Effectively Wild Episode 2431: Hitters Who Podcast Together, Play Together

Summary

Effectively Wild Episode 2431: “Hitters Who Podcast Together, Play Together”

Date: January 24, 2026
Hosts: Ben Lindbergh (The Ringer) & Meg Rowley (FanGraphs)
Featured Guests: Brent Rooker (Oakland A’s) & Vinnie Pasquantino (Kansas City Royals)

---

Episode Overview

This episode opens with Ben and Meg’s deep-dive on the Mackenzie Gore trade and its implications for the Nationals, Rangers, and the broader baseball landscape. The main focus then shifts to a lively conversation with MLB hitters Brent Rooker and Vinnie Pasquantino, close friends and off-season training partners, about everything from home run parks, personal routines, clubhouse dynamics, baseball’s new challenge system, mentorship, and CBA negotiations. The pair’s banter and candor provide a fresh, player-driven perspective on the state of modern baseball.

---

1. Nationals-Rangers Mackenzie Gore Trade Breakdown

(Opening – 29:37)

Key Discussion Points

• The Nationals’ Philosophy Shift:

  • Gore’s trade to Texas signals a longer-term reboot for Washington, prioritizing a prospect package over immediate roster improvement (02:00–05:50).
  • Nationals’ struggles to develop core talent and skepticism about organizational spending continue to trouble fans.
    • Meg: “It’s really frustrating to feel like you’re starting over after having started over. … Restarts like this don’t do tend to take a while. And the fans are impatient.” (11:09)

• Comparing Rebuild Cycles and the “Jersey Guy” Concept:

  • Exploring why teams hesitate to commit to homegrown stars and the impact of continuous churn on the fanbase.
  • “Winning generates jersey guys... but I think if most fans had to choose between keeping a guy around and losing versus trading that guy and winning, then they take the winning.” — Ben (06:47)

• Prospect Package Analysis:

  • Breakdowns of Gavin Fien, Rosario Fitzgerald and others acquired from Texas; high risk, high ceiling, but distant ETA.
  • A warning to Nats fans about not overhyping Fien (“go read the reports here … Eric [Longenhagen] is the low man on Fien”). — Meg (18:02)

• Rangers’ Side:

  • Gore fills a critical mid-rotation need for Texas as they make one more push with an aging but talented core.
  • “Gore has the talent to be a top of the rotation guy … so if the Rangers are going to make another run, then good for them for trying to go for it again.” — Ben (21:00)

• White Sox Notable Signing:

  • Quick mention of Sir Anthony Dominguez signing; discussion on why rebuilding teams still invest in bullpen arms—either to flip at the deadline or stabilize the fan experience.

---

2. Guest Segment: Brent Rooker & Vinnie Pasquantino — Hitters Who Podcast (Together)

(29:37 – 98:23)

Background and Dynamic

• Guests are friends and former off-season training partners in Nashville, linked by agent and shared club facility (33:40).
• “We try to look at ourselves like entertainers too, of how can we get people engaged and actively involved in the game … You can have a good time and play baseball.” — Vinnie (35:48)

Podcast Banter & Offseason Podcast Plan

• The two nearly launched a podcast together, tabled when Vinnie’s April struggles left him “literally the worst player in baseball” (32:31).
• “So I pulled the plug on. Doesn’t mean it’ll never happen in the future.” — Vinnie (33:07)

---

A. The Changing Home Run Landscape & Ballpark Factors

• Royals’ Kauffman Stadium Wall Changes

  • Players had long advocated for smaller dimensions; Vinnie was looped into decisions, reviewed stadium PowerPoints, and predicts notable impact (36:56–38:53).
  • “Every single player … said, hey, these fences are … why is this place so big?” — Vinnie (36:56)
  • On wall changes: “Their reasoning behind it is cool … they put a lot of hard, hard work into this and it’ll be interesting to see how it goes.” — Vinnie (38:53)

• Park Factors & Mental Approach

  • Ballpark differences affect both approach and clubhouse mood; hitters defend home park advantages (“What do you want him to do? Apologize for where he plays his games?” — Vinnie, 44:00).
  • Both guests push back on “expected home runs” stat, calling it “misleading.” (45:14–45:58)

B. Training, Bat Speed, and Vision

• Both players worked on bat speed.
  • Vinnie describes balancing swing speed with mechanics, recounts his struggles in April including poor vision, resolved after getting contacts in May (52:42–57:39).
    • “There’s so many different things that can go wrong with a swing. It could quite literally be anything.”—Vinnie (56:15)
  • Brent focused on marginal bat speed gains, but also laments a graph showing bat speed “falls off a cliff” after age 31 (58:18–61:06).

C. Challenge System Rollout

• Both discuss how new challenge system may or may not suit their approach.
  • “The most excited I am for it is to watch other people do it, to see if they’re right or wrong … some sneaky drama with that.” — Vinnie (62:59)
  • Catchers’ framing still affects challenge decisions. Pitchers likely to quickly lose challenge privileges (63:56–65:17).

D. Ironman Streaks & Personal Routines

• Durability:

  • Brent played all 162 games (mostly at DH), considers it more mental than physical, gives credit to “real” position players like Pete Alonso (66:22–68:00).
  • Vinnie played 160; both joke about “iron man” podcasting (68:00–68:13).

• Favorite Road Meals:

  • Brent meticulously tracks breakfast spots, including Milwaukee’s Uncle Wolf’s Diner and Seattle’s Skillet (69:33–70:32).
  • Vinnie less adventurous, prefers Dunkin’ Donuts.

• Food Item Named After Vinnie:

  • The “Pasquich” — shaved Italian beef, provolone, bacon, hash browns, giardiniera aioli on brioche (70:56).

E. Sprint Speed, 30–30 Club, and Base Running

• Both realize their Statcast sprint speeds should entitle them to 30 steals, especially after seeing Juan Soto & Josh Naylor succeed.
  • “There is no excuse.” — Vinnie (71:41)
  • “I’ll give it a shot. I’ll run more.” — Brent (73:22)

F. Young Teammates, Mentorship, and Clubhouse Dynamics

• A’s Denzel Clark & Tyler Soderstrom:
  • Brent marvels at Clark’s defensive prowess and Soderstrom’s Gold Glove finalist campaign in left field (74:06–74:54).
• Royals’ Jack Caglianone:
  • Vinnie reflects on mentoring Jack, describing the pressures of stubborn MLB adjustments and being supportive vs. letting young players figure things out individually (76:47–79:39).

G. Long-term Extensions & Club Signals

• Both applaud recent team investments in young talent as a sign of real commitment to winning.
  • “Ownership and the front office kind of confirms that and reaffirms … we believe in the group we have … that breeds a good environment.” — Brent (80:07)
• Vinnie preparing for arbitration, noting: “At the end of the day, when April rolls around, none of it will matter. We just try to win baseball games.” (81:30–82:26)

H. The Invisible Side of Baseball

• Rich Hill in Kansas City:

  • Stories of his hyper-competitive preparation and longevity (83:00–84:04).

• CBA & Labor Issues—Communication and PR:

  • Both stress the need for facts-based, unemotional communication with fans as a new CBA and potential lockout looms (85:12–86:22).

    • “I think as players it’ll just be our job to communicate in a very objective, very level headed way.” — Brent (85:12)
    • “We have been losing [the PR] battle forever. … a lockout means that the owners have shut us out.” — Vinnie (86:22)

  • On fans calling for a free agent signing deadline: “The only reason … is so they are slightly less bored for like three weeks. And that’s literally it.” — Brent (91:00)

I. Ohtani Encounters, WBC, and Meteorology Nerd-Outs

• Vinnie v. Ohtani:

  • Ohtani’s fastest pitches are always against Vinnie; “I don’t know [why]. We’ll get to the bottom of it.” (93:49)

• Team Italy WBC Preview:

  • Details embargoed, but “gonna have some good pitching … some speed … a very left-handed lineup.” (94:38–95:09)

• Brent, Weather Twitter, and Meteorology:

  • Became an accidental “weather guy” on social media after joining meteorology debates: “I am by no means well versed or an expert on anything. … meteorology Twitter is hostile!” (96:43–97:36)

---

3. Notable Quotes & Moments

• “Players are semi fungible if your team keeps winning. Ultimately what fans want is for a team to win.” — Ben (06:47)
• “Nothing says you can’t do both [keep stars and win]. That does require some spending…” — Ben (06:52)
• “Your experience of the Nationals has been continuous also.” — Meg (11:21)
• “Our pitchers complain a lot, but that’s their own thing.” — Brent on clubhouse park dynamics (46:20)
• “There’s so many different things that can go wrong with a swing. It could quite literally be anything.” — Vinnie on bat speed and April struggles (56:15)
• “I think as players it’ll just be our job to communicate in a very objective, very level headed way…” — Brent on upcoming CBA talks (85:12)

---

4. Selected Timestamps for Key Segments

| Segment | Timestamp | |---------|-----------| | Nationals-Rangers Trade Begins | 01:41 | | “Jersey Guy” Concept | 06:26 | | Rooker & Pasquantino Guest Intro | 29:37 | | Off-season Podcast, Friendship | 33:00 | | Ballpark Factors / Wall Changes | 36:56 | | Bat Speed/Training/Contact Lenses | 52:42 | | Challenge System | 61:06 | | Ironman Streaks Routine | 66:22 | | Food & “Pasquich” | 70:56 | | Steals/sprint speed | 71:33 | | Mentoring Rookies | 76:47 | | Clubhouse impact of extensions | 80:07 | | Arbitration behind the scenes | 81:30 | | Rich Hill’s Last Ride | 83:00 | | CBA/Labor PR | 85:12 | | Signing Deadline Critique | 91:00 | | Ohtani, WBC, Weather Twitter | 93:49 |

---

5. Episode Tone & Style

• Casual, witty, and honest, with in-depth strategic insight balanced by irreverent, self-deprecating humor—true to Effectively Wild’s ethos.
• Brent & Vinnie’s rapport provides a unique “players’ perspective,” blending locker room banter with transparency on professional and labor realities.
• The hosts facilitate a conversation that is both highly informative and refreshingly humanizing about life in the majors.

---

For Listeners:

Fans interested in why teams really rebuild, the nuances of bat speed and hitting, MLB labor issues, and the personality behind player social media will find this episode indispensable. Rooker and Pasquantino’s chemistry shines, making the prospect of their own future podcast tantalizing.

---

Summary by: Effectively Wild FanGraphs Recap Bot

Transcript

[Ben Lindbergh]

If baseball were different, how different would it be? And if this thought haunts your dreams, well, stick around and see what Ben.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

And Meg have to say.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Philosophically and pedantically. It's effectively wild. Effectively wild. Hello and welcome to episode 2431 of Effectively Wild Wild, a baseball podcast from FanGraphs, presented by our Patreon supporters. I am Ben Lindbergh of the Ringer, joined by Meg Relly of fangraphs. Hello, Meg.

[Meg Relly]

Hello.

[Ben Lindbergh]

We have a couple of cool guests in store for everyone today. Brent Rooker will be back on the podcast. Brent Rooker of the A's for the third straight off season. He will be joining us for an update on Brent Rooker and the A's, but also many other subjects. And this time he will be joined for the first time by Vinnie Pasquantino of the Royals, who is also a guy that we have liked a lot from afar but never had on the show before. And he and Brent are buddies and so we have them on together and they make a great tag team. So that'll be fun. Always nice when we can have someone. We have done a meet a Major Leaguer segment about and then meet them for real in a way. Way back in episode 1875, July 15, 2022, we we met major leaguer Vinny Pasquintino and today we will meet him in person or at least on a podcast. Close enough. So that's coming up shortly, but we have one more trade to talk about, as promised. We had so many transactions to discuss last time that we did not even get around to breaking down the Mackenzie Gore trade between the Rangers and the Nationals. So let's, let's talk about that one. That's a big one. That's one that's. We've been waiting for the other shoe to drop on a Mackenzie Gore trade for years. At this point, it finally happened.

[Meg Relly]

It did and I think told us a lot. A Mackenzie Gore trade in isolation tells you a good bit and then if it is followed by other trades will tell you even more. Earlier this off season, they made a move to acquire Harry Ford from the Mariners. And that's a like, address your big league roster as it stands right now kind of a move, right? Because their catching situation was really bad. We talked all about Harry Ford is blocked by a big dumper and now we'll get big league run and seems like an obvious improvement over their existing sort of, you know, tandem. So, okay, that's about the here and now, 2026 and the immediate future. But trading Gore, particularly with the return that they got is future casting on their part. Right. Because all of the guys they got back and we can talk about the prospects in specific if we want to.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Eric Longenhagen, five player package.

[Meg Relly]

Right, Five players. As Eric Longenhagen noted when he wrote that group up for us at fan graphs, a lot of those guys are not likely to have an impact on their roster this season. In some cases because they've been injured and others because they're a little further away, just naturally in their progression. With the exception of Abimelech Ortiz, you're probably not going to know what the Nationals got out of this group for another couple of years. Which isn't to say that there aren't promising guys in here. They have a former top 100 pitching prospect. They have the Rangers first round draft pick from last year. And so there's an interesting mix of upside and risk in this group, but sort of across the board, marked by their distance from their big league impact. Gore obviously had this incredible first half of the 2025 season, really fell off in the second half. And we can talk about what that means for the Rangers, not for the.

[Ben Lindbergh]

First time either, in his right.

[Meg Relly]

And so we can talk about what that means for the Rangers. But to me, this suggests that the, the new group, the P.O. boney has sort of maybe decided that we're riding again on a rebuild. And I can appreciate the ways in which that would be incredibly frustrating to nationalist fans. Right.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah.

[Meg Relly]

Gore was sort of along with, with Abrams, like at the center of this Soto deal. Right. Let's launch into this new era of, of contention and it just has not borne fruit yet. And you know, they still have Abrams on the roster. He still has a couple of years of team control left. But if you're moving Gore, you have to wonder like, how long is C.J. abrams for this group? Not that they have to rush to, to move him, just given how much team control he comes with. Are they really punting on this window? And the answer to that increasingly seems like it might be yes, but partially driven perhaps by a lack of confidence on the front office's part that they're going to be able to retain those guys via extensions or in free agency. So that piece of it is like kind of a bummer because when you have a new group come in, one that seems like it is standing in marked contrast with the Rizzo era in terms of like the tenure, the approach, the pedigree, the analytics bend, you know, it's all these young guys that isn't to say that they can't put a positive imprint on the organization. But I think that we are still maybe butting up against will this group be able to persuade the existing ownership to spend money on the team? And this might be one sort of negative indicator.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah, I was thinking about that too, in relation to other trades that we've talked about recently. The Marlins shipping out pitchers and just perpetually rebuilding and then the brewers shipping out Freddie Peralta. Obviously different sort of situation because the brewers have been so successful. But they do also ship guys out in many cases and keep their eye on the future. And it has largely worked out for them, even if there is some cost to that. Because we have talked before about the idea of the jersey guy. Just the guy that you can buy his jersey and count on him being around and being a favorite, as opposed.

[Meg Relly]

To the jersey guy, who is what Jersey boys grow up into.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Exact. And there is value to the jersey guy. I think there's also just a lot of value to winning. And I think winning Trump's jersey guy, if you had to choose one or the other, just because I think winning generates Jersey guys.

[Meg Relly]

Right.

[Ben Lindbergh]

And, and that ultimately fans are fickle, players are semi fungible if your team keeps winning. And ultimately what fans want is for a team to win. And I'm not saying there's no, no difference in the fan experience based on how that team wins. And, and it can be super rewarding to see a guy come up and, and be promoted from within and, and improve and develop and just stay around and spend a whole career. I mean, that's, that's a, a core pillar of why we watch sports and enjoy sports. But I think if most fans had to choose between keeping a guy around and, and losing versus trading that guy and winning, then they, they take the winning. There's nothing that says that you can't do both in theory. Why not both? And that does require some spending, usually because to keep that guy around, you do have to invest in them long term. And there are some teams that have a little less willingness to do that, shall we say? So I put this in a slightly different category than say, the Marlins, where it's just, okay, they might have a plan, maybe they really are building towards something. But it's just, it's hard to trust that given their track record, because this is what they have always done. The other thing, though, is that the Marlins were kind of in contention this past year. You know, they weren't a great team. But, but they seem close. Ish. And so that Made me sort of side eye them a little bit. I know they have pitching depth. They're trying to improve the other side of the ball. Okay, again, maybe it's not just about saving money, but they're close enough that if you're subtracting from your current roster, well, there is a cost to that. And with the brewers, even though this has worked out for them long term, you know they're going to be in a tight division race again, in theory. They have never won a World Series. Like they could use Freddie Peralta this year. So there's an aspect to it that's kind of frustrating, especially when reports come out about how they're concerned about the payroll. If it were just that, they think, oh, we're selling high on Freddie Peralta and he only has a year left and this will benefit us in the long term, that's one thing. But if it is at least partially about payroll constraints, self imposed payroll constraints, then that changes the tenor of it. With Nationals, I agree it's got to be frustrating because this is one of the proceeds of the Juan Soto trade. Mackenzie core. This is one of the guys you got back. That was supposed to be the trade that launched your foundation, helped you build a winner. And that trade could not have worked out any better for the Nationals. They got all these guys back. They got James Wood, they got Abrams, they got Gore. And yet they have been both unable to develop enough players to surround those guys with a complimentary core and also unwilling to invest in the roster. And, you know, I've made some allowance for that because, A, they did sort of get screwed over by winning the World Series in 2019 and then having zero attendance the next year. You know, not getting to take the victory lap, not getting the revenue boost that comes after winning a World Series. That's a setback for sure and partly helps explain why they have suffered a pretty steep descent since then for a World Series winner. So, okay, make some special dispensation there. But they've been so bad since then, like, only the Rockies have have lost more games, I believe, and their payrolls have been low. And if your payrolls fall for a while because you are in a rebuilding phase, okay, you know, I get it, right, because there's only so much marginal value, I guess, to like, you know, adding some free agents when you're kind of in the down cycle. But then if you're just stuck in that down cycle for a really long time and your ownership is cheap and hasn't invested in infrastructure and isn't probably. Or at least you can't believe that they're just saying, well, we're saving some money while we're bad and we'll certainly splurge when we get good again. I don't know why anyone would really believe that that's the case with the Nationals. The mass and stuff is. Is behind them now for a while that was part of the explanation or the excuse. And so, yeah, it's really frustrating to feel like you're starting over after having started over. That's. I don't know. It's kind of like I'm trying to liken this to. It's like when the Tigers were rebuilding and then they sort of restarted their rebuild. Now, you know, maybe that's a positive comp for the Nationals because the Tigers got good again after the second start of a rebuild pretty quickly.

[Meg Relly]

And it's tricky because if you're a fan, you have a fairly consistent or at least continuous experience of the team that you root for.

[Brent Rooker]

Right?

[Meg Relly]

You're a Nationals fan. You were there when they were struggling. You were there for Harper. You were there for the World Series when you were there for the, the downturn, for the trade of. So right. You've been there the whole time. Paul Taboni hasn't been right. And that group hasn't been. And I, I do think that, like, they deserve an opportunity to demonstrate that they know what they're doing and that they can make smart baseball moves and that they can improve process and sort of rectify some of the development deficiencies that have plagued the Nationals for years. Now they're brand new to this. They get a chance. But their understanding of what they both are able to do with the mandate they have from ownership and, and want to do to bring the next good nationals team to D.C. that's happening on a brand new timeline for them that is fresh. It's not fresh for the fans. You know, they, they're sitting there going, oh, here we go again. You know, I think that these transition points and franchises can be really uncomfortable for everyone involved because the decisions that are being made about guys aren't necessarily wrong. And I want to be clear. I don't know. There's a lot of work where Flyer is too strong for this return. But you know, there are a lot of guys, like I said, who are farther away from being able to contribute on the field in D.C. this wasn't a package for. For big leaguer. So I don't know if they're going to help or not. We're going to learn about what the front office is good at. Are they good at identifying talent? We also, I think, should keep in mind, you know, as it pertains to Gore in particular, that like, Gore is a Boris guy. The odds that he was going to sign a pre free agency extension were low to begin with, and it doesn't seem like there was a lot of like, love loss between him and last regime. And that stuff carries over into your relationship with the front office, even when it's new folks. Because if you're Mackenzie Gore, hey, guess what? Your experience of the Nationals has been continuous also, right? Well, I mean, first it was with a couple of other teams, but, you know, like, so these, these can be sort of fraught and uncomfortable and tense situations. And it's hard because restarts like this don't do tend to take a while. And judging how good this group is at finding its way toward a competitive roster is going to take a while. And the fans are impatient. And the really uncomfortable part of it, if you're not someone who's like, employed by the team, but someone who just wants to buy a jersey and sit in the sun and watch a good club, is that this one isn't guaranteed to work out either. Right. And you might just find yourself right back where you were with a new pobo and nothing to show for it, you know, So I. It's just kind of an uncomfortable, tense thing. I think in a vacuum, taking a sort of diverse acquisition approach, where you are bringing in guys who are either big leaguers now or near ready big leaguers, and. And a volume approach of promising guys with ceiling, but also guys who might not be ready right now. Like, I think in general that's a sound strategy. You have to pick the right guys, obviously, but like having two threads going at once, two paths going at once, I think is. Is good. This is a firm system that needs reinforcement. Right. So, you know, I don't think that in a vacuum, it's. It's like a bad approach. And I don't think Taboni has said anything that makes me think he's like bristling at this or, you know, taking is on the defensive about it, but it just takes time to build trust in that. Right. And they haven't. They haven't earned that yet. They're trying to. And I think that when you look at the personnel moves they've made away from the field, it makes sense. Like, I can see the logic in it and think that, like, having fresh perspectives and new folks in there was necessary given kind of how the organization had stayed stagnated, but we just don't know yet, you know?

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah. So. Yeah. And for Nats fans, I. It's not like this trade changed their understanding of the organization's direction, probably. This was kind of clearly coming. Maybe, you know, it's like it wasn't working. The rebuild stalled, hence Rizzo's dismissal and all of the rumors that have surrounded Gore for months, years, et cetera. So maybe this is just a rip the band aid off. It finally happened. It's still upsetting, I'm sure, but not unanticipated. Plus, plus, they do still have a jersey guy in James Wood and, you know. Yeah, the package they got back. And people can read Eric's take if they want all the details, but I guess the. The highest profile guy is the Rangers first rounder from last year. Right. Gavin Fine, who's not yet 19 years old. I think it's Fien.

[Meg Relly]

Yeah, I think it's Fien.

[Ben Lindbergh]

It may very well be. And I don't know because he's not even 19 yet. And I won't need to know how to say his name for years, even if everything works out. So he's a shortstop. He was the 12th overall pick. Yeah. But. Yeah, like, none of these guys is. Is a high ceiling sort, according to Eric's projections. Right.

[Meg Relly]

Well, I think that there's. I think they're ceiling, but there's a good bit of risk.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah.

[Meg Relly]

Right. Like these guys have, you know, particularly the. The fiend Rosario Fitzgerald, which everyone. You're just going to have to get used to it. It's Fitzgerald.

[Ben Lindbergh]

I know that's. It's not Fitzgerald. It's. It's so cool. Yeah.

[Meg Relly]

Names are cool, man. There's so many different ones, you know? Like, it's great how many different. How many different human names there are. I'm getting my weird out now because I was trying to be, like, really normal when we were talking to Brent Worker and Vinny Pascoentino. Because, like, Vinnie doesn't know us yet. And I. I'm convinced that Brent forgets how weird we are, like, because we space out the conversations far enough apart that he's not like the haunted pool people. Eh. I don't know if I need to talk to them again.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah. I wonder if he warned Vinny. But you were. You were restrained. You didn't get too deep into Italian heritage with. With.

[Meg Relly]

I don't know him. You know, I don't.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Maybe next time.

[Meg Relly]

Maybe. But, like, what am I going to be? Like, how Italian Are you like?

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yes.

[Meg Relly]

Relax, lady.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Do it.

[Meg Relly]

Gravy or sauce? Gravy or sauce? Anyway, I want to. I want to, like, give a warning to Nats fans if you haven't yet read Eric. He is the low man on Fiend. So, like, and he has good reasons and also acknowledges the potential ways he could outperform his expectations. But, like, he just be forewarned. He's like, he's the little guy on phenom.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Doesn't think he's a phenom.

[Meg Relly]

Phenom phenomenon. I think it's Fiend. All of that to say, go read the reports here. Like, Rosario was so dynamic and interesting and then got hurt and clearly needed tj. And then there was a very long layoff. He got hurt, you know, sometime after the 2024 season. His. His elbow injury was announced in spring training, although the timeline of it was left vague. And then he. He has not yet had tj. So he's going to miss a great deal of time. You won't see Rosario in 2026, probably not till late into 2027. So it's just, you know, there's. There's stuff kind of attendant with each of these guys that could give you a pause. We'll just see where they. And then. And then there's Ortiz being on the big league roster at some point this year, either at first base or. Or in the outfield somewhere. So, you know, there's him. You might see Abby Melek, another great name.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah. As for the Rangers side of things, things have not gone great for the Rangers since they won the World Series either. And they had a losing season in 2024, they were.500 in 2025. And if they wanted to make at minimum one more run at this thing with this core, then Mackenzie core, kind of what they need. Or. Or some sort of Mackenzie Gore, like.

[Meg Relly]

Player version of Mackenzie Gore. And which one?

[Ben Lindbergh]

Preferably the good early season version.

[Meg Relly]

Right.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah, it is. It is strange. And. And other. Ben documented this in his blog post. It's not just that his numbers have tanked later in the season, but also his stuff has tanked. And so I don't know why it's.

[Meg Relly]

Kind of perplexing, this man in the gym.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Maybe. Maybe it's that I remember writing years ago about Chris Sale and how he had a pattern of breaking down later in or wearing down. And with Sale, everyone assumed, well, he's so skinny, of course, you know, like he just. Just lost strength or something. I don't know what the answer is for Gore and You know, it could just be random or something but I'm sure that he and, and the Rangers will be thinking and talking about that because if he could sustain. It's almost like we talked about with Kyle Tucker who's had kind of a tale of two seasons in each of the past two seasons.

[Meg Relly]

Right?

[Ben Lindbergh]

So has Gore. If he could be that first half guy for the full season then he would be probably one of the most valuable pitchers in baseball. So that's what the Rangers hope for. But whatever they get out of him, they really did need some security there because you have DeGrom and Evaldi the top of that rotation and those guys are pretty good. They're not as good as they once were. But also if those are your most dependable pillars of the rotation, Jacob deGrom and, and Nathan Valdi at their ages with their track records inj wise that's not ideal. And so having Gore in there to be kind of the, the mid rotation bridge to the Vandy boys and, and whoever else. Jacob Latz, Cody Bradford, you know, it looks a lot better than it did before both in terms of talent and, and depth. I was hoping that the Vandy boys would be better last year than they were. Lighter was pretty good. I was disappointed that that rocker because I was excited about him the previous season when he came up and looked good for a while. So it'd be nice if, if those guys would be good too. But just to have someone who's a little younger. Gore has not yet turned 27 and again he has the talent to be a top of the rotation guy. So if the Rangers are going to make another run with a pretty old core then I guess good for them for trying to go for it again.

[Meg Relly]

But a pretty young Gore.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Oh yes, it's true.

[Meg Relly]

Good one is a good one. I don't know.

[Ben Lindbergh]

It's better than phenom I think so I'll give you that.

[Meg Relly]

I think it's fiend.

[Ben Lindbergh]

I hope so. That's the only way that that play on words works. But it wasn't that great to begin with.

[Meg Relly]

I am just fascinated because I do think that, you know, the Rangers have shown some capacity to help pitchers get better. Rosario is a good example of that. You know he ended up blowing out so you know there's that. But he, he was very bad in college and then he got to Texas and they totally changed him and, and changed his slot and then he ended up being a top 100 prospect before he blew out. So they might be able to. To do Some work with Gore that puts him in a position to be better. He also doesn't have to be un. You know, barring injury, he doesn't have to be the number one in that rotation. So maybe that helps a little too. Like you take some of the pressure off, but I don't know. He's fascinating. It's on some level, not surprising to me that the return that the Nationals got had the sort of shape it did, because I think there's a reasonable argument to say that, like, you don't fully know what you're getting with Gore.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah, I mean, this was a rotation that needed an emergency, Patrick Corbin last season, and they actually turned out to really rely on him. So. Yeah, it's been so perplexing. The Rangers just their offensive decline post World Series, that was just such a stacked lineup and it was just never the same after that. And some of the younger guys getting hurt, not panning out, but I'd like to see them make one more go at it. I don't know if you as a Mariners fan feel exactly that way from your fan perspective, but this makes it a little more feasible for them to give. Give the Astros and the Mariners a run for their.

[Meg Relly]

I still think that they have limitations in their, in their lineup to contend with there. There are some question marks there too, but yeah, I mean, like, look, your team's. Your. Your favorite team has to be able to play against good teams to, to win. So, you know, trying to make the whole division the AL Central doesn't seem particularly feasible to me.

[Ben Lindbergh]

And Gore, of course, has a second season after this one, still under team control before he reaches free agency. So it's not a. A one year rental a la Peralta. Okay. The only other transaction I wanted to touch on briefly is the White Sox signing Sir Anthony Dominguez to a two year, $20 million deal. Not as much to say about this, not as much import to it, but I thought it was kind of interesting because this feels like a move that, that you might make to polish off a contending team. Sort of like I always wonder about that with a team that's not great, but is making bullpen moves. And, and the White Sox have done that. They signed Sean Newcomb, they signed Sir Anthony Dominguez. They've been fairly active this offseason. Obviously they traded Luis Robert, but, you know, they brought in Anthony K. They brought in Munetaka Murakami. We've talked a fair amount about the White Sox kind of maybe turning the corner and looking promising and rebounding from bottoming out, but also having some pretty compelling young players. And I always just think, like, if you're not expecting to make the playoffs, then what value is there to you of shoring up the back of your bullpen, getting kind of a closer type? And I'm not saying there isn't any. And, and maybe from a spectator perspective, there is, because the White Sox Last year by War at Fangraphs, they had the 12th best bullpen middle of the pack, but they were dead last by bullpen win probability added. And so it was frustrating. Like, the bullpen was. Was blowing a lot of games, you know, they didn't have that many to begin with, I guess. And so you could just say, you know, what's the point? If you're in the White Sox situation where you're getting better, but you're not really good yet, in the short term, why sign Sir Anthony and Newcomb? How does that help you? Of course, there's always the option of flipping one of those guys at the deadline, which I guess is open to the Rangers, too, with Gore. Right. Because, you know, if things don't go great for the Rangers this season, first half trade deadline, he could find himself back on the block again, which I'd feel bad for him because he's just been constantly a trade candidate for his entire career, essentially. It'd be nice if he could sort of stay in one place. I guess he'll get to pick his future employer soon enough. Yeah, but. But yeah, with the White Sox, I wonder if it's kind of a play to just, you know, stock up on some trade chips you could flip at the deadline or if it is about. Well, we might not be great. But you know what, it's one of the most frustrating fan experiences to lose a lot late and blow whatever leads you do manage to generate. And so our team has been through a lot. Our fans have been through a lot. Let's at least try to protect some leads and lock down some wins. So I don't know which is more the motivation. Maybe it's a bit of both.

[Meg Relly]

It's hard to not tie it directly to having moved Luis Robert Jr.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Right.

[Meg Relly]

Because it's the same amount of money.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yes.

[Meg Relly]

That he was going to make. And so it does kind of feel like a one for one salary swap, which I don't know, is totally fair to them. But it's like, is this how you're reallocating this money? I mean, I guess the thing about it is that he's not the pitcher he was at Sort of his peak with the Phillies, but he's still useful. I don't know that he's the. And he was sort of the best remaining free agent bullpen arm who you could have confidence was going to throw meaningful innings. Right. Like, I think like, Kopeck's better on pure talent, but like, how many innings is Michael Kopeck gonna throw in? 20, 26? I have no idea. And if you just feel like you need a stopper back there, okay. But he's also kind of fallen down the bullpen hierarchy of every team he's been traded to. And so is he really gonna be the guy that like, nets you a meaningful prospect at the deadline if you're bad and he's good and you're looking to offload him? So that part of it I'm like, not that sure of. But also, it's 2 years and 20 million total. Right? So it's like it's $10 million. How does that matter?

[Ben Lindbergh]

Okay, well, let's get to a couple of good sluggers and a couple of good yakkers. Let's take a quick break and we'll be right back with Brent Rooker and Vinnie Pasquino.

[Brent Rooker]

Effectively wild. I want to learn about new statistics. I want to hear about none of RBI yet. Tell me about some prospect I should know about.

[Ben Lindbergh]

We're joined now by a man who is passionate about breakfast and another man whose nickname, well, one of his nicknames is Italian Breakfast. The former is a two time all star despite somehow not making the team in his best season. And until today, a two time effectively wild guest. It's time to complete the trilogy. It's the return of the Rooker. Brent Rooker of the A's is here for the third time. Welcome back, Brent.

[Brent Rooker]

Good to be here, guys. Always, always a pleasure to catch up and talk some stuff. So I'm excited to do it.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah. Somehow we haven't driven you away yet. It's amazing. And making his EW debut a guy we haven't previously talked to, but have previously talked about. In fact, back on episode 1988, in March of 2023, this guest was dubbed by Meg Riley as, quote, maybe the most charming man in baseball. Maybe.

[Brent Rooker]

Wow.

[Ben Lindbergh]

We'll find out. Yeah, we'll find out.

[Brent Rooker]

That's.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

What a nice thing to say.

[Ben Lindbergh]

She hedged a little, you know, she'll. She'll reach a conclusion after this conversation. Maybe. And no, no shots at how charming Brent is either. He is also the 2024 major league leader in sacrifice flies. That just speaks to his character and his selflessness, he is Vinnie Pasquantino of the Royals. Welcome, Vinnie.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Thank you for having me. Excited to be here with Brent, who. Wow. I've got some making up to do when it comes to getting on this show then.

[Brent Rooker]

What were your sack numbers this year? Did they go down? Were you more selfish this year?

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

I was way more selfish this year. I think I had three, maybe.

[Brent Rooker]

Oh, my goodness.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

I knew going into the year I needed. I need to average, like, 10 over the next 10 years to, like, break the record. So that's kind of my career goal is sac fly record.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah, you had five, actually. Don't sell yourself short.

[Brent Rooker]

How many of those sac flies are homers now with the fence is moving?

[Ben Lindbergh]

That's the thing. Well, right already, though. I mean, last year he hit 19 homers, so he had to drive some other guys in. Now he just drives himself in because he hit 32 bums last year.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

So I was trying to be more like Brent.

[Brent Rooker]

Yeah, you were actually better version of me than me, so good job.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Hey, you said it. You said it.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Well, you can already hear the banter back and forth between these two, the repartee. It sounds like they're naturals for a podcast. And in fact, Vinnie, earlier this month, when Brent was ragging on you on Twitter about how the fence changes at Coffman could cut down on your triples hitting potential, someone tweeted that you two would be great together on a podcast. And, Vinnie, you responded, if I wasn't literally the worst player in baseball in April, we would have one. So first of all, in your defense, by fan graphs, war, you were only the second worst player in baseball in April. Thank you, Andrew Vaughn. Andrew Vaughn was last. And. And look how his season.

[Brent Rooker]

Both you guys, real turnarounds there. Look at that.

[Ben Lindbergh]

But take me through this. So were there. Are there plans for an actual Pasquintino Rooker podcast?

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

There was a show that had been created, and we hadn't come out with a first release date yet. And when I was sucking so bad, I just was like, I think this is probably a bad idea for me. Hard to. Hard to talk every two weeks about the state of baseball when you're actively making the game of baseball worse. So it was totally my decision. Brent is way more mentally tough than me. I don't know what. How he was doing at that time of the year.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Like, I don't remember now, but better than you, obviously. Way better.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Yeah, that's for sure. You can say that about 99% of the league, but, yeah, So I pulled the plug on. Doesn't mean it'll never happen in the future. It just means it's not currently happening.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Well, you guys are always welcome on Effectively Wild if you just want to join our little platform here. But I. I hope that happens at some point and hope that you get off to a stronger start. Yeah, I hope so too.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

I'm trying to figure that little number out.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Well, well, tell us a little bit about your history. You have the same agent, the same representation, but. But do you guys go back a bit? How do you know each other then?

[Brent Rooker]

What year did you move to Nashville?

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

2019.

[Brent Rooker]

Yeah, so we worked out together in the off seasons. 2019, 2020. All the COVID shutdown, all this stuff. We worked out and hit together from a. So from a safe distance, of course. We, we followed all the rules and then all always wore masks and kept our distance from each other during our workouts and our hitting sessions. And then 2021 also. And I guess 2022. Two, right. Yeah. Because I moved back home summer of 2022 so there were four off seasons there. We did all of our off season training, lifting, hitting and all that stuff together. So that's kind of we. When we became tight and became friends and started our current. The current version of our relationship.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Wow.

[Ben Lindbergh]

And. And your agent just match made you at that point point or is that how you got together the first time or you were just in the area.

[Brent Rooker]

Together so like you can jump in there. But our agency, like kind of what sets them apart or one of the things it does is they have like a, they have like a training facility for. In Nashville for all their guys that live locally. So we all have a place to kind of work out and train together, which creates a cool environment and a cool dynamic to have a group of guys that you know you're going into the off season to. To work out and train with. And I was there for a think five years and then we started having kids and moved back home to Memphis where me and my wife's parents both are just close to be closer to family with the kids and stuff. So we left. But I was still there for a good four or five years taking advantage of that.

[Ben Lindbergh]

And why do you guys get along so well?

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Because we're both hilarious. I think that's definitely number one. I think, I think we view things very similar when it comes to baseball and social media and the way I think we have similar ideas on how the game should be promoted and viewed. And it's in a less serious not that we don't take it serious, but it's in a self deprecating, like, hey, you actually can have a good time and play baseball. Because I think forever baseball was always the sport that was more like, hey, I'm a sportsman, I go play.

[Ben Lindbergh]

That's it.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

I, I show up, I do my job, I go home. And I think Britain and I more look at it from a. Again, we take our job super seriously. Like, it's really the only thing I care about. But we try to look at ourselves like entertainers too, of how can we get people engaged and actively involved in the game of baseball instead of just, hey, we're gonna, we're gonna stay quiet, we're gonna show up, we're gonna do our job, we're gonna go home. And that's a perfectly fine way to do things. I think we just try to have a little bit more fun than that of like, hey, this can be fun and we can take it seriously at the same time.

[Meg Relly]

Well, this might be a kind of awkward transition away from that. But, you know, one thing that's fun is home runs. And one thing you might do more of this season is hit them. Not that you have struggled in years past, but I'm curious about the wall changes at Kaufman and more precisely, the process by which players were sort of informed or involved in that decision. Like, did you wake up one morning and you saw, huh, the walls are going to be shorter in some spots and closer in. Or were you guys in conversation with the front office about those are maybe a little too far away?

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Well, I think every single player that had played for the Royals forever had said, hey, these fences are like, why is this place so big? Right? So. And you know, Brent, Brent had a, had a lifespan with the Royals. I'm sure he thought, he thought the same thing.

[Brent Rooker]

I think I hit, I think I hit a. Like, my only hit with the Royals, I think was a double, like off the base of the wall. So maybe if the fences were shorter at that point, I might still be a royal.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Was that the day that we were wearing the red uniforms?

[Brent Rooker]

Yeah, we got beat like 40 to 1 by the Dodgers. But I did get two hits.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

I remember that. So I think it was one of those things where, where every, every single person had complained. So. And it wasn't even a complaint anymore. It was just. You're talking about it. Whenever former players would come back, you'd bond over how far the fences are. It was one of those things where I think about in August of last year, I Was kind of informed that this was being looked into. It doesn't mean it's going to happen, but what would you think about it? And obviously my initial reaction is yeah, yeah, I'm in. So then it, then it kind of came, well, this is what we're thinking. This is how it might get done. We don't know if it's going to get done. And then we got a text a few weeks ago, it was like titled Stadium. We have a zoom call on this day. We want everybody to be on it. We're letting you know of something happening. And that's when I was like, okay, well this is 100% what it is. So I, I actually had somebody text me and say that there is construction crews at the fence probably a few days before that. So I had been tipped off that something was happening. So it's, you know, it's, it's definitely interesting and I think their reasoning behind it is cool. They have an entire, they had an entire PowerPoint showing us why they're doing it, how it affects us, who it could affect individually, how it affects the pitchers, different things like that. So they put a lot of hard, hard, you know, work into this and it'll be interesting to see how it goes.

[Ben Lindbergh]

The interesting thing is that yeah, the walls are, are deep, the outfield is big. But it's not an extreme pitchers park overall. It's, it's if anything maybe slightly a hitters park just because it, it has historically increased other types of extra base hits. Plus there is the reputed advantage of the batter's eye out there. Right. Because Kaufman has the, the best strikeout factor. If you look at the park factors on baseball savant it' where you know, the pitches don't move very much and then it's, it's Kaufman really number one. So I'm, I'm curious if you think that that reputation of that hitter's eye, that hitter's background is deserved. Is it really easier to make contact there? And then do you think that the other aspects of how the park plays up for hitters balanced out the difficulty of getting the ball over the fence or is it the sort of thing where that would get you out of whack because you'd be trying to swing for the faraway fences and then that could sort of screw you up in other ways?

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Well, so I'll answer the last part of the question first. I, I think there's a few different ways it could go. You could try to hit too many homers and you hit a bunch of Fly balls, you get out, whatever. Or it could go the other way where it's, hey, I'm not trying to hit homers. Maybe you hit more singles. I. I think there's a whole bunch of things that can go through your head at any given time at the plate to address the batter's eye. I think think it is a great batter's eye. It's massive. The scoreboard is very tall, so you're not. You're not really seeing the scoreboard. You're just seeing the batter's eye, which is great. But I. I think sometimes too, and I don't know, in terms of the park factor, in terms of strikeouts, like, I don't know what it's looking at because I just. I don't. I don't have the knowledge of it.

[Ben Lindbergh]

But, yeah, I think it's just. It's like comparing performance there versus performance elsewhere.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

I know that it's like, in relation to the rest of the league at their other parks, but. But the Royals have always historically been a team that looks for guys that don't strike out a whole lot. So is that an organization decision that is now affecting the park factor, or is it the ballpark that's doing it? Because from my knowledge, at least, park factor has to do with what actually happens at the stadium over the past three years. Right?

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah, you could look over any span, but, yeah, it's often three years. And in theory, it should kind of account for the makeup of the players playing there, because it's comparing the same players performance there and elsewhere across the.

[Meg Relly]

Rest of the league.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah, that's the idea. Anyway, it. There could be something it's not capturing.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Yeah, so. So I don't know. It could, like. I. I think it's a great place to see. You know, Brent could talk about it too, because he's now played there. Like, he hasn't played there as much as I have, so probably an easier question for him to answer as far.

[Brent Rooker]

As, like, batter's eye stuff and visibility. I think, yeah, I think it's good. I do think they're. I mean, with every. Y' all have. There's.

[Ben Lindbergh]

There's some.

[Brent Rooker]

There's some decently bad shadows at times during the summer, though. But I mean, that exists. That exists everywhere. I think it's interesting, like you asked the question is, like, moving the fences in, going to cause guys to try to hit more homers and maybe have an inverse effect. And I thought it was interesting this year for my. The first thing I thought of was, like, personal experience. I went from the Coliseum being obviously a very pitcher friendly place to Sacramento being very hitter friendly and my strikeout rate went down like six and a half percent, which I thought was kind of interesting and kind of the opposite of what would be the easily predictable thing. And I don't know what the reasoning behind that was, but that's kind of the first thing that popped into my head when you brought that point up.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah, I was going to ask about that because when we had you on last offseason we asked you how you thought Sutter would play and you said you thought it would be a hitter's park but that you didn't think it would be anything extreme. You didn't think it would be top five. According to fangraphs, it was fifth, the fifth best hitters park. According to Baseball Savant it was the second best. So I'm assuming it, it played a little more offense friendly than you thought.

[Brent Rooker]

Yeah, it did. It for sure did. Especially down the line and left. It stands out a lot. Right field, I don't know if I don't know what the exact numbers are. Right field felt kind of normal. It was pretty wind dependent too because there were some days where the wind was blowing out anything that got up in the air was going to go. But there were also some days, days much or more specifically early in the year where the wind was blowing in and like it was a graveyard. So it, it's definitely a hitter's park in terms of the home run factor more than just like a big outfield or allowing a lot more hits. But yeah, it turned out to be a very good place to hit.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

I'll say that one thing that I find super interesting about this conversation in general and Brent, I'm not saying you did this, but baseball is, is very funny because there are some guys that play in hitters ballparks. There are some guys that don't play in hitters ballparks. And if you are a person who does play in a hitters ballpark, you almost have no choice but to get defensive when talking about your ballpark because people are like say you're a left handed hitter at Yankee Stadium, like Bellinger for example. I think he had way better numbers at home right Than he did on the road. What do you want him to. I'm not saying. You guys are saying what do you.

[Brent Rooker]

Want him to do?

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Apologize for where he plays his games. Like hey, if next year I hit 40 home runs and I was supposed to hit 25 home runs according to the expected stats, I'M going to take those points of OPS and I'm going to be so happy. Whereas like for my career in terms of home runs, I've always underperformed home runs. I'd rather over perform. Everybody would rather over perform. So I always think it's such an interesting conversation because the guys that play in more hitters ballparks, which you know, according to the numbers I play in one of those. I would disagree, but I get why it is that. But I think it's such a funny conversation because we work out with Brandon Lau who played in Steinbrenner this year and he is convinced it was a pitcher's ballpark.

[Brent Rooker]

Convinced. Ridiculous.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

It's ridiculous. He hit a homer this year year and slammed his bat on the ground and the ball went out.

[Brent Rooker]

I think I saw like 10 different videos of Yandy hitting balls like 87 to right field that were homers.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Because guys take it very personal if you say that you're in a hitters ballpark because like, oh, you think I can't hit homers. So I am very fortunate that I hit over 30 home runs this year because now I can actually speak on it and not sound like I'm begging for home runs.

[Brent Rooker]

I, I don't like expected home runs because is. I just think it's misleading and that like it's only basing it off the distance the ball actually traveled.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Yep.

[Brent Rooker]

Instead of like the launch conditions and how the, how the, where you were playing affected how far the ball went despite the launch conditions. Like I hit a ball in San Francisco, it was like 112 at like 23 degrees and like that should be an expected home run, but it didn't go anywhere and it was caught at the wall in dead center field. But I don't get an expected home run on it because it went 390 or whatever. But like if I hit that ball at the exact launch conditions anywhere else it goes 420. So it's just, I don't, I don't buy the expected home runs thing. I think it's misleading. I don't like it.

[Meg Relly]

How does an extreme hitters park like that kind of wash over the clubhouse? Because obviously you're excited. Right. You're hitting home runs. You'd be hitting them anyway. But you're hitting home runs. The conditions are ideal. Everything's going great. Great. But your pitchers have to deal with that also. So how does, what does it do for sort of clubhouse morale to.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Neither of us care about what pitchers think.

[Brent Rooker]

Our pitchers complain a lot. But you know, that's their own thing.

[Meg Relly]

Fair enough. They can sort out their own problems.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Yeah. Within a clubhouse, like, no matter what, it's kind of like being an umpire almost where somebody's going to be mad at you, like one side of the ball is going to be unhappy at something. So, like, as a guy who, who never has pitched, I don't care what they think. I think they have all the advantage in the world. So they're the ones playing offense. We are reacting to what they do. So I look at it like, dude, just strike me out if, like, you can control that.

[Meg Relly]

I saw an umpire get cheered in the fall league this year because the challenge system is in place. And it was the first time a lot of the retirees in the fall league had seen it. And there was a guy who just called a really great zone and every challenge went his way. And by the end of the game, a guy said, way to go, blue. Which is the first time I think I've ever heard that happen in my entire life.

[Brent Rooker]

The umpires probably had no idea how to respond. He's like, oh, my goodness, I don't.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Know what's going on. Brent, you did have some pitcher teammates who expressed some disapproval of Sutter Health park and various conditions there. I do wonder though, just how it played in terms of, of the major league quality of the facilities and everything. When you're upgrading a minor league park, what were some of the difficulties and how did that evolve over the course of the season?

[Brent Rooker]

I think the, I mean, they did, obviously they built us a whole new building in left field with a minute with the amenities with clubhouse, with food room, kitchen, weight room, training room, all that stuff. And they did a great job with it. So all of our, like, facilities themselves were for sure major league quality. Up the major league standard. They were great. The only downside is not having them connected to the dugout, which is obviously have been well documented, but that's kind of outside of our control and something that was definitely, I mean, I, I think it definitely played. Played a factor early in the year. I think we got used to it. It just kind of becomes second nature and you don't really think about it anymore once you get in the second half, which will have the, the luxury, the advantage of kind of going into the season knowing what to expect this year. So it shouldn't really play a role anymore. But yeah, I mean, with the, the upgrades and things they did to, to our space as players, they did a very good job and they were definitely plenty adequate.

[Ben Lindbergh]

You guys had me looking up splits at Steinbrenner Fields last year. And the Rays did hit quite a bit better at home. But there was a lot of complaining early in the season about the wind.

[Meg Relly]

Yes.

[Ben Lindbergh]

And yeah. Brandon Lau. Yeah, it's. It's not an easy place to hit by any means. I'm sure everybody thinks that it's just like Yankee Stadium and it's not. The wind blows in almost every single game. It's hard to see at night. And it's kind of proven to be a little bit more difficult than people were originally thinking. Is that a Brandon.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

That is a brand.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Was a Brandon quote.

[Brent Rooker]

He is always complaining about everything.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

About everything.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Well, I guess he doesn't have to worry about playing there now he's in Pittsburgh, so.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Which is a way worse park to hit him.

[Brent Rooker]

Way worse.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Serves him right, I guess. Brett, you. You referenced your decline in strikeout rate or decline makes it sound bad, maybe good. If anything decrease it's lower than it was was. I was just kind of comparing your 2023 stat line with your 2025 stat line. And in some respects it's almost identical. And in some respects it's completely different. So you hit exactly 30 homers in each of those seasons. You walked exactly 9.3% of the time in each of those seasons. You had roughly the same, you know, WOBA and Ex Woburn and WRC plus and all that stuff. The difference was you struck out about 10.5 percentage points fewer, less in 2025 than in 2023. So you were like a way better contact hitter and yet sort of the same hitter overall, in a sense. So how did that happen? Is that good? Did you mean to do that?

[Brent Rooker]

Yes, I think it's good. I think if the end stat line is going to be pretty close to the same, all else equal. I think you take the line with less striking else. I think that that's true. And I. But no, I, like, I didn't. There was. There was never a point where I was like, okay, I'm gonna do this now for the sole reason of trying to strike out less. Like, I never made a specific conscious adjustment to try to decrease my strikeout rate. I think it just became. It just came from becoming a better hitter and getting more major league at bats and more major league experience and understanding how guys pitch before two strikes, how they pitch me with two strikes and being able to kind of put together plans to counteract those different things. So I. There were. When I compare, you said the stat lines, the two seasons were pretty Close to the same. When I think back on how I felt throughout the years, in both seasons, I felt like a significantly better hitter this year than I did in 2023, even though the stats look fairly similar. And I think a lot of that had to do with, with the strikeout rate being lower was a reflection of putting together more competitive at bats more frequently and never really being overmatched. There were times in 2023, which was my first year, obviously with consistent playing time for an extended period of time, that I walked up to the plate, just kind of felt overmatched and was just like, I don't really have a chance here. And I kind of know how this about is going to end. And that was never the case case this year or this or kind of the back half of 2024. I think that just comes from evolving as a hitter and, and like I said, learning how guys are going to attack you in different situations and being able to, to compete with, with different types of arms and different types of. Of situations with different types of stuff and things like that.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah. Speaking of evolutions as a hitter, you guys have both been sharing some, some progress footage and work in the cage this offseason, and it seems like you're both doing various kinds of bat speed training. And I wanted to ask you about, because I know that was something you worked on going into last season and it seems to have paid dividends and your, your swing speed was up, but there was an article in the Kansas City Star early last year that suggested that maybe your increase in bat speeds actually played into the slow start to the season, that you were still sort of getting used to that. So could you tell us a little bit about that? And you know, is it a good thing to increase your swing speed and is there some sort of adjustment period? Yeah.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

So that, that article stems from a TV spot I did on MLB Network where we talked about some things. And that interview was scheduled like two, two weeks in advance. And like we've already talked about, I was terrible in April. So when I went in legitimately, like, they didn't tell me this, but they were definitely just looking for something that was good, like 100. I'm telling you, they were like, what do we, we want to have this guy in. We know he's going to talk. We know it'll be good, but what can we say? Because literally nothing is good. So your bat speed's up. Great. So they asked me about it and that was me real time trying to work that out in my head. I do Think swing speed is important. I think it's one of those things that is very similar to exit velocity where it creates room for error. The faster you swing, the less often you technically need to square up a baseball because you're giving yourself more opportunity that when you do square it up, it's going to go the same way. If, If I hit a lot more balls at 100 than I do at 90, I'm probably going to get more hits. But those are. Those are such simple things to say because there's so much more involved. Well, what's the. What's the angle of the ball off the bat bat? What's my attack angle? What's the tilt on my shoulders? What's the connection to the barrel? What's. Where's my contact point? What am I swinging at? So there's so many different things to think about that. Like in that article, I think I was quoted as saying, well, maybe I need to lower my bat speed to help out a little bit. Which, you know, to an extent is. Can be true for somebody. I don't think Freddie Freeman has one of the higher bat speeds in, in the league, but he's obviously one of the best hitters. So I do think swinging the bat fast is important. It's just finding a way to make that work for your body. And at that moment, like, I had rehabbed all off season on my thumb. I had the month off because I broke my thumb, came back for the playoffs, continued to rehab the thumb, got another surgery on my thumb, and then didn't start hitting until till, you know, middle of January or whatever. And it was mostly in rehab settings where I'm trying to get it back, go through a spring training. I was awful in spring training. So now I'm tinkering with the swing as spring is going, but I'm, you know, I'm hitting the ball hard, I feel good about my work. And then we get into the season and it was like I got punched in the face because of. It was like, oh, my God. None of the things that I've tried to work on are working other than that I'm swinging the bat fast, fast. So in my head I'm like, well, that's great that I'm swinging the bat fast, but what else is working? And the answer was nothing at the time. So it was like every day I'm trying to work on new things, and then eventually I just got to a point, which I haven't ever said this publicly, but on May, I think it was May 18, last year, I got contacts, which is kind of an interesting wrinkle to the season. I had a moment where I was. I went to a trainer and was like, hey, because in spring, I mentioned something to them about my eyes. And then in. We were in Houston, I went to him, I said, is that clock blurry to you? And he said, no. And then, you know, a few days later, I went to the eye doctor a few days after that. I have contacts with me, and I put them on that night. And then it was kind of like things cleared up a little bit better. So I. There's so many different things that can go wrong with a swing. It could quite literally be anything, anything. So that was a long winded way of saying, yes, I think you should swing the bat fast.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah, that's really interesting because. So we've talked about that before with guys who get contacts or they get Lasik or whatever. Like, Max Muncie had a big turnaround this past year after he got some. Some treatment for vision. And. And I've done that myself. I had contacts, then I got Lasik. It definitely made a big difference for me. Not that I need to see very well to do a podcast guess, but I. I wondered about that sort of thing, not just being detected kind of routinely. Like, are there not just regular eye exams? Because it seems like to see and hit, you know, C ball, hit ball.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

The.

[Ben Lindbergh]

The seeing part is pretty important.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Well, so for. For my specific case, it was weird because I had always had, like, perfect vision, and then this spring, I didn't, but I still had good vision, so it was more of a out. It's not that I'm not seeing well. It's that I'm not seeing at the level that I'm used to. Like, even the eye doctor said, if you didn't play baseball, I wouldn't be giving you contacts, but because you have to see at an elite level every single day, this will be good for you. But I was also very. I hate excuses with my entire life. So because of how bad I was, I didn't want to, like, say anything about it because it's like, oh, he sucks. He thinks it's his eye. Or he thinks it's this, he thinks it's that, where it's like, all right, I waited until I started to hit a little bit better and then got contacts because I didn't want it to be a thing.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah, Yeah. I always say some excuses are good excuses, though. You know, they're just explanations, but I get it from a PR perspective and Brent, I know you have thoughts on bat speed and bat speed training, because back in October, you brought this up on Twitter. You said the fact that the idea of swinging the bat faster is better is considered new age analytical thinking. Insane. Gaining speed, power, force production has been beneficial for every athlete in every sport since the beginning of time. And you had some caveats beneath that. But I guess the idea that swinging harder is like something, you know, super advanced or, or saber metric, I guess, does seem sort of silly.

[Brent Rooker]

Yeah, I started. So I kind of came into this offseason the last month of the year, kind of did a deep dive on what was different between my 2024, four in my 2025, because I felt like I felt kind of similar throughout the year. Obviously, just the. The power numbers didn't necessarily match up with what I did last year. They were still, you know, productive and solid, but not quite to the level of what I did in 24. And I dove in and try to figure out what was going on there. And bathroom was the exact same, pretty much. Swing direction, attack angle. Basically every single measurable thing that I could find was identical. The only thing that was different was my contact average. Contact point in 25 was a little deeper than it was in 2024, which led to me being able to make better swing decisions. So I chased less, I struck out less, I swung and missed less. But I wasn't producing the same power numbers because obviously the, the more you catch balls out front, the easier it is to backspin the pull side. And that's when the horizon runs come in, when you can, you know, backspin to the poolside is where home runs come in. It's where hard hit doubles come in and things like that. So power was down. Everything else was improved. So I came up with this theory basically that, okay, well, if I can keep everything the exact same and just swing the bat slightly faster and push my contact point back out front by just the bat moving faster and not having to make earlier decisions or anything like that, then I should kind of be able to keep the best of both worlds. And that kind of was my plan going into the. The off season, was just try to gain very marginal improvements in my bat speed and how quickly my, my bat was accelerating and things like that. And then I get deeper into the off season and that's all going great. I feel like the program has been good. My swing feels like it's in a good place. I see a tweet that basically says after you turn 31, your bat speed just falls Off a cliff. And I turned 31 in November. So I spiral world and I panicked a bit and I basically shifted my mindset from like, okay, because I saw the graph, it's like bad speed by age, it's flat, it hits the 31 and then it just 45 degree downward spiral. So basically my mindset shifted now to where like, if I can just maintain what I've been doing, I don't have to improve it. If I can just keep it the same by doing some of this training, then like, I'm winning and I'm ahead of the curve. So I think it's kind of, it's been a good way or a good perspective shift for me and that I just kind of need to find a way to maintain what I've done for the past three years, for the next several years. And I'll be in a good spot. But yeah, I mean, I think all things equal in a vacuum, swinging the bat faster is always better as long as you're able to maintain your direction, maintain your swing mechanics that you believe in, maintain your approach and things like that. I think that that kind of physical training in just terms of just being able to be able to more explosive and faster moving is always going to be good.

[Meg Relly]

You take in all these inputs during the season, you're doing work during the season on your own swing. You're making adjustments and training all through the offseason. And all of that is based on input that is specific to you. The path you, you sort of chart is one that you're determining. But you also have to contend with broader structural changes to the game, ones that I imagine will have a much smaller impact on any individual hitter, but are going to have an impact on the same. And I'm curious, curious what you each think of the challenge system and whether you think that you will each be reliable challengers in the months to come. Because I think we're going to see some guys who really excel. They have a great sense of their own zone, they know where that pitch was. And then we might have some guys who challenge from a more emotional place potentially. And I'm curious where you think you will each fall along that continuum and whether you. You're looking forward to this change.

[Brent Rooker]

Vinnie will be better at it than me. He has a far greater understanding of the strike zone than I do.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

I. I've given it a lot of thought, but I think I'm going to have my blind spots like everybody else, like change ups low, I'm going to think are way lower than they actually are fastballs up. I'll probably think her higher. I don't know it. I wish I had a better answer. I just don't know. Because is. I'd like to think I'm not emotional about it, but in the heat of the moment when it's 1:1 and you think you got screwed on a call and it can make or breaking it back going 21 to 1 2, you know, you try to do it, or, you know, I know that there's some. There's some pitchers with, you know, whether it's crazy release heights or whatever, they can make pitches look very different than they are to the point they fool the umpire, fool the catcher, and they end up being strikes. So I don't know. The most excited I am for it is to watch other people do it to see if they're right or wrong. Like, I think there's some sneaky drama with that.

[Meg Relly]

Yeah.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

And what are teams going to do? Because I think the easy thing for teams to do would be like, all right, guys, the veterans can challenge because they're the veterans. When you think about it, the guys who should be challenging are the young guys, the rookies, because they've done it before. Like, some of these guys that come up from the minor leagues now know the strike zone better than ever because they've just been trained it for years now. So, you know, you have older players who are on record as saying that they think they should get different strike zones than other people, which I think is a wild thing to say. But it's also what they grew up with, so that's what they know. So it'll be. I think it'll be like a two or three year adjustment period, but I think after that, like two, three years, I think walks might skyrocket because apparently the zone is small. That's everything that guys from the minor leagues have said is that this abs zone is small. So we'll see what happens. I'm, you know, I'm excited to find out.

[Brent Rooker]

Some of the input you hear from fans is like, it kind of removes the art of framing. And I think that's incorrect because I think so much of, at least for me, so much of where I perceive the pitch is like, I'll take a pitch. I think I know where I think it is. And then I look back and the catcher's gloves in a completely different place than where I thought it was. And it could just be because he caught it well. So, I mean, that could prevent framing, can still prevent challenges. Challenges. I think is what I'm trying to say. Like, if a guy catches the low ball really well, by the time you look back and track it into his glove and that gloves at a good height, it can definitely prevent a challenge from happening.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

You get what, three challenges a game. Like, it's not like every close pitch is going to get challenged. So I think there's a misconception with, oh, it's a close pitch, we're going to challenge it. Like, if it's a second inning and somebody burns a challenge on a OO pitch, like, guys are going to be so angry. Angry that, you know, if you get it right, nobody's going to care. But it's just one of those things, like, the result matters a lot with that. Like, you better get it right if you're going to do it. I think there will be certain guys on certain teams that get banned from challenging 100%. Like, we had a meeting last spring because we were able to do it last spring of like, hey, guys, pitchers should not be doing this. I swear this pitcher came out the first pitch he threw. He challenged and was wrong by 6 inches.

[Brent Rooker]

Shouldn't be allowed to zero ever.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

But in the heat of the moment, are some of these guys going to do it just because they're angry?

[Meg Relly]

Right. Yeah. I think what we've seen with a lot of the. The minor leaguers is that, you know, they start out saying, well, anyone can do it. And then a couple of games into the season, the pitchers are no longer allowed to challenge. It has to come from the catcher because for exactly the reasons that you're. You're saying there can be a little more emotion involved from there.

[Ben Lindbergh]

And plus, as you guys said, you don't want to know what pitchers think anyway, so why should they be led to express their opinion about the strike zone? Yeah, Meg makes fun of me sometimes for. For never taking an episode of this podcast off. And I feel like I'm with a couple of kindred spirits here because you guys did not take a lot of time off of work in 2025. And in fact, Brett, Brent, you never took a game off. You played it all 162. Vinnie, you missed two games. Slacker. And I want to know about the. The toll that takes a on you, Brent. Like, how do you have to prepare differently? I assume at some point it was a goal for you. In fact, I think I read an article to the effect that you had set your sights on it and actually turned down a potential day off. But, you know, did. Did that wear you down? At all.

[Brent Rooker]

Yeah, it was never a goal until I got probably half, like, into August, and then I was like, okay, the end's kind of in sight here, and we've done it to this point, so let's just, you know, it's. If I'm physically capable, let's go ahead and finish this out. I do not want to take the same credit of playing 162 as guys who play defense do, because that is not the same thing. I think I played defense 28 times, so there should be some kind of weighted scale there. And that 162 turns into, hey, they.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Already weight that scale on your war, big fella. So it's getting weighted.

[Ben Lindbergh]

That's fair.

[Brent Rooker]

But I think the. The 162 thing, like, I think for me it was. I mean, just because, like, again, I'm DHing almost all the time besides those 28, 30 games, whatever it was, I think for me it was more of a mental exercise, like, because they're def. There were definitely weak, like, times where I had a rough five games. And I know we're going into the first game of a series against a pitcher that, like, I do not match up well with well, and it would have been pretty easy to be like, all right, give me my one day off here, or whatever it was. And I, I. There were times when that thought popped into my head, but I kind of put my head down and I just did it and I got through it, and I played every one of them, and I was. I was proud of myself in the end. So, again, I don't want to take the same amount of credit as, like, I think ellie played all 162, and that's a lot of playing shortstop. And other guys did something similar. I know Pete runs out there to first base every day. Olson does the same thing. The other guys who played every game, I don't want to take the same amount of credit as they get, but it was. It was something that I felt accomplished in doing, and I'm glad that I did it. And I'm planning on trying to do it again this year, so we'll see how that goes.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah, we do 150 plus episodes of this podcast a year, so you know, that and playing 162 major league games seems similar to me. We're both iron men in our respective fields. I can't think of any differences, really. That's right.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Same thing.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Really. Yeah.

[Meg Relly]

Yeah. Ben, I was just saying you don't have to podcast on your wedding day. I think that's just being a good friend, you know, I don't think I'm speaking out of school there.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah.

[Meg Relly]

I have a. I have a non serious question. We've talked about training and bat speed and the challenge system and never taking a day off. Brent, we ask you this every time you're on the show. And Vinnie, I would love to hear your thoughts in your own experience this year. What were your favorite road meals that you ate in 2025? What were the highlights?

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

It's a good question. Brent does a good. A good, like a much better job than I do of getting out. I'm more of a, like, get up, get some Dunkin Donuts, coffee, and go back to the room and sit in there until I go to the field.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Heathen. Wow. Yeah.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Toronto's got some great food.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

I also never remember where we go. Like, I don't write down anything. There's this place in Minnesota that's really good, like the Butcher's Tale, I think. Think that place is really good. Trying to think of where else we go. We like we'll do there. In Detroit, right next to the hotel, there's a place, the team dinner that we always do. That place is really good. I. I'm a terrible person to ask this question to the Tim Hortons. I uber eats.

[Brent Rooker]

I have my breakfast stuff right this year. I always keep track of that. I have a few. A few note notables.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah.

[Brent Rooker]

Yeah. The Baja breakfast hash in Milwaukee from Uncle Wolf's Diner is very good. Oh, in Minneapolis, there was a new breakfast place. I think it was new because I hadn't been there even from the times that I lived there. Hope breakfast bar had a smoked salmon and pimento cheese scramble. And I love pimento cheese and so that was delicious. Hot honey shrimp and grits from skillet in Seattle. I also have on here, which was very good. So those are three ones that made the list that stuck out to me. And then, I mean, I know I had some. Some good dinners here and there too, but I only record the breakfast ones. So I'd have to take a little bit of time to go back and think about. Think about some dinner spots. But I love the food. I love the. I love the travel aspect of our job with the fact that we get to go to different cities and try different restaurants. And it's, you know, it's one of the perks for sure.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Well, despite not being a foodie, Vinnie does have a food item named after him. So, Brent, have you eaten or would you eat the pasquich, which Consists of shaved Italian beef topped with two slices of provolone cheese, two strips of bacon, crispy golden brown hash brown patties, and giardiniera aioli, all served on a buttered and grilled brioche bun.

[Brent Rooker]

I have not eaten it, but I absolutely would eat it.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

I'm going to send you one over pregame this year, please.

[Brent Rooker]

That would be fantastic.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Fantastic.

[Brent Rooker]

I would love it.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

That's what you need in your stomach before a game. So I'll send it over about an hour.

[Ben Lindbergh]

I have a semi serious question for you. You. You both hit 30 plus homers this past season. Well done. However, we have to ask you the tough questions here. And based on your statcast sprint speeds, you're both roughly as fast as or faster than Juan Soto and Josh nailed. Miller, what's your excuse for not swiping 30?

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Well, I'd like to say I've never been thrown out though, so my efficiency, in terms of efficiency, I'm about as good as.

[Ben Lindbergh]

You're basically Carlos Beltran.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

But I actually am planning on stealing more base. I haven't told the Royals this yet, but seeing those two guys steal bases like they're. You're correct. There is no excuse.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah. Why are you not 30? 30 guys?

[Brent Rooker]

What did Josh do, though? Because he didn't.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

I'll tell you what he did. I asked him, I was like, josh, what? What are you doing?

[Brent Rooker]

And.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

And he was like, well, stolen bases are important. So, like, I figured I'm going to try to steal bases. And then I realized I'm pretty good at getting a read on what guys are doing. So I just started doing it and it's worked out. So he, his answer was amazing because his answer was, well, I'm smart enough. I can, I can have an idea of what the pitcher is going to throw. Row. I'm reading the count, I'm reading the hitter, I'm reading the situation. I'm just going to take a shot here. And even though he had 30, like, he was still able to steal, you know, he got to 15, people knew he was stealing bases. But if a guy is smart, like, you know, Bobby, everybody knows he's a threat to go every time he still steals bases. These guys are smart. They know what they're looking for and they. And they take their shots.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah, it's like, where there's a will, there's a way. I wonder whether it will inspire people because they look at those guys and they're like, I got could beat them in a foot race. So why can't I steal 30 plus bags now. I, I think base stealing is, is more fun than it is valuable, at least as the stats would, would have it. And so I guess you could say, you know, if you're getting banged up, there's injury risk. You just want to keep your bat in the lineup. You gotta play 162 games after all. So maybe it's just not worth it, but maybe anyone has the capacity to do that or at least many more people have the capacity to do it it than was previously believed, you know, under the new the rules and everything.

[Brent Rooker]

Yeah, I'll give it a shot. I'll run more. I stole 1124, I think that was, I got the double digits and I was proud of that. So we'll, we'll see.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah, do it. All right. I also wanted to ask you, since you, you mentioned not playing much defense, Brent, there were a couple guys I, I wanted to ask you about their defensive acumen on your team because when Denzel Clark came up and started making circus catches as every other game, that was kind of a phenomenon. We talked about that a lot here. Also impressive was Tyler Soderstrom going from being a catcher, playing some first base, then going to left field where he had never played as a pro and becoming a Gold Glove finalist. So how much fun is that for you guys to get to watch those guys put that clinic on out there?

[Brent Rooker]

Watching Denzel at centerfield is a experience unlike anything I've seen. I mean it was. He went on that like two week run where every single catch he was or every single game he made like a sub 5% catch probability catch. It was bizarre just how many chance, like one, how many chances he was getting to make the catches. And then he converted like every one of them and it was, it was truly insane. And then watching Tyler do what he did too was awesome, man. I was fired up that he was so good at it because it means I didn't have to do it as much. So he, he went on to left and turned out he was really good at it and it was great. It made our team better because obviously we want, you want to get Nick Kurtz in the lineup when you can because he's pretty good as well. So having Tyler go out there and do what he did was super impressive to watch.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah. Wanted to ask about Nick Kurtz. He comes up in late April and from that day forwards, he is the best hitter in baseball. Not named Aaron Judge or Shohei who Otani. So did you see that coming? Did you know he was going to be that good. How impressive was that?

[Brent Rooker]

I think we, we got glimpses in spring training last year. He was super impressive during spring training. I mean, hit him, he hit some homers, but it was just kind of the quality of the at bat during spring that impressed everybody so much. And then he came up and took like two weeks to get his first extra base hit. And everybody was, it was kind of like, okay, we're, I mean, it's, it's a different sport up here and we know he's going to struggle a little bit, but the quality of the at bat and the, the approach was still really, really good and you kind of see it coming. And then he had the, the series against Houston where he hit homer or walk off homers off Hayter and Brayu and back to back nights, I guess. And that was like, okay, this kid is, is different here because those were two elite, elite relievers and he just did that in high leverage situations. And then from there he kind of never looked back and went on one of the more impressive runs I've ever seen.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah. Finney, I wanted to ask you about a young teammate who came up to Jack Caglion, your Italian brother, who it, it seemed like you really took under your wing and, and I kind of admired that because, you know, sometimes the, the hot shot rookie comes up and, and people feel threatened by that. It's like this guy could take my playing time, he could replace me or something. But you seem to become kind of a mentor for him. Him. You developed a celebration when he hit a homer. You kissed him on each cheek. You didn't get to kiss him as often as you probably both would have liked because, you know, like rookies have since time immemorial, he had a hard time acclimating to that level. So when a guy goes through that, how do you help as more of a veteran to kind of keep his head straight and help him get through that?

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Yeah, it's, it's tough because you try to remind him how good he is. You remind him that he has support sport. But when you're like, I don't know, I think I speak for a lot of people when I say this. Like, sometimes your rookie year is the hardest baseball ever is just because you're learning so many different things about the game, about the culture surrounding the game, about how to be comfortable within your own skin and, you know, for Jack and rightfully earned. I mean, he was pushed and pushed quickly, quick and honestly. Like, he never said this. He would never, I don't know If Nick Kurtz having such a great year didn't affect Jack because same draft class called up quick and just, you know, I mean, Brent said he had two weeks without hitting an extra base hit, like. And then he took off, and he was one of the best hitters in baseball. And if you're. Jack, you're sitting there and like, man, this guy's doing this, and I'm not having the success that he is, you know, that could wear you down a little bit because you're. You're always comparing yourself to your peers. And I just think he had a tough. You know, he had a. He had a tough year. He did. He did what I think is normal to happen when you're a year out of college and you get thrown into the big leagues, which there's not a whole lot of people that have ever walked the earth that has. That has happened to. And he earned it. He earned the right to get. To get called up as quick as he did. There's probably a piece of him that think he was. He was held down a little bit because of how good he was. So I. I think you just try to put your arm around a guy, tell him you love him, that, you know, you just got to keep working. But there's also times where you use things as learning experiences of, what were you thinking that at bat? What. What was going on in your head? What were you trying to do? What was the situation? So I think you got to kind of play both parties of, like, friend and I care about you, and let's make you better. But then there's also the team AD aspect of, like, hey, man, we're trying to win ball games here. Like, that's what the goal is, and we need you at your best to win ball games. So how do we get you there? Because in order for the Kansas City Royals to have success from last year moving forward, like, we need Jack Caglion at his absolute best because he is an important piece to our lineup. So that didn't really answer the question of, like, what do you do? Because the answer is. I'm still trying to figure it out of how. How can I help him get into the best situation possible to make him his best? And maybe that's leaving him alone.

[Ben Lindbergh]

It.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Sometimes it could be as simple as leaving a guy alone, of letting him get comfortable within his own skin at the level that he's at. Or maybe the answer is, hey, we're hitting at this time, and we're going to talk about this, this, and this, and we're going to take this, this very seriously, and we're going to lock in and we're going to try to help you figure it out. So I think there's a whole, whole range of things you can do to try to try to help the young player get better.

[Meg Relly]

Both of your teams this offseason have committed to young players on the rosters with long term extensions. Obviously, the A's, Kansas City, these are smaller market clubs, but ones that have been starting to invest in the roster. I'm curious what you. What does that do for veterans like you in terms of your assurance of the sort of competitive drive of the front office, the desire to have good players in house long term? Like, how do extensions like that tend to wash over you?

[Brent Rooker]

I think it gives us a sense, the feeling within our clubhouse is that we're headed in the right direction, that we have the right group of people together to do what we want to do. And when ownership and the front office kind of confirms that and reaffirms that they believe the same thing by expressing their desire and then going out and actively keeping the same group together, I think it kind of makes it clear that everyone's on the same page and that, like I said, all right, like, we've got the people here that we want to be here. We believe in the group we have. We think if we keep these guys together that we're going to be able to go on a run of success to the level that we want to. And I think it just kind of builds the clubhouse culture, makes everybody feel confident in the fact that we all feel the same way. And then that breeds a good environment to come in and work and, you know, go on the field with.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Last time we had you on Brent, I think last offseason, we made you promise to, to inform us first if you ended up signing an extension. And then Ken Rosenthal reported it. Yeah, you didn't do it, but, you know, we forgive you. Yeah, that's okay. But. But the nice thing about that is that you don't have to go through the arbitration process. Vinnie, you haven't signed an extension yet. You do have an arbitration hearing looming. You tweeted recently, I'm about to go into a room and hear how awful I am. That is kind of how it works. So what have you heard about that process and how have you prepared yourself for it if it ends up happening?

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Yeah, we're preparing for it. That. That tweet was supposed to be more sarcastic than it came out. That's why that tweet no longer exists on the Internet. But, yeah, it's one of those things, right? It's a business decision decision. I, I was at a number. They were at a number. We, you know, we didn't agree. And that's why arbitration exists, is for me to try to capitalize on the value that I can and. And for them to put me at a spot where they think I belong. So, you know, as personal as it seems like it is, because it's just like talking about the money that I'll make this year, like, at the end of the day, I'm going to do fine. So we just go into a room and we figure it out. That's. That's really about it. So. So, you know, in this game, you got to do some things that are a little uncomfortable. This is one of them. But, you know, it is what it is. And, and at the end of the day, when, when May rolls around, when April rolls around, none of it, none of it will matter. So we, we just try to win baseball games.

[Ben Lindbergh]

One more for you, Vinnie. We asked you about one of your youngest teammates. I wanted to ask you about your oldest teammate briefly last year, who made his professional debut before Jack Caglion was born. That is, of course, Rich Hill, who is a favorite of ours, former podcast guest, made a couple of starts for the Royals last season, which seemed to have maybe been his last major league starts, because it seems as if he is done now as a player. Do you have any Rich Hill stories from his brief tenure in Kansas City and what was it like to have him show up at age 45?

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Yeah, so one of the people I got closest to this year was Luke Maitland, daily catcher for us. And he was in AAA when Rich got to aaa. And he just kept telling stories about how competitive he is and how he'd be in a bullpen and. And he's working on new pitches, trying to figure out how to make his pitches better. It's not just like, show up, throw a bullpen. Yeah. Feel good. Like there he's screaming in his bullpens. He's trying to figure out what he needs to figure out. And when he got to the big leagues, I saw firsthand, I mean, that guy is unhappy if he has a tough inning and, and it's old school. He's down there throwing things. It, it.

[Brent Rooker]

What a.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

What a pleasure it was to play with. To play with Rich Hill. Just to be able to. To see the work ethic. I think everybody kind of knew that unless he was throwing perfect games every time he went out there that it probably wasn't going to be the longest stint because we were, you know, we had some guys coming back from the il, so it was just kind of a cool experience to get to play with him. He was giving us competitive starts, he was giving us everything he had. And if that was it for him, I mean, what a phenomenal career and I'm honored to have shared a field with him.

[Meg Relly]

You mentioned that your arbitration tweet doesn't exist on the Internet anymore, but both of you are very happy to chat with fans, sometimes put fans in their place, but often just share your experiences of the majors, your training that is positive and part of Vinnie, what you said with baseball should be fun and you guys can be accessible and tell the fun parts. There is a potential potentially very not fun thing looming over this season, which is the pending end of the cba, the next CBA negotiation. I know. Brent, you've talked on Twitter about your thoughts on a signing deadline and what that would do for players and their salaries. I'm curious kind of how you guys are thinking about talking with fans directly about labor issues, because I think that fans are maybe more pro player than they've been historically, but there's still a lot of pounding the table for ownership and salary caps and signing deadlines. So how do you look at sort of social media as an opportunity to talk to fans about your perspective on labor issues and the CBA negotiation that's pending?

[Brent Rooker]

I think it'll be important to just present facts and accurate numbers and things that accurately depict kind of the situation of where the league is at business wise and what makes sense. I think these topics, it becomes very easily to get emotional over them from both sides, even from the neutral third party side of the fan. And I think as players it'll just be our job to communicate in a very objective, very level headed way. But look, here's a situation, you know, here's why XYZ doesn't work, here's why we feel it's bad for the league as a whole. Here's why we feel it's bad for growth, here's why we feel it's bad for competition or on the other side, you know, things that we want to accomplish. Here's why we think these things are good for competition or are good for parity or good for the league as a whole. And if we can kind of present those things, like I said, with, with a level headed perspective without getting emotional in a way that makes it very clear and easy to understand why we are positioned in the way that we are, then I think, you know, that will have a positive effect effect on, on the outcome of this, of the, the cb, the CBA negotiations.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

I, It's a tough one because when it comes to PR, we have been losing that battle forever. I'm not 100% sure that everybody knows that a lockout means that the owners have shut us out.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah.

[Brent Rooker]

That, that needs to be clarified for sure.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah.

[Brent Rooker]

Like we are not the ones that doing this here, guys.

[Meg Relly]

Yeah.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

But I also think that players in general have not been willing to speak publicly with, with the fear of what if I say something wrong? What if I'm not around when this happens. There's a whole bunch of things that could, could be negative about speaking directly about these issues.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Sure.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

And I, and also because it's a legal battle, I guess there's things you're not supposed to. About talk, talk about legally or publicly. But I just think it's tough because we're the ones that play, so we're the most visible when it comes to this. So the fans don't really see the owners. The owners speak through their lawyers. They, they know what they're doing. They're very buttoned up. Where we, as players, we're out there every day. So if we're not out there, it seems as if it's our fault. And it's tough because people know how much money we make.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Make.

[Meg Relly]

Right.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

And, and we make a lot. We do. Now I, I do think that they. I'm not, in no way am I defending the amount. I'm like whatever, that doesn't matter. But our salaries are public and people can see that and be like, oh well, this guy's being greedy because he's making 10 million and now he wants to make 25 million. Isn't 10 million enough? And it's such a weird argument to be like, well, it's not about is it enough? It's about what the market value says it is the same way it, it is in any, you know, any free market, which is what we, you know, currently have. And it's, it's just such an interesting conversation because I completely understand it from a fan side of thinking that this is on the players completely understand because technically speaking we could just say yes to a really bad deal. That wouldn't make any sense though, because we're not. The goal is of. This isn't to protect ourselves as players. It's to protect the 10 year old kid that's playing baseball right now to make sure that when he gets to the major leagues, he's not taken advantage of by the other side. So I think what, what Rooker said is super important that it, it doesn't need to be emotional. It's just we're trying to get to a point where both sides can agree on, to, you know, agree on an agreement essentially somewhere where both sides are happy. Which the problem is is neither side is really ever happy. But what, what we'd like to do is get to a point where we find a spot where we as players are happy and don't miss games in 2027. But like I started this conversation, this would be a lockout. This is not a strike.

[Meg Relly]

Right.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

So that is owner's ship making a decision to lock the players out. And what that means is we cannot have any contact with anybody within the organization. And that's their choice that they're making. There's nothing that says that they have to lock us out. That is a decision because the agreement would have ended. They don't have to lock us out. We could keep negotiating and try to figure something out, but they look at it as like that's a way for them to use their leverage of locking us out to get us to the table. And to be honest, like in my personal opinion, I think that's kind of a strange thing. But maybe, but I'm also not a business major who, you know, is strong suit is negotiation, which is why we have our own team of people that are helping us navigate this situation. So it'll be interesting to see what happens. But it's. It's not a simple. It's not a simple conversation, which kind of sucks because you want to try to give people honest honesty and be transparent, but there's some things you can't really be transparent about because there's so much behind the scenes going on.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah. And Meg alluded to Brent's tweet about the signing deadline idea. You called it pretty close to the most anti player idea you could possibly have. I think we're with you in. In multiple ways. Not just that this would favor ownership, but also which you subsequently tweeted about that. It just doesn't seem to make that much difference from an entertainment standpoint. And also also has some drawbacks in the sense that nothing would be happening in baseball for months at a time. You tried to sort of seek out contrasting opinions or why would people want this or why would this be better for fans? Did anyone talk you around at all or give you anything to think about that you had Overlooked.

[Brent Rooker]

Quite literally. The only reason a fan could give me or anyone for why they would want this in place is so they are slightly less bored for like three weeks. And that's literally it. Like, there's no other logical reason to do this besides, like, I'm bored. Nothing's happening on Twitter and I want things to be happening.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

So what does that mean exactly? In a sport that has so many transactions, what would a signing deadline actually do? Because what if nobody offers you a contract?

[Ben Lindbergh]

I guess that's the idea.

[Brent Rooker]

That's it.

[Ben Lindbergh]

You know, and then you have to take whatever because that's where the leverage.

[Brent Rooker]

That's why our leverage is like the middle class free agent who wants a 1 for 7 deal at the end of their career. It becomes signing deadline day. And some teams like, well, we'll give you one for three. And then you're like, you're worth eight, but we'll give you three.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

That's my question. What if nobody offers you anything?

[Brent Rooker]

Yeah. Then you just don't have a job.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

But, but we do the minor league deals with invites to camp and things like that. Could you sign one of those? Or like, what if somebody was willing to give you eight after the deadline? Like, are you not allowed to sign any anymore? I don't know.

[Brent Rooker]

And I, I still. There's answers for those questions because other sports have these things. I just don't know what the answers are.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah, yeah. And even if it would make you a little less bored for a few days, then it would make you more bored later.

[Brent Rooker]

Exactly. It's like, okay, well, now from January 1st to. I said this yesterday, like, okay, the deadlines, whenever, from the deadline until the season starting, then nothing's happening.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

So now you guys are forgetting you can't put out your graphic with your mock lineup for your team if the guys aren't signed on by the sign. Signing day.

[Brent Rooker]

That is true.

[Meg Relly]

I mean, I, I literally got a push notification during a, an NFL playoff game that I would rather have paid attention to that Mookie Bets will be retiring when his contract is over in like seven years. I was like, I needed a push. Did I need a push notification for that?

[Ben Lindbergh]

That's all we would have if.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Right, That's.

[Meg Relly]

That would be the signing deadline future. Just learning that Mookie will not be retiring early.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah, good. Okay, just a couple more for you. One Ohtani related question for you, Vinnie, because we have talked to Brent about Ohtani before, about the fact that he has taken Ohtani deep and then wanted to get an autograph. Photo of the the home run when he went to the all star game in 2023 from Ohtani. You had an interaction with Ohtani in October, Vinnie. Because of a couple of previous interactions. This was going back to the side of the summer when Jeff Passon tweeted that the two fastest pitches Ohtani had ever thrown were both against you. One in a game in the regular season and one in the wbc. And you, quote, tweeted that and said wtf? And then when you were doing some media stuff around World Series time, you got to ask him about that. So why is Shohei Ohtani picking on you specifically?

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

I don't know.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Know. I don't know.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

It's a great question. He tried to say like, oh, you're a good hitter or something. We, we'll get to the bottom of it. But at least it's good. I know what to look for off of him. He tries to throw his fastest fastball. So I'll be ready.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah, well, you might, I suppose, have another WBC matchup coming up. You are of course playing for team Italy again. Give us a, a preview of the Team Italy squad. What can we look forward to in a couple months? And just like how hyped are, are you in general after the breakout WBC years ago, it seems like everyone wants to play now and that there's just so much buzz around this.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Yeah, well. So when is this episode going out?

[Ben Lindbergh]

Very soon. Okay.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

So I can't tell you who's on the roster because it hasn't been publicly released yet.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Okay.

[Brent Rooker]

It's not me, it's not Brett, I.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Can tell you that. Yeah, it's gonna be cool. It's gonna be a good team. We're gonna have some, some good pitching, gonna have some good hitting, gonna have some speed. Need like it's going to be very left handed, dominant from a hitter's perspective, which is going to be funny. Like it could at times there could be eight hitters in the lineup that are left handed. So it's, it's going to be interesting in that regard because I'm assuming other teams are just going to load up with left handed pitching to face us.

[Brent Rooker]

Ready to see Garrett Clevenger, buddy?

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Yeah.

[Brent Rooker]

Yeah.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

So, so we'll be ready for that. Yeah, it's going to be super, super cool. The last WBC was one of the best baseball experiences I've ever had and I'm expecting no less from this one. So I'm really excited about it and yeah, I think it'll be great.

[Ben Lindbergh]

I'm excited too. And maybe this can be our, our closer here. Brent, I know that you're the new Mike Trout. You've, you've gotten into meteorology lately and meteorology, Twitter. So we're heading into a weekend. A lot of precipitation in the forecasts. What do you think think is is in store for us across the country?

[Brent Rooker]

I don't know. I'm watching it closely here in here in southwest Tennessee. So I mean, if I go to my iPhone app, which obviously is not always the most reliable thing, but that's. It still got us for like 30 inches of snow. And so, but more, the more reliable European models tend to have us at like 5 to 6 inches of snow with a bunch of ice on top of it. So either way, I don't think I'm leaving my house for a few days, which is. Okay, we're gonna hunker down here. I got plenty of firewood things in case we lose power. But yeah, it's. I, I, I. So some. So being active on social media, like sometimes I get, I have an idea before I, before I tweet something like, okay, like, I think this one will, will do pretty well numbers wise or this one will blow up. I did not think that one was gonna do anything. Like, I had no expectations for it at all. And it really took off there. We got deep into meteorology, Twitter, and I learned a lot of stuff. So thanks guys for having me. All you, all the other people out there on that side of the Internet. It was a, it was, it was a good experience for me. So I appreciate it.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah, you, you referred to the at Weather Channel official account as weather Boy.

[Brent Rooker]

I don't know if y' all got that reference. It's a fantastic reference, though.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Here's like actual customer out here. What's, what's the best kind of firework to buy?

[Meg Relly]

Wouldn't you like to know?

[Ben Lindbergh]

Weather boy. Boy, where are your parents? Kids? Sketchy.

[Brent Rooker]

Back to you guys.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Are you actually a, a weather guy? Like, are you a Mike Trout type who's.

[Brent Rooker]

No, not really. Like, I follow. I mean, we, I live where I live and have always lived is always pretty active during tornado season. So in the springtime and early early spring, I guess when I'm home, we always have a few events and it's fun to track and follow, but I am by no means well versed or an expert on anything. I just, the, the, the, the algorithm on Twitter really just throw me into the middle of these meteorology debates for no reason. And I found it very interesting how hostile they all. They all got.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Yeah, it's no different from baseball, I guess. People argue about everything. Yeah. Okay. Well, this was a. A great pleasure. Glad we can keep extending this offseason tradition of talking to you, Brent. And glad we could add you to the mix this year, Vinnie. And. And you're both welcome back anytime. I don't know if this will be like the. The for the podcast that you two eventually launch, but the door is always open here at Effectively Wild.

[Brent Rooker]

Thanks, guys for having us. I was. I had a good time, as always.

[Vinnie Pasquantino]

Yeah, as well. This was great.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Was there a perspective title for your podcast before. Before you scuttled it last year?

[Brent Rooker]

Yeah, but we're not sharing that information.

[Ben Lindbergh]

But it's good.

[Brent Rooker]

It is, but it's good.

[Ben Lindbergh]

Okay. Yeah, I. I was going to steal it for the episode title, so it's good that you didn't. Didn't tell me what it was. Yeah. Keep it for when you actually debut. Looking forward to it, guys. Thanks again.

[Brent Rooker]

Thank you, Joe.

[Ben Lindbergh]

All right, well, thanks to Brent and Vinnie. Those guys are great. Thanks also to their agency for facilitating. That's the Bledsoe agency, which they alluded to at the start of the conversation. Apologies for some minor audio issues there. There were some missing headphones, a bit of audio bleed. I'm sure that'll all get ironed out when they start their own podcast, though. Something Meg and I are toying around with is the idea of having a regular rotation of players appear on the podcast this season. Maybe once a week or every other week. Just kind of incorporate a player perspective as almost a third quasi co host. Nothing set in stone, just an idea. Haven't talked to any of the potential participants about it, but since we have plenty of smart, engaging players in our orbit now, those two and Declan Cronin and John Brebia and beyond. Could be a fun feature. We shall see. Not sure Tommy Pham would want to do that though. Then we'd really be fam graphs. But listener Zach in our Patreon Discord group drew my attention to an Instagram post at the Big League Impact account. That's a charitable organization started by Adam Wainwright, and this week they posted. In addition to our signature fantasy football league for fans, we also host a players only fantasy football league, giving pro athletes a chance to compete against one another while raising money for causes close to their hearts. In 2025, 26 MLB players and one NHL player took part, supporting more than two dozen charities along the way. You'll never guess who won this league. Well, you wouldn't have if I hadn't just mentioned Tommy Fam. Yeah, it was Tommy Fam. He finished in first. He won $40,000 for the National Keratoconus Foundation. That's an eye condition that Pham has. So good. Great for the National Keratoconus foundation, but great to see that Tommy Pham is still entering and even winning Players Only fantasy football leagues years after his suspension for slapping Jock Peterson over a fantasy football dispute. That did not discourage Tommy Pham from continuing to play fantasy football with his fellow players who at this point might just decide to let him win because it's probably safer for them before we finish our conversation, last episode about Andrew Jones and diving by outfielders prompted much discussion many responses. For those who missed it, we talked about the widespread belief that Andrew Jones never dove in the outfield and how that allegedly illustrates his skill because supposedly he never needed to dive because he got to everything easily. So we examined that and we concluded that he did dive, at least on occasion. There are documented dives out there. We couldn't compare his rate of diving to other outfielders, but we did get data from Sports Info Solutions that suggested that for outfielders and center fielders especially, good defenders tend to dive more often. If anything. Well, I heard from Joe Sheehan, one of the people we cited for saying that Jones didn't dive. Joe says two notes. One and you basically got there at the end is if you think of outfielders as having non diving range and then a diving range outside that. Jones's non diving range was so large that his diving range diving range, not driving range, that's a different sport was largely F7s and F9s, that is flies to the left fielder and right fielder. He really was that that good. 2. Referring to the SIS stats at the end, I wonder how much of the numbers are affected by modern positioning and outfielders having to dive on shallow fly balls more than they did when they were 20 to 30ft closer to the infield. To bring it back to Jones, he played more shallow than most outfielders in his era. So that would be a category of batted balls that he likely dove less for than his peers and surely less than a modern outfielder. Other responses 1. From Oliver Subject line Mathematically proving better fielders dive less I was listening to your segment on whether Andrew Jones dove less because he had such good reason range and was surprised by your skepticism. To me this is theoretically provable to be true if we make some assumptions. Let's assume that a given fielder's range is a Circle of radius R. It's the old simplified scientific model, the spherical cow. The size of the circle for better fielders is bigger than for worse fielders. Dives in this scenario would be balls hit to the edge of the circle. All catches, non dives and dives would be contained within the circle. We can calculate the dive percentage based on the ratio of the circumference of the circle to the area. Area dive percentage equals 2 PI r divided by PI r squared equals 2 over r based on this, the higher a fielder's range, the lower the chance they have to dive for a ball on any given play. This intuitively makes sense, as if you imagine a fielder who cannot run, they would dive on basically 100% of place. Obviously this is an oversimplification, but one that I think illustrates the point, so that's interesting. I asked Oliver how he would square that circle with the SIS research and he says, unfortunately theory and practice are different in principle practice, I would guess guys with higher range are expected to take plays from their corner outfielders more and thus are taking a greater proportion of plays at the edges relative to less rangy center fielders. Essentially, balls at the edge of the circle make up a greater proportion of their place. Not so different from what Joe was suggesting. Other responses Mulder Bat flip in the Patreon discord group I agree that even with Jones's range, there are still balls at the edge that are divable. But I can see that those edges have a lower percentage of balls hit to them compared to the divable range of the average outfield fielder, and thus Jones had fewer diving opportunities than the average fielder. Raymond Chen Patreon supporter, says, I came to a similar conclusion. By different logic, the edges of Jones's range are closer to the ranges of the corner outfielders, so he might not even need to make those plays in the first place. At an extreme, imagine an outfield of players with enormous range. You would get no dives at all because they collectively could cover the entire outfield comfortably. That's if you have three Denzel Clarks out there. There was also some discussion about whether diving is even good. Is it more like running through first base as opposed to diving into first space, which tends to be counterproductive, but I think it can be helpful to approach the ball at a different angle. Plus, you're airborne, you're not sliding, so you're not slowing yourself down. Just kind of gives you better body control. Another Patreon supporter, Zach, says the Jones defense discussion had me thinking of Jim Edmonds as a contrast, he would find a way to dive for balls that were hit right at him. And he was pretty great too. Listener Andrew M. Duck up a Willie Bloomquist quote about Ichiro he never made a bad route to a base. Baseball he covered a lot of ground. He never dove head first for a ball in all the years I saw him play. That frustrated some teammates every once in a while, but his philosophy was that he was faster running through than he was diving or sliding. So same question I asked him once, why don't you dive? And he said, do you ever see a sprinter diving through the finish line? When you heard him, it made sense. I'm sure some divers overdo it. Scott says. Grady Sizemore was always diving. Maybe you should have stayed on his feet. Perhaps it could have kept him healthy. Michael Mountain says, My hypothesis on center fielder specifically if you have great range and assuming well positioned to start with, a greater percentage of your dives will be on balls hit to the left or right compared to a center fielder with less range because you have enough range to cover more of the distance forward or backward in your narrow arc of the field. And those balls hit to left center or right center are more likely to have another outfielder backing you up or ready to make a quick pickup and relay throw if your dive is unsuccessful. So you may feel more emboldened to dive on a ball that is at the edge of your range compared to a center fielder with less range, knowing that the risk side of that equation is lower for you. That's an interesting explanation. Paul on Blue sky says, I think the reason Jones dove less than other center fielders is that he played much shallower than most. Most of his best diving catches were in front, which many center fielders did not attempt. His first step was left or right and going back on deeper balls, he leapt or reached up. John on Blue sky says, Listening to your discussion about Andrew Jones's defense and lack of diving and I'm reminded of my childhood center fielder Devon White. White was such a good defender that watching him often looked like he was simply snagging batting practice, always camped right under the ball. He links me to a 2015 Toronto St. Star piece in which White said he was impressed by then Blue Jays outfielder Kevin Pilar's work in center field and a diving catch. But it says White did contrast his style of play with the headlong flat out body launches which are typical of many of Pilar's catches. I didn't dive, white said. And finally, Patreon supporter Brett says, I suspect that Ben is probably right about elite fielders having just as many opportunities to dive as average ones, but I did come up with two possible caveats for center fielders that I think are at least somewhat plain plausible. First, if you assume that outfielders are more likely to dive when they're charging in than when they're running back toward the wall, consider the case of a center fielder who consistently has shallow positioning. This is what others said about Jones. He'd generally be less likely to dive because there'd be fewer balls hit in front of him, but if he had top tier range, he might still be able to track down balls hit over his head. Second, I can imagine that a good center fielder might have fewer opportunities to dive side to side because his range might overlap with the right and left fielders, particularly if the players on either side of him are also good defensive defenders. If you're a bad center fielder and or you have a bad corner outfielder alongside you, you might need to dive for a ball hit into the gap. But if you know you have another outfielder who can cover ground as well, maybe you don't need to dive because you know there's another glove waiting. This strikes me as distinct from infielders. And remember, we learned that good infield defense is not positively correlated with dive rate. Infielders, Brett says, are never going to be able to make up the gap to the next fielder on a sharply hit ball, and even corner outfielders who have all of foul territory to potentially dive or spread slide into. It also occurs to me that a fielder who is good at positioning himself based on each hitter's tendencies might also end up diving less because he's consistently in a better position to reach the ball. Thanks for all the thoughts. Really interesting topic, at least to me, and clearly some of you you can support Effectively Wild on Patreon by going to patreon.com effectively wild and signing up to pledge some monthly or yearly amount to keep the podcast going. Help us stay ad free and get yourself access to some perks, as have the following five listeners Tony C. Mitchell, Crawl, Emily Ross, Reggie Deal, and Steve Smeaton. Thanks to all of you, Patreon perks include access to the Effectively Wild Discord group for patrons only, monthly bonus episodes, playoff live streams, prioritized email answers, shout outs at the end of episodes, potential podcast appearances, personalized messages, discounts on merch and ad free fan graphs, memberships, and so much more. Check out all the [e-mail] effectively wild if you are Patreon support or you can message us through the Patreon site. If not, you can contact us via email. Send your questions, comments, intro and outro themes to podcastangraft.com you can rate, review and subscribe to Effectively Wild on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, Music and other podcast platforms. You can join our Facebook [e-mail] group effectivelywild. You can find the effectively wild subreddit at r effectivelywild and you can check the show notes in the podcast, posted fan graphs or the episode description in your podcast for links to the stories and stats we cited today. Thanks to Shane McKeon for his editing and production assistance. That'll do it for today and for this week. Thanks as always for listening. We hope you have a wonderful weekend weather the winter weather and we will be back to talk to you next week.

[Brent Rooker]

If things fall different, how different would it be? Players growing 3rd arm send infield to the tree and if there is fair game even K's dirty pants and maybe if you're lucky we'll cold call. By the chance you never know precisely where it's going to go. By definition, effectively wild.