Shelton

I don’t think the ability to re-sign a player once they enter free agency is much of a factor at all for modern front offices. So I agree that the decision to trade Mize had little to do with their ability to do so. I think it was just a standard value proposition. To the extent we might choose to reverse this trade today (maybe less so after the sweep, but in general when things looked even better on Friday morning) doesn’t really matter when considering the decision being made two weeks ago. I think in the case of Mize, they valued the prospect they got back substantially higher than the value of a comp pick in the next draft. And I think another big part of it is that the value of Casey Mize over two months relative to his replacement isn’t significant. I think the tigers are 3-3 in games started from the Skubal and Mize rotation spots since Skubal’s final start.

I think he puts off the treble attempt a bit longer. I think he’s focused next year on getting Paris-Roubaix added to his ledger. And then another tour. But I also think he might get a kick out of riding for Del toro in the Giro or something. We’ll see.

I would not say that because lance has a podcast that cycling has welcomed lance back. In fact, my understanding is that everyone still hates lance.

I think it’s just that game to game results include so much damn noise. Of course our team would be better if we still had them. To the extent we were unlucky in their games, we were also unlucky in others. Our run difference had outpaced our record all year. So although we lost their production relative to their replacements, we still have the built in skills elsewhere that led to that positive run differential. Maybe everyone else was also playing over their head and are due to regress negatively.

The tigers were 15-17 in Skubal-Mize starts. Of those 32 starts, only 3 were during our terrible May (all 3 Mize starts, 1-2 in those games), meaning they were 14-15 during the time when the team actually won games at a positive rate. Outside of games started by those two, the tigers are 44-43. Does this mean anything? Probably not. But I do think the loss of those two starts is not nearly as detrimental to the overall quality of this year’s team. It’s not analytical to rely on the eye test, but nothing about this current version of the team makes me think it’s a .500 team at best going forward like FG and BP will tell you. That said, playoff odds: FG 37.5 BP 28.9 Bref 54.7 FG season to date mode 61.9

Watch the play. Actually, see if you can find a clip with the camera angle high above home plate that shows all of the fielders. You will see them all (including the first and third baseman) walking slowly toward their dugout with ball still in the air anticipating the third out as the runners circle the bases. The CF then lobs the ball back in to second (not third or first to double off the obviously stupid baserunners that both forgot how many outs there were based on their rock solid memory of all of the plays from that inning). Only after the ball was lobbed in to second base did they eventually throw the ball over to Vlad. I couldn’t say at what point t they realized that the ball that was caught wasn’t actually the third out. Maybe an umpire said something as they were leaving the field and they were like “oh, right, well I guess we can just get third out here at first base”. I don’t know when it is that players start relying on the information provided to them on the scoreboards. But I don’t think comparing it to rec league is a valid comparison, because no one is saying it’s not possible to keep track when someone else is not doing it correctly you. You’re right, a lot of times the information is obscured. But that doesn’t mean it is not relied on. They would be almost foolish not to, given that is correct far more often than player recollection alone. I don’t disagree that players “should” be able to keep track without it (in most cases). If you are going to insist that they don’t actually rely on it, I’m not going to be able to convince you otherwise. But then I feel like we will need to start investigating whatever mind control powers they have at the Rogers centre that would lead that many players to all have the wrong recollection of seemingly simple facts.

I think it’s fairly common practice to award rings to guys that contributed to the season. But, tigers are not winning a ring this year. And, I doubt Skubal would want one in this scenario.

Just because every player would say on the record that they “should” know the game situation without looking at the scoreboard doesn’t change the reality that nearly every one of those players in practice is constantly looking at the scoreboard, as evidenced by a dozen players all thinking the third out had been made by the CF yesterday. You cannot possibly be suggesting that players are expected to not reference any other data source (scoreboard, teammate, coach, etc.) other than their own recollection to know the count, score, and number of outs at all times. That’s not a question, by the way. My point is where does one draw the line as to when a player should stop consulting those sources and rely on their gut. I’ll report back with my findings as soon as you report back with evidence of the COPA scoreboard having the balls and strikes wrong. And yes, I’m digging in on my position. Players rely on the scoreboard.

Are you really digging in on this? Players are supposed to be aware of the game situation and game state, and I think I would rather they use the objective data right in front of them that is accurate 99.9% of the time to know what the game state is, rather than relying on memory of the series of plays that came before. When every person of the field appears to have thought there were two outs as that play was unfolding, I think your expectation of what is expected from these players isn’t aligned with what the players themselves are taught. Seriously, you think scoreboards at the ballpark are slow to update? Those things are damn near instantaneous.

Well, the previous play (that only got one out) occurred with zero outs, obviously. But there had been men on first and second prior to the zero outs play. So maybe when they saw two outs on the scoreboard after the play, the thought was “huh, I must have missed the leadoff guy making an out three batters ago”. I really don’t think it is that hard to believe that they thought there were two outs due to the scoreboard. Just because one out was made on the play prior doesn’t mean that a second out couldn’t have happened earlier. You’re standing on the base. The inning is still alive. The scoreboard says two outs.

Yes, this is what I’m saying. The defense was misunderstanding, just like the runners. All it needed was one guy on defense to point out the situation and keep their guys on the field. How could not one guy have been aware of what happened, especially since they did go through with getting the third out? That to me implies that the defense didn’t actually understand the rule (and in that case they deserve to have the run against). If they did know the rule and the umpires assured them otherwise that it was fine to leave, then the umpires should have stepped up and fixed it.

They 100% got it correct if the defense indeed left the field on their own and didn’t get the fourth out. Yes, had he simply tagged and then crossed the plate before the runner was doubled off, the run would count. In this case, because they didn’t make a play back to third base, there was no call for the umpires to make, so it was effectively as if he had correctly tagged up.

Yeah I’m not sure I buy the “waved them off explanation”. But let’s say it did happen. The defense is standing on the field saying “we have to get the fourth out” and the umpire assures them they do not. It seems like in that case, as with other replays where players to be placed back where they should be, that the umpires should have placed the defense back in position and allowed them to complete the fourth out technicality. Much like a batter giving himself up after a dropped third, the runner from third gave himself up when he crossed home and returned to the dugout himself. If he starts scrambling and running back toward third, defense could have easily thrown back to third to get the fourth out as it was happening. if the umpires messed up in a rule interpretation they should be able to fix it in a situation like this.

Yeah, with different versions it’s a preference for which system you think is the most accurate. I don’t believe that the player projection versions like FG or BP are necessarily better, but I do understand why they do it the way they do. I just have a hard time looking at the Cleveland and Detroit ROS% (for example) and the teams side by side and believing that to be accurate. There are still subjective judgments being made as to playing time apportionment, and pecota/FG/zips since their limitations. I guess like anything else it’s best to look at everything and synthesize it however you see fit. I don’t see whatever writeup you are talking about. Send it to me on bluesky.

At the same time, these guys are frequently reminding themselves of the game situation prior to almost every pitch, so it’s understandable that a quick glance at the scoreboard to see 2 outs listed and your brain instantly flicks over to “go on any contact not in front of you.” Even when he should have known from the previous play, there is enough going on that he could have started second guessing himself and thinking he forgot an earlier out. Also, that throw in from CF wasn’t the most urgent (not that it had to be, but still). The pitcher and catcher also thought there were two outs. Of all the players involved on the field (9 fielders and three batter/runners), I do wonder how many thought in that moment that there was 1 out and how many thought there there were two. We know for sure four of them (two runners and two fielders) thought there were 2 outs. I think what this illustrates is that the players on the field are likely checking the scoreboards constantly to remind themselves of the game state. My question is why didn’t any of the fielders or the team know enough to stay on the field and get the 4th out?

Of course.

You keep two from the group of Vierling, Wenceel, Lee, and Carpenter. If it’s after September 1 you keep three.

Of course. I just do not agree that fewer people necessarily means fewer baseball fans. But I do agree that on a macro level over a long period of time, fewer people obviously means fewer consumers overall, so the various forms of entertainment that baseball is competing with will all have to figure out how they are going to maximize their share. If baseball had an actual monopoly they could of course lean on that to the detriment of consumers, but of course that is not the case in reality.

Buddha is on point in here. Although I disagree with the birth rate thing.

That’s actually really helpful in demonstrating my point. Thanks.

Can you provide an example? It doesn’t feel like this exemption, in practice, has a significant impact on the issues being argued about in the baseball world.

On the topic of the old antitrust exemption, what is Baseball doing that every other franchised sports league in this country isn’t or wasn’t also doing (from a monopolistic antitrust standpoint).

This deserves to be in the Peter Chase Files. Well done.

So, we’ve come to the point in the season where the playoff odds swings every day are going to drive me to drink, either in celebration or sorrow. I don’t make the rules. we are also at the point t where fangraphs and bref can differ somewhat significantly. Fangraphs even allows you to tweak which one of their systems to use for forecasting purposes. Anyway: Bref SRS rating projection: 42% (currently the WC3 in their projection) FG projection mode: 27% (using rest of season projections for specific players and playing time guesses) FG season-to-date mode: 50% Pick your poison I guess

What about 36-5 in a 41 game stretch?