enough to this point that they've made you look smart for injecting that slight note of caution into the

beginning of their season. But you were, I guess, as you said, kind of the low man on the Cubs coming into the year. So even so, they have exceeded your expectations. Yeah, low man on the Cubs and high man on the Pirates. And I think the second part of that's going to be where I really miss on the NL Central. They just, their run prevention's terrible. And it really wasted what could have been an excellent offense. But yeah, the Cubs, I mean, leaving aside the

analytics of it, just the dominant story, what should be the dominant story of the summer. Now that the NBA Finals are over, the Cubs should be what everybody's focusing on. So the Cubs have picked a really good time to lose five out of six. And it does close the gap. I still – the Pirates are essentially – Pirates are probably going to be in sell mode here. 13 back on Sunday morning.

I can't see them chasing the one spot. The Cardinals, because they're better positioned for the wild card, will probably continue to compete. I just – it would be unlikely to see either one of these teams put pressure on the Cubs, although the Cubs have made it a little bit more likely. I think the fascinating thing for the Cubs is just are they going to sustain this incredible run prevention, which is this odd amalgam of decent strikeout and walk rates, improved defense due to positioning, and weak. And it's still early enough. And I've been a skeptic about pitch framing, which is a relatively new thing in the sabermetric arsenal.

And I feel like we've got to be careful about assigning too much to weak contact because we just don't know yet. You know, what is a skill and what is a fluke? I mean, does it take a thousand batted balls for this to establish or a hundred? And we only have like two years of this data right now. So, and if this has been done, I apologize, but that's the main thing. I'm really kind of holding back and saying, you know, how much of this is their scale and how much of this is a pretty good run.

But regardless, even if they're not this good, if you go Arrieta, Lester, Lackey in a playoff series, you've got Rondon and Stroop at the back end. And you've got an offense that even with Hayward, not really hitting all that well has been very strong. The Cubs have enough position players playing. The Cubs have more good position players than, I was going to say the National League East, but it's probably pretty close. It's closer than you think, though. And you look at what they have coming through. I mean, they're not going to have room to play the Ian Haps and the Billy

McKinnies of the world. They might not have room to play Glaber Torres as one of the 20 best prospects in the game. So that's why I look at them. I've talked a lot about the Cubs possibly trading for Trout and all the different things they could do. Well, even if it's not for Trout, I think you'll see them make a move here to align their talent and fix that bullpen.

I don't know what to make of the run prevention either. Rob Arthur and I wrote about it for FiveThirtyEight last week and they have this historically low BABIP and it's backed up now. We can kind of, you know, whereas in the past we would have just said, well, it's random, it's variation, it's luck, whatever. Now we can kind of go a level deeper and say, well, they have allowed weaker batted balls. And, you know, facing a Cubs pitcher this year has meant that you hit the ball a couple miles per hour slower and you, you know, hit it into the ground more so than you do against other teams. And so it's I guess it's tempting to now that we have those numbers say that it's real because we can point to this other thing.

But we've just kind of gone down a different layer now. And so now we don't know whether the ability to limit contact is something that you can keep doing if you've done it this far. So, you know, they've done it for half a season and you really have to go like 10 pitchers deep on the Cubs staff to get to someone with a three ERA. are, I don't know, Trevor Cahill and people who kind of just ended up on this team last year and no one expected that they would do anything. So it's hard to point to one particular thing they are doing when they're either acquiring pitchers or telling their pitchers how to pitch. We don't know exactly what it is that has contributed to their run prevention thus far. Of course, you know, they've got a pretty good defense. They added a couple of good defenders to that. They seem to have done some work with positioning to, say, move Dexter Fowler in a different spot in the outfield. And now his defensive stats are good, whereas they've always been bad. So I'm sure they are doing some things on the margins, but I'm not sure those things are enough to make them a historically great run prevention team. But I guess the upside is that you could say, well, Jason Hayward hasn't

hit yet. Presumably he will at some point. And, you know, maybe Jorge Soler comes back. Maybe he contributes something on offense. And I don't know, you could play that game with a lot of guys on the Cubs roster who are outplaying expectations. So for every Montero who hasn't hit, there is, you know, a Tommy LaStella or a Matt Caesar who hit more than you would have expected them to. And so I don't know whether that all balances out. But as Randy mentioned, a couple podcasts ago, their underlying numbers are even stronger than the surface numbers, which are pretty strong in their own right. So there's no Cubs collapse coming. I don't know whether this is going to be a precedent-setting

historic team, but it seems like it's a team that will be plenty strong enough to remain atop this division. Yeah. And then you get into the best ofs. I think that's the interesting thing. What happens if the Cubs turn into the Braves? I don't think there's any reason to not think the Cubs are going to be a 95 to 100 win team for the rest of the decade. But we don't care about that as much as we used to. There's not as much value in that as much as we used to. I think the fascinating thing for the Cubs is going to be, okay, it's October again, and what are we going to be?

And you can't control that. I mean, I've written about, and you've actually linked to it back at Grantland, the work I've done looking at contact rate in the postseason and how important that seems to have become in determining who wins series. And you can trace that through the Giants teams. You can trace it to the Royals, even the – not the Red Sox. It was the other team. The Cardinals. The 2011 Cardinals were a very strong contact team relative to the league even and these Cubs one of the concerns the Cubs

this year were you know all these guys who came to the league last year and had huge strikeout rates you know what's going to happen to them this year but on balance those four rookies have performed reasonably well and as a team the Cubs haven't struck out as much as they did last year so you know they're better positioned to be a postseason team than they were last year when they were max strikeouts and running into the Mets. But for all the things we can point to, two things I know are true. The postseason is still basic. Random is the wrong word.

The postseason victors are determined by who plays the best over seven games, which isn't always who's the best team. And we're only going to remember the Cubs for what they do in October. That's the really crazy thing about it. The Cubs could literally average 100 wins a year for the next, for the next five years, and all that's going to matter is did they win the next 11. Knowing that, how would you approach the deadline? Because you know that this team's going to be good for the foreseeable future, and so you don't want to take away too much from the 2017, 2018, 2019 teams, but you also have this great prospect depth and players you can't even find a place for. So do you, in this case, because it's the Cubs, because of the drought, the curse,

whatever you want to call it, and just how important it is for the Cubs to win that one time, even if it does hurt you down the road, would you go out and give up some guys that normally you wouldn't say, well, I'll trade this guy for Chapman or Miller or some other good late inning arm. But in the Cubs case, you might be more willing to do that than you would be otherwise. I would for a number of reasons. One is that you don't have a whole lot of things else you can trade for. Unless you're going to make the big trade for Machado, Trout, some of the five best players in baseball, you've got a roster that really can't be improved very much on the margins.

So the one thing they desperately need is that left-handed arm in the bullpen. Clayton Richards lost, well, he went on the DL, but I think he went on the DL with a sprained DRA. Travis Wood's not that guy. He's not the guy you bring in to get Bryce Harper in the seventh inning of a 1-1 game. Miller is not just, Miller fills a lot of holes. He signed for two more years at $9 million a year, which is just pin money now.

He fits between Rondon and Stroop in a way that you can use all three of them. I'm not sure Madden will do. Madden, who was a lot more inventive with his bullpen in his early days with the Rays, has become fairly rigid in how he uses relievers. But if you were to have Miller in that mix, now you have two righties and a lefty that you can start to use the way, say, Melvin's used Doolittle and Mattson a bit this year,

which is, oh, three lefties up in the eighth, I'll use Miller. Oh, it's three righties, I'll use Rondon. He's just a perfect guy, a two-way guy, so you can lead him in for complete innings. And you're not going to have to trade Glaber Torres to get a reliever from the Yankees. I mean, you're going to have to use some of that excess, use some of that depth, but you're not going to necessarily

have to ridiculously overpay to get him. I just, there's really no better fit right now, I can think of, between a player and a team. And again, you mentioned it, maybe I don't do this if I'm running a different team in a different situation.

But when I look at the Cubs roster, I think not just what their roster looks like, but their possible path through the playoffs. The wildcard team, well, when I wrote this, it was possibly going to be the Pirates. That doesn't look as smart right now. But you've got a team like the Mets with Conforto and Granderson. You've got the Nationals in the playoff mix with Harper and Murphy. You've got the Dodgers with all their left-handed hitters.

The Giants have like six lefties in their starting lineup, which we'll see if they get pence back, that number changes. You absolutely have to have at least one power lefty in the pen if you're going to be facing these teams. So all of these things point to the Cubs overpaying if they have to. And this will sound crazy, and I'm going to say it because this will give you your soundbite people can yell at you about. Kyle Schwarber for Andrew Miller. Kyle Schwarber has no place to play. Kyle Schwarber is a first baseman or a DH. It's cute that they tried him in the outfield. He was a bad outfielder before he blew out his knee. I'm not saying he got hurt because he's not. I don't mean to like that, but he was not going to be a good outfielder. He's now not the best catcher they have because Wilson Contreras is in the major leagues. He's only ever going to be an awkward fit left fielder. And they also have like six outfielders. It seems like an overpay, but Schwarber for Miller, a player who has no value to you this year, and you're going to have to trade anyway, you might as well get the right thing for him. Right.

Yeah. I mean, maybe there's something you could get added to that package to sweeten it. So it's not just you know schwerber for a reliever however starling castro's available right sure but you'd think it might be better for schwerber in the long term to have the option of dhing at least so i don't know it might ease the pain just in that this is a really great team and even if the cubs are good for years to come it's possible that they might not never be as great in any one year. And, of course, until they win the first championship, people will be willing to give up more, I think, to get less than they would otherwise.

So it would hurt less if you did that and you won. Then I think no one would fault you, of course, if you do it. And even if you don't win, this isn't Bagwell for Anderson. Schwarber isn't Bagwell. Andrew Miller isn't Larry Anderson. Andrew Miller is going to be around for two more years. He's one of the very best relievers in the SEC. Again, I'm a couple days behind on checking stats, but he had struck out about half the guys he'd faced.

He was pushing up against the Chapman and Kimbrough numbers. This is the one guy. He was 55-3 last night. Checked his strikeout-out to walk ratio. You're not trading for Larry Anderson here. So again, I know it's extreme. And I agree with you. Maybe a Schwarber is probably too much. You make it Schwarber for Miller. And I don't know. Do you want Carlos Beltran hanging around the bench for the last two months of the season? I mean, that's one guy you get the Yankees to throw in. The Yankees don't have a lot of throw-ins. They've got really expensive guys and guys they probably wouldn't want to trade.

I'm sure if the Cubs want Chase Headley, they're welcome to. Yeah. And you mentioned Madden, and it's interesting because if this season had been your first introduction to Joe Madden, I don't know that you would think there was anything out of the ordinary about him. I think he's one of the pioneers of defensive shifting. And, of course, the Cubs are now one of the teams that shift least frequently. And he came into the year talking a lot about how he was going to use relievers more aggressively and take starters out earlier.

And that really hasn't happened at all. I think the Cubs have maybe gone deeper into games than any other team. And I guess it's just, you know, don't mess with success. It's the sort of thing that Sam and I ran into early in last season with the Stompers where we wanted to do all these creative things. And then we were winning every day without doing those creative things. So there was no impetus to do it and no one else wanted to mess with what was going on.

And you just didn't need to do those things. So I guess maybe that's what it comes down to with Madden in that they haven't really needed the Madden magic because every starter has a 2.5 ERA. Yeah, and they've been up 5-1 in the seventh all the time. So there just isn't a whole lot of reason to get tactical. He has been really aggressive with the position players. Chris Bryant played four positions over two days. There was a graphic during the Cubs- Marlins game, and I think it was the Marlins broadcast. Addison Russell was the only Cubs player who played only one position in the three games. There was another one. They used 24 of the 25 guys on the roster. Arrieta was the only guy who hadn't played. And he's gotten very, very inventive with how he uses his, well, his 12 position players at one point. I think they were carrying 13 pitchers the other day. So in that side of it, he's maintained that level of

point. I think they were carrying 13 pitchers the other day. So on that side of it, he's maintained that level of inventiveness. You gave him Zobrist and they kind of turned Javier Baez into a Zobrist starter kit and he's doing it with Bryant. So on that side, he's very inventive and creative. But other than using Rondon occasionally for more than three outs, he hasn't been like that at all with the pitching staff. And the Cardinals, of course, the Cardinals magic, the runners in scoring position magic that their pitching staff had really to almost an unprecedented degree last season hasn't continued in 2016. And so just that alone has resulted in a big step back. But they've had some players they were counting on, of course, not contribute. I mean, guys like Grichik, who looked like a breakout guy last year, has now been demoted. And Colton Wong, of course, got the big extension and

then has not built on the success and is now a center fielder all of a sudden. And so, you know, they've had some of the guys they were kind of counting on go backwards and Yadier Molina has not turned back into the great Yadier Molina. So I don't know whether there's any where you look at on this team and say, well, they're going to be much better going forward. You know, maybe if Trevor Rosenthal stops walking every other guy he faces, that would help. But for the most part, you know, some of their guys have played below expectations. Other guys have exceeded them And this kind of seems like this is maybe who the Cardinals are now

Which is a team right in the thick of wildcard contention And maybe one of the favorites for a wildcard spot Which in a down year, I guess, for St. Louis is pretty good They don't seem to have true down years And it's also a team that's hard to necessarily say, where would you go out and make changes? Because they have, Alex Reyes is probably ready to pitch in the major leagues right now. Who do you bump from the rotation? The worst pitcher by quality has been Adam Wainwright. I don't think I want to make that phone call. Michael Walker, you've been talking about guys

who haven't developed. Michael Walker is high on that list. And it just seems like he's never been the same since the shoulder problems in 2014. It's a tough roster to manage. Jamie Garcia has basically been what you'd expect from Jamie Garcia, league average starter. I don't think you want to trade Reyes. I don't think that's how you necessarily want to use him, but it's hard to figure out how do we improve this roster. Colton Wong being a center fielder essentially stemmed from Brandon Ma. They had no other place to put him.

He lost his job when Peralta came back. Well, they're not going to move Diaz, who has an 80-80 OPS. Being a center fielder essentially stemmed from Brandon Moss. They had no other place to put him. He lost his job when Peralta came back. Well, they're not going to move Diaz, who has an 80-80 OPS. And Brandon Moss is hitting, and Matt Adams is hitting. And all of a sudden, we have no room on the roster for Colton Wong. Their utility infielder was hitting 450 last I checked. Rick Garcia, kind of out of the blue, had a 450 batting average. It's been a very strange year.

But the real key for them, I used to do a lot of radio. I still do. I go on Bernie Miklas' show in St. Louis. You do radio hits in certain spots, Ben, and you get to know those teams better than you know teams in other markets. For years in St. Louis, it's been, oh, how come we don't have any power? They have 95 home runs this year. They're fourth in the league in homers, second in the league in slugging. All of a sudden, they've turned into a completely different team overnight. Last year, it was run prevention.

This year, it's we're just going to bash the heck out of the ball. By the way, I'm really trying to – Randy cursed already. And if I can curse less than Randy on a podcast, I got to get a blue ribbon or something. So I'm trying to keep it clean. Trevor Rosenthal, when was the last time we saw any pitcher have this kind of walk rate? Like relievers just don't do this anymore. It's the age of the huge strike zone. The velocity gives them an advantage. And you've got a guy with Mitch Williams' walk rate. Relievers just don't do this anymore. It's the age of the huge strike zone, and the velocity gives them an advantage. And you've got a guy with Mitch Williams'

walk rates. Very unusual. So if I had to rate, let's say there are four teams in the wildcard hunt. We'll give the Marlins a spot here. I think the Cardinals, I have the Cardinals over the Nationals because I have the Mets within the division. I would have the Cardinals first among that group just because I think I trust the offense. And they've already got a built-in replacement if one of the starters were to go down. Like if they finally decide Michael Walker really is hurt, they can plug Reyes in. And teams, you know, Ben, the bullpen being sellers in a recent newsletter with McCutcheon specifically. And I think, I mean, the only problem with the trade McCutcheon case is that it's tough to trade a guy who is hurt, right? And so you just, this seems like it might be a good time to trade McCutcheon if he were healthy. Of course, if he were healthy and playing great, it would be harder to trade him. And as it is, it seems like as long as he has this lingering finger problem

and you don't know whether, you know, the team that trades for him doesn't know whether it's going to be the old Andrew McCutcheon for the next three months or not. And so it seems like you'd be selling low. You'd have fewer people bidding for his services, right? So that kind of sinks the trade McCutcheon case, at least to some extent. Yeah, a lot of it depends on whether you think the – A, the first half is because of the injury and two, the injury will linger and that's for medical professionals to make that cause. What I would say is that if McCutcheon is a four-win player and you're getting two wins trading from the second half, that helps you. Plus you're getting an incredibly cheap four-win player for the next two years. The trading McCutcheon idea is really – it's not about finances at all.

It's entirely about baseball because – Austin Meadows is not a better player today than Andrew McCutcheon is, but there's a decent chance he'll pass McCutcheon over the next two years. You're going to end up with a situation – talk about some of these teams that can't get all their good players on the field. The Pirates might be in that situation. Marte's not going anywhere. Polanco's not going anywhere. I think it's hard, not just you talk about for the, you don't know, teams don't know what they're getting. I think it's hard because you're trading Andrew McCutcheon. McCutcheon to me is one of the

few players in baseball who actually you can make a case for having substantial value beyond wins above replacement calculations. That's a hard deal to make for you, the Pirates. But you're going to have absolutely no case for signing him in two years. He's never really gotten paid. I mean, $14 million a year is going to be the most he's made. He's going to be one of these – I know people are wincing right now, but in the context of baseball, Andrew McCutcheon's never gotten paid. He's probably going to want to maximize the dollars on his next contract.

That's not going to be you, Pirates. So you know you're going to lose him anyway. You might be a better team without him in 2018. You're certainly a better team without him in 2017 if you consider 14 extra million dollars plus whatever you get for him in trade. So if you know he's leaving, now we're just talking about timing. And I think if you do it this year, you're ripping the bandaid off in what's kind of become a lost season anyway. So there's really no cost to not having Andrew McCutcheon the rest of the year. There's lots of baseball reasons, but every time I talk about this, the reel that runs through my head is the kids in San Diego getting the ball from McCutcheon. And I just, that's a

hard guy to trade. Right. And there isn't that much else on the roster that seems all that attractive to contenders. I mean, there are guys like JSO and Liriano, and you could probably move them and you don't really hurt your core, which should be among the best. Melanson's a free agent. Several years. Yeah, right. Melanson too. I think JSO's interesting just because of the contract.

He's got another year at 4 million. That's like a free baseball player. Yeah. And JSO's a very, I mean, if He's got another year at $4 million. That's like a free baseball player. And JSO is a very – I mean if you look at what some teams are running out there at first base, JSO is a nice piece. All right. And so for the Brewers and Reds, we don't have to dwell on them at length. They will play 162 games.

They will. They've been a more successful and certainly a more entertaining team, I think, than you could expect for a team that's where they are. And spent the winter making lots of moves and moving talent out and acquiring a bunch of guys that most people probably hadn't heard of. A lot of those players have panned out and they've at least been interesting to watch. And they steal bases and they have a bunch of guys who can hit and So there's a lot to like there and as We mentioned a couple podcasts ago They have a couple more pieces Who could move and

Might move in the next month or so And you'd think that would set them A long way along the path Back toward contention which You know they haven't been as far from In what was supposed to be their needier. It hasn't been as painful, at least yet, as some of the other rebuilding slash tanking teams have. And I think they've got to maximize the value out of LaCroix and Braun. I mean,

LaCroix is 30, Braun's 32. Again, they might not ever be better than they are right now. LaCroix had the injury last year, but this has been his level. Again, you're not going to... I don't think the Brewers are going to be able to sign him for 5-80 in two years. Maybe I'm wrong about that, but I think there was an extension to be had. We probably would have heard about it by now. Braun, of course, he's signed forever, and again, this might be it. This might

be as good as it gets. You'll never get a chance to get that $60 million, $80 million off your future payrolls, and there's no reason for them not to do it. The Brewers have this problem, the Reds, the Pirates, the Cardinals. You have to build a 95-win team. That might not even be good enough, but I don't think you can realistically go out and say, we're going to build a 100-win team.

You can't just do the Royals thing where let's just be good enough for a year. See, Randy's gone. I can say that now. Let's just be good enough and fall into the playoffs one year. You can't do that in the National League Central. You absolutely have to try to build a 95-win team. Braun and LaCroix are not going to be on a 95-win Brewers team. The guys you get for them could be. Now you've got Phillips, and you've got Orlando Garcia, and you've got Josh Hader, who might work out. You've got Domingo Santana, who I'm a big fan of. And you just made the steal of the draft. I'm not a big draft guy, but them getting Corey Ray, I thought was just, I thought was a steal for them.

You start to see a team developing here. So you take these two huge assets. LaCroix should bring back a lot. Position, performance, cost. And like I say, he'll be 30. You don't want to be signing him in two years when he's 32 and he's got a million miles on his knees. Flip him now. Go out and get your Louis Brinson, who are probably for this organization, focused on pitching. But you see a Jorge Lopez coming through. There's a lot of talent. David

Stern has a lot going on here. And he can absolutely pull the trigger. But you got to get it right. You can't hold on to these guys because your owner wants you to and you can't hold on – you can't make the wrong trade. You only get one chance to trade Luke Croy. You got to get it right. Trading Braun will be a win because they can use the $80 million. But trading Luke Croy, you got to get it right from a baseball standpoint. Yeah, and I don't know if the Reds have as attractive pieces to trade. We have a long history of not talking about the Reds on this podcast. So we can probably continue that tradition. Did that start for a particular reason?

I think, I mean, when we started the podcast, the Reds were actually a good team. And so there were reasons to talk about them. But for some reason, we just didn't. And they were, where were they on your list of, you know, least interesting teams? They were very, very low, very, very close to the bottom. And so, yeah, I mean, the Reds are just, they're not a good team. They're not a particularly interesting team.

Well, I mean, eventually, you know, they're going to have to go through the full, they kind of started the partial rebuild, but as long as Joey Votto insists on not being traded, they're going to have a hard time finishing it. All right. Another division down. So we're going to stop this one here. Of course, as soon as I said that Joe Madden hadn't done anything weird for a while, We'll be right back. joeswriting at joeshian.com. Subscribe to the Joe Sheehan newsletter, which you can access for free through the all-star break by emailing sheehannewsletter at gmail.com with the subject line Sam, a special offer for Effectively Wild listeners. As I've mentioned, Sam and I both subscribe to the newsletter and we love it. You can also find Joe on Twitter at Joe underscore Sheehan. You can support this podcast on Patreon by going to patreon.com slash effectivelywild.

Five listeners who have done so already. Karina Longworth, who hosts one of my favorite podcasts. You must remember this. Fred, Angela Pereira, Michael Van Wickle, and Brendan Malone. Thank you. You can buy our book, The Only Rule Is It Has To Work, our wild experiment building a new kind of baseball team. Go to our website, theonlyruleisithastowork.com, for more information. If you've read the book already and you liked it,

please leave us a review at Amazon and Goodreads. Helps us out. You can join our Facebook group at facebook.com slash groups slash effectivelywild, and you can rate and review and subscribe to the podcast on iTunes. You can get the discounted price of $30 on a one-year subscription to the Play Index by going to baseballreference.com and using the coupon code EP when you sign up. Send us emails at podcastsatbaseballprospectus.com or by messaging us through Patreon.

Joe and I will be back tomorrow to tackle the AL West. Cause I was trouble in your ghost I may have mentioned I'm in pain Used to be enough To make every bird stop singing The way for well that does Told you no one is afraid