DrungoHazewood

Yep, the hardest schedule in MLB goes to the worst team in the best division. Those projections are a good example of the statistical principle of how standard deviation goes up as the number of trials goes down.

As was horse racing. But they started calling Base Ball the national pastime in the 1850s, and I think it passed everything else by the turn of the century, if not earlier. At my grandma's old farmhouse there is a set of World Book Encyclopedias. The 1948 annual update volume had a decent sized writeup on baseball. The football article was mostly about college, with a few paragraphs tacked on the end about the National (Football) League. Basketball was a kind of a primitive curiosity, and pro hockey wouldn't branch out from six northeastern/Canadian cities until the mid 1960s. Back when games were two hours with four strikeouts baseball was the big thing.

I'm simply saying that the idea that ties don't have a part in baseball wasn't always the case. And it's not really even now. 106 years ago baseball was the most popular sport in the country, and it wasn't close.

One of baseball's problems is that they're very reluctant to ask hard questions. And even more reluctant to do anything to fix problems. I think it's legitimate to ask if it serves any purpose to have 17 inning games where you're basically flipping a coin to declare a winner, the game ends at 2am, and six people are still watching. I know your position is that that's baseball. My question is why? Besides "we've always done it that way", of course. I think the powers-that-be need to put more emphasis on what makes for a compelling game of baseball, and less on refusing to change anything because of tradition. And, yes, I realize that a lot of people equate compelling with however the game was played when they were kids. Unfortunately for more and more people baseball isn't something they watch(ed) as kids.

I will go to my grave holding fast to the idea that signing a 34-year-old DH to a four-year contract is a dumb thing to do. And signing injured fan favorites who's OPSing .700 as an everyday right fielder might feel good, but won't do anything to help your push to the playoffs. If I had both those choices to do over I'd make the same call.

In 2001 Cal's last game was supposed to be at Yankee Stadium. 9/11 changed that, but a friend of mine got some tickets to that game. We went, it was raining on an off all day. After 15 innings they called it, and end went in the books as a tie. I don't think anyone was walking out of the park thinking "ties are stupid enough that we need to keep playing in the pouring rain in a game that has zero impact on the standings."

In 1914 2% of all MLB games ended in ties. In the era before lights and modern groundskeeping and train travel most teams had several ties a season. I believe it was 1908 that the great three-team pennant race between the Cubs, Giants, and Pirates was impacted by the fact that the teams had (IIRC) nine ties between them.

Of course when you were a kid an average game where you sat back and enjoyed things was 45 minutes or an hour shorter than a game today. In the pre-WWII era 90-120 minutes was the expected time of a game. The famous 26-inning tie in 1920 was done in 3:50. The 2019 Red Sox played eight different nine-inning games that took longer than that. Maybe you like batters stepping out after every pitch, unlimited timeouts, eleven mound visits, every other batter with OCD batting glove adjustments, sixteen pickoff throws, 23 commercial breaks, five mid-inning pitching changes... I'd rather just watch a couple hours of baseball.

In the old days player development was not nearly so regimented. Bonus babies and teenagers would pretty routinely spend a year or two or three on the MLB bench hardly playing. Some of them went on to long, productive careers. You'd probably have a hard time showing that less of them developed than players under a more traditional progression. Since all MLB is in the same boat I'm not going to worry about this too much.

There's basically a floor for MLB winning percentage around .250. Even the 1916 A's, who literally were playing random kids from Class D ball and sandlots and stuff, they won 23% of their games. The '03 Tigers won 26% and their only real pitcher was a LOOGY. Weird things happen in small samples, but the Orioles are going to win 15-20 games out of 60 almost no matter what.

Don't you just love that continuum, that evolution over someone's career? I don't know if there are a lot of comps to that in other sports. Some, like a corner might become a safety, or a striker might eventually end up on defense. But baseball is so predictable and linear. You're a shortstop in high school, you slide over to second or third when you can't hack it at a higher level, you get older and can't throw as well and find yourself at first, and then some kid comes up and you're a DH and pinch hitter. There have to have been 5,000 guys who followed roughly that sequence. It's still odd to think of that 38-year-old DH as a kid shortstop.

In 2017 the Dodgers had a run where they went 51-9. Most years 40-45 wins is the best anyone gets out of a 60-game stretch. The 1969-71 Orioles never had a 60-game stretch better than 45-15. Even the 1890s Orioles never had a run better than 46-14. The 1906 Cubs had three streaks of 52-8 and another of 51-8-1 to end the season. The '99 Cleveland Spiders had several runs of 4-56. The '15 A's went 9-50-1. The '16 A's had a 4-56 run. The '19 Orioles' worst was 15-45, which tied the '88 Orioles start to the season.

That's an impossible task. Or nearly. Look at historical drafts. In 2014 there were seven college 1B/3B/OFers taken in the first round. Michael Conforto had a 1.000 OPS for Oregon State in '14. By '16 he was in the majors, by '17 he was a very productive MLB hitter, now has an .800+ OPS with the Mets in 2000+ PAs. Bradley Zimmer had a 1.000 OPS for San Francisco in College. He's had a few brief trials with the Indians and has a .652 OPS. Never had more than 16 homers in a minor league season. Derek Fisher didn't even really hit at UVA so not a comp. Mike Papi had a .939 at UVA, over 1.000 the year before. Never played in the majors, never had a full minor league season with an .800 OPS. Connor Joe had a 1.000 OPS for San Diego State. Is now 27, 1-for-15 in the majors, and was one of about 1000 people to OPS .900 in the PCL last year. Matt Chapman had a .910 OPS at Cal State Fullerton. Last year had an .848 OPS and 36 homers for the A's. Casey Gillespie had a 1.200 OPS for Wichita State. One or two good years in the minors but is now 27 and played last year in indy ball. So here's my projection for Kjerstad in 2025: .230 average +/- .080 .315 OBP +/- .060 .420 SLG +/- .100

In 1989 the all time Oriole record for strikeouts in a season was 125 by Boog in 1966. Four Orioles had more than that last year. I expect Kjerstad to strike out 150 times a season.

Far fewer than would have 20, 30, 40 years ago.

Wrong acronym?

Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays...

Batters are going to need something like 186 PAs to qualify for the batting title. That's less than two months of regular playing time. Richard Hidalgo once had a month where he OPS'd 1.486 (.477/.532/.953). Last March/April Cody Bellinger hit .431/.508/.890. Todd Helton had a month where he hit .476. Wade Boggs hit .485 one month. Juan Gonzales slugged .917 in July of '96. Edgar once had a month with a .560 OBP.

I don't really know how teams look at strikeouts in a world where the average MLB batter strikes out 138 times per 600 PAs.

I bet you could find at least one or two articles detailing why each and every commish was the worst in the history of the game.

I think than Manfred is a catch-all for everyone's dissatisfaction with Major League Baseball. Some want him to be the benevolent and independent overseer of the sport of Baseball. He's not anything like that. He's the owner-appointed head of the Major League Baseball corporation. There is no one person or organization looking out for the sport of baseball. Manfred is paid to represent the interests of the owners of MLB.

Or, perhaps, a general uneasiness about a paradigm where these four players could exist: Player #1: had a big year in his age 30 walk year, was signed to a $23M, 8-year deal, is now an unproductive 34-year-old making $23M, living in a 12,000 square foot mansion with a butler and a Ferrari Player #2: had a very similar year to #1's walk year, but in a pre-arb season and is making $650k Player #3: had an MVP season in AAA but won't be called up because of service time issues and is making $45k a year Player #4: was signed for $20k out of the DR, is now a good prospect, and is in low-A pulling down $12k a year and sleeps on the futon of a host family It may not be a great setup when four players of fairly similar ability have a 2000x spread in salary. In my job I've been there almost 30 years, run an organization of several hundred people with a budget of almost $100M, and have a salary about 2.5 times what a entry-level employee straight out of college makes, and just 50% more than someone with five years of experience. I have no problem with players making what they can get, but the setup that exists now bizarrely makes the case that David Price (1.8 WAR) is worth 55 times as much as Lucas Golito (5.7 WAR). It's not a free market, and it needs to be changed.

AL East, or 10-team MLB East? If the latter I'd be up for that as the new normal. One of the biggest problems with the usual division-heavy unbalanced schedule is there's only four other teams in your division. After you've been beaten down by a $200M team for the 15th time you're pretty well done with the idea. I'd love a schedule where 80% of your games are in your time zone, spread between nine other teams.

Pedroia may be a good comp as a 80th or 90th percentile outcome from Martin. But Pedroia was the 8th middle infielder taken in the 2004 draft. The day he was taken most of the teams in the majors thought that Matt Bush, Chris Nelson, Stephen Drew, Trevor Plouffe, Blake DeWitt, Reid Brignac, and Brian Bixler were better bets to have a successful career than Pedrioa. As a junior Bixler hit .453/.519/.650 at Eastern Michigan, with 31 steals in 59 games. He was the Pirates' shortstop of the future. He retired with a .518 OPS.

If you completely disagree with the solutions MLB has come up with (and I do, too, I think they're far too limited and conservative and won't really change anything) what do you propose?