Effectively Wild Episode 2434: Hold Your Dark Horses

Summary

Effectively Wild Episode 2434: Hold Your Dark Horses

Date: January 31, 2026
Hosts: Ben Lindbergh (B), Meg Rowley (A)
Podcast: Effectively Wild: A FanGraphs Baseball Podcast

---

Episode Overview

In this episode, Ben and Meg reflect on recent front office and management shakeups, analyze the offseasons and futures of several MLB teams—focusing on lopsided rosters, "dark horse" playoff candidates, and new contract structures—while peppering the conversation with their trademark humor, wordplay, and thoughtful asides. They also respond to listener mail on Lord of the Rings baseball hypotheticals and discuss some fun idiomatic and linguistic quirks related to baseball and beyond.

---

Key Discussion Points

1. Twins Front Office Shakeup

• [00:35–09:15]
• Derek Falvey is out as President of Baseball Operations and Business for the Twins—peculiar timing so close to spring training.
• Ben and Meg aren’t sure if the decision was mutual or prompted by ownership turbulence, especially considering off-season instability and payroll constraints.
• Jeremy Zell promoted to GM; Tom Polad becomes interim business president.
• "Would've been strange if they had just stripped him back to baseball only..." – Ben [02:58]
• Lament over the impossibility of doing both "pobo" (president of baseball ops) and "business" together:
  “It’s like a player-manager or something. Maybe Falvey’s the last POBOs we’ll ever see.” – Ben [06:01]
• The AL Central’s general lack of ambition (“AL Centralling all over the place” – Meg [06:54]) remains a theme.

---

2. Oakland Athletics: Roster Building & Extensions

• [10:03–23:02]
• Jacob Wilson, A’s shortstop, signs a 7-year, $70M extension—part of a trend locking up position players (Nick Kurtz, Brent Rooker, etc.).
• Athletics have a respectable core of hitters, but pitching remains a persistent problem.
• Discussion on prospect arms (Gage Jump, Morales, Jamie Arnold) and the unique challenge of attracting pitchers to the organization, particularly in light of Severino’s disappointing free agency experience.
• Anticipation about the eventual Vegas move and the hope that a new ballpark could help recruit and pay for pitching talent.
• Analytical note:
  “Last year they were 13th in position player WAR… respectable, playoff-caliber, but pitching… 27th.” – Ben [16:46]
• Playoff simulations occasionally favor the A’s if their young pitchers can take a step forward.
• A’s as a “fashionable dark horse” pick, moving from contrarian to mainstream in prediction season.

---

3. Lopsided Teams and Team Building

• [16:46–23:02; 60:12–63:45]
• The A’s profile as one of MLB's most lopsided clubs (exciting offense, bottom-tier pitching).
• Pirates given as similar, but in reverse: excellent pitching, poor position-player group.
• A running joke: “What we need to do clearly is merge the A’s and the Pirates and then you would have a sort of super team.” – Ben [63:45]

---

4. New MLB Contract Structures: “Trampoline” vs “Pillow” Deals

• [23:02–38:47]
• Analysis spurred by a piece distinguishing “pillow contracts” (classic: one-year deals) from “trampoline contracts” (two-to-three-year deals with early opt-outs).
• Scott Boras’s influence on opt-out deal popularity, tracing the innovation to J.D. Drew and Adrian Beltre contracts.
• Ben relays a statistical analysis showing that, over time, opt-out deals don’t really “cost” players money—they end up matching market projections almost exactly.
• Notable quote:
  “So these guys who... have had to settle... for the trampoline contract... [still] get what was projected for them. So in that sense, the math just kind of works out as projected." – Ben [29:38]
• Meg muses on Boris’s continued effectiveness as an agent, arguing that although his puns are getting worse, the deals still “end up being okay” for clients. [31:31]
• Discussion of how recurring opt-outs “serial free agents” could make future free agent classes stronger than they appear on paper.
• Fan perspective: opt-outs create emotional tension—harder for fans to become attached, because the better a player performs, the likelier they are to leave after a year or two.

---

5. MLB Offseason Inactivity: Frustrating Teams

• [44:42–81:08]
• Hosts debate which teams’ inactivity has most irked them and why.
• Tigers, Guardians, Reds, and Orioles called out for lackluster offseasons relative to opportunity or recent performance.
• Meg: “The Tigers... have the combination of stakes and also opportunity to be just a little bit more ambitious, having a tremendous benefit within the context of the Central.” [48:56]
• Ben: “Year after year... just get an outfielder for once. Like sign a Harrison Bader or something. I know you have the lotter coming in, but it’s just... just go get a bat.” [51:08]
• Mariners’ lack of moves is discussed with some forgiveness—Ben: “I'm more forgiving... Because I do think the Mariners are good.” [55:23]
• Pirates and Brewers included as low-spending/underwhelming despite opportunities given their young cores and positive signals.

---

6. Who Are the Real “Dark Horses” for 2026?

• [65:49–76:13]
• Hosts query which teams genuinely qualify as dark horse playoff contenders in 2026.
• Criteria: must have a “legitimately respectable” unit (offense OR pitching), must have been overlooked or ridiculed recently, not just a recent playoff team with a minor step up.
• Teams mentioned:
  • A’s – may be too obvious/fashionable for this crowd.
  • Pirates – reverse A’s, strong pitching, miserable offense.
  • Marlins – Meg’s top pick: “I think the Marlins are my dark horse team for 2026.” [67:51]
  • Twins – possible, due to low public expectation but respectable projection.
  • Royals, Giants, Rays – discussed as not quite fitting the label.
• The audience-specific nature of “dark horse” is acknowledged: to casuals, the A’s or Marlins might be surprising, but to plugged-in fans, less so.

---

7. Listener Mail: Lord of the Rings Baseball Hypotheticals

• [85:39–94:29]
• Extensive and lighthearted feedback on prior week's chat about constructing a baseball team of characters from Lord of the Rings.
• Fun moments:
  • “Bag End of the Bullpen” pun (from Discord, [85:40])
  • Aragorn considered for center field, Legolas for shortstop, Ents ruled out due to pitch clock violations.
  • Gandalf on the mound (“he throws heat, literally”), hobbits as strike zone nightmares.
  • Question: Should magic/invisibility be allowed? No—invisible players break the game, especially with strike zones and replay.
  • Query as to whether mutants who turn invisible must be naked: “They just have to wear their uniform.” – Meg [91:59]
  • General appreciation for feedback: “People clearly enjoyed that conversation... It was a good fun time, man.” – Meg [94:50]

---

Memorable Quotes & Moments

A’s and Pirates Superteam

• "What we need to do clearly is merge the A’s and the Pirates and then you would have a sort of super team... Smash the two rosters together in some sort of super collider and we end up with some... Pirates-A’s, like, substance that is really good on both sides of the ball." – Ben [63:45–64:47]

On the Opt-Out Era

• “There is kind of a conflict there where you know that if that deal’s paying off, then they’re gonna leave you, or at least they're gonna test the market.” – Ben [40:56]

AL Central as a Theme

• “It’s just al Centralling all over the place.” – Meg [06:54]
• “A division that lacks a particular kind of ambition, you know?” – Meg [07:06]

Meg’s Friday Energy

• “We're getting into the Friday energy, and I haven't even opened a beer.” – Meg [69:15]

On the Twins’ Rogers Twins

• “Their names need to be further apart on the name spectrum than Taylor and Tyler. That's effectively the same name.” – Meg [78:42]

---

Notable Timestamps

| Timestamp | Segment/Topic | |-----------|---------------| | [00:35] | Twins front office shakeup & AL Central ambition | | [10:03] | A’s extensions—position players vs. pitching imbalance | | [16:46] | Deep dive on lopsided rosters and projections | | [23:02] | Pillow vs. trampoline contracts; Boris era; player mobility | | [38:47] | Fan perspective: contracts, player turnover, emotional ties | | [44:42] | Underwhelming offseasons: Tigers, Guardians, Reds, Orioles | | [55:23] | Mariners: forgiving a quiet winter | | [65:49] | Who actually qualifies as a “dark horse”? Criteria debate | | [69:15] | The Marlins as 2026 dark horse—audience specificity | | [85:39] | Listener mail: Lord of the Rings baseball lineup review | | [91:59] | Hypotheticals: invisible mutants, uniforms & baseball | | [94:50] | Appreciating listener engagement on fun hypotheticals |

---

Thematic Summary

This episode blends timely MLB news (front office changes, offseason inertia), analytical commentary (on contract structures, roster construction, projections), and community engagement (listener hypotheticals). The hosts’ rapport and signature witticisms infuse the show with energy and accessibility—themes of ambition (or lack thereof), new market dynamics, and sifting contenders from pretenders underpin their thoughtful, often humorous baseball banter.

---

For full episode discussion or in-depth team-by-team analysis, refer to the detailed timestamps above.

Transcript

[A]

It's effectively wild. So stick around. You'll be well beguiled. It's effectively wild. Like Nolan Ryan was sometimes. Hello, and welcome to episode 2434 of Effectively Wild, a FanGraphs baseball podcast, brought to you by our Patreon supporters. I'm Avery Riley of fangraphs, and I'm joined by Ben Limburger of the Ringer. Ben, how are you?

[B]

From po boast to no boast. Derek Falvi out as both president of baseball operations and president of business operations at the 20s. So we knew you. You chewed too much. You bit off too much. You can't do both of those jobs. It's an affront against front offices and chewing. Yeah, that too. It's. It's Icarus. It's. It's. You're just. You're daring to be smited. Smitten. Smited. I don't know. But if you. You take on those two jobs, I don't actually know what happened here. It doesn't seem like anyone does as we.

[A]

Doesn't seem like it.

[B]

No more will come out, probably, but it's odd timing for sure to have him out, what, like, 10 days before pitchers and catchers report they've had a whole off season to part ways, if they were going to part ways. And I know there's been a lot of upheaval with the Twins and new minority owners and the. We are going to sell and no, we're not going to sell. And then there's a. A new control person. There's a new polad in charge. So perhaps like, meet. Meet the new bus, same as the old bus, I guess. Not the same, but still same family. Probably too close for comfort for Twins fans. So maybe it had to do with all of that. Maybe. Maybe there's history with him and Tom Poad, or maybe he got frustrated with another kind of inactive off season for the Twins. They're pitching this as a. A mutual parting of waste. But, yeah, it's always hard to read between the lines on that to see whether it was, you know, mutual, but it was maybe more one person than the other. It's rarely just like, you know, the mutual option. It's. It's rarely a 50, 50 thing in a mutual situation.

[A]

You're right to say that we don't really quite know what went on here. The timing is odd, I guess, if you think you're gonna do it. It's stranger still to let him persist in the role. And maybe it just took a while to arrive at the conclusion that the Fit wasn't good anymore. But it is odd. It would have been stranger, I suppose if they had removed him from having baseball responsibilities and then been like, no, but stay on and run the biz, won't you please?

[B]

Yeah. Wouldn strange if they had just stripped him back to baseball only because that was kind of standards. But I don't know, maybe he was stretched trying to do both of those jobs and it had some impact. It's really hard to assess the Twins whole situation over the past few years or to blame the front office for what just seems like ownership just not really wanting to invest in this team and, and then they went through the whole trade deadline sell off and breaking down the bullpen and everything last year and that was something that was probably to some extent payroll mandated and they just, they haven't had a whole lot of resources to work with there.

[A]

Yeah, it's a, it's an odd. They're in an odd spot. Just I think organizationally right now, you know, you always are a little hesitant to speculate because there does tend to be reporting that emerges about these things and gives some amount of clarity to what went the decision was, what it was, when it was and what have you. But yeah, weird. A weird one. And since you're a multi sport knower now, you might also know, Ben, that the, the Minnesota Vikings also got rid of their GM today.

[B]

So I saw that. And in fact Falvi was informed of that firing in the middle of his zoom exit interview with the media.

[A]

That's so weird.

[B]

He was quite surprised that that had happened at the same time, which I guess it's, it's a little late to be doing that in the NFL too. But it' late or early. I don't even know which. In MLB usually you see this sort of thing happening at the end of a season, at the start of an off season, and then everyone has time to move on and, and explore other opportunities and bring someone in. So that's why you wonder like, did some particular incident precipitate this? Because as Aaron Gleeman noted, he was the lead speaker at the Twins annual media luncheon a week ago. So it doesn't seem as if they were sor of pushing him out in any obvious public way. So seems like we're kind of. Yeah. Flummox.

[A]

Strange times.

[B]

Yeah. So weird times. So Tom Polad himself will be taking over in the interim as the president of business operations until they find a more permanent solution.

[A]

And notably, notably good businessman, I guess.

[B]

Yeah. In good hands. And the gm, Jeremy Zell will be promoted to lead the baseball operation side, I guess. Still gm, but like a real gm. What a GM used to mean. So, anyway, it was. It was less than a year that Fi was PO both because he was promoted to the second slot last year on March 3, so didn't even quite make it 11 months. Just thumbing his nose in the eye of. Of all that is right and proper in Major League Baseball and sports. Trying to be the business guy and the baseball guy. Pobo. I wonder whether we'll ever see it again. It's like a player manager or something. It's like it's over. Maybe Falvi's the. The last pobos we'll ever see. Who knows?

[A]

Perhaps. Yeah, don't. Don't be a PO.

[B]

Both.

[A]

And don't draft JJ McCarthy. I think these are things we're learning.

[B]

Yeah. I was gonna say something about the Twins payroll, but you look at the other teams in that division, it's just like they're, comparatively speaking, pretty big spenders. It's like the twins are at 108 million according to roster Resource. Right now. The Guardians are at 82 million. The White Sox are at 74, so the Tigers are at 161. They're tops in the division, but they're 15th in baseball. So it's just al centralling all over the place. Royals 100 and 46. They're in the middle of the Twins.

[A]

And the Tigers hail Centraling all over the place. That's quite some phrasing that you have committed to their friend. Yeah, we could say a division that lacks a particular kind of ambition, you know?

[B]

Yeah. Yeah. I want to circle back to that a little later on this episode. I went with no, both. Just. Just off the dome, just on. Off the top of my head. I hadn't prepared. I don't know whether. Just like Nobo.

[A]

No, no, both was. No, both your instincts were good because it has an isy symmetry with pobos, which is. It does, I think, what we landed on. So I. I think your instincts steered you. Steered you straight on that one.

[B]

Yeah. I guess unemployed is another way to describe it. I'm sure he'll be able to. Kind of.

[A]

Kind of a rude way to describe it. I mean, accurate but pointed, perhaps.

[B]

Well, it was. It was mutual, as we know. So, you know, it was his doing as much as anyone else's, as far as we know at this moment. But, yeah, there's always going to be some sort of reveal and. And then you never know with the reveals. Is it the the team that's trying to cast aspersions on the per. You know, just like, reveal airsome dirty laundry on the way out. Or is it the executive who's trying to portray things in a positive light for them so that they can catch on somewhere else? So it's always tough to discern the truth, but sure, yeah. Even with all the changes in leadership over there, the fact that this happened now at the very end of January, it's. It's odd, to say the least. Anyway, yeah, so Thad Levine had already moved on, and now Derek Falvi has, after, I think, a full decade, just about. He was with the twins since 2016. So, yeah, a lot of. A lot of changes over there. And if they did leave because they wanted to go somewhere with a little less uncertainty, I know Levine was just hired by the brewers earlier this month as a special advisor. One of those kind of. It's almost like a pillow contract for a baseball executive. You know, you become like the assistant to the. Whatever, manager. Yeah. And. And then you can kind of, you know, bide your time, keep your name around, and. And then maybe someone comes along looking for a GM or a pobo, and you have, you know, you kept your finger in. You've been in the game, so.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Okay. We'll see where they end up next. And wherefore the twins.

[A]

Finger in the pie. Finger in the.

[B]

Yeah, that's probably the pulse. There's on the pulse. But in. In the pie, you wouldn't want to.

[A]

Put it in the pie.

[B]

Well, not if other people are going to be eating right.

[A]

If you're going to eat the entire pie, which. Look, no judgment. These are trying times.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

But finger on the pulse.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Toe in. You keep a toe in, you keep a toe in. But don't put those in pies, either. I mean.

[B]

Yeah, it's. I guess you Usually. You have fingers in every pie. It's like you're. You're touching all the pies. I. Because a finger in one pie, maybe that's acceptable. But, yeah, it's. It's. The idiom, I think, is more about having your finger in multiple pies, which is. It's greedy, you know?

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

It's too many pies. You're just wanting to be involved in everything. So. Okay. We had an extension announcement shortly before we started recording. The A's have extended Jacob Wilson, shortstop. They're just putting together quite a collection of position players over there. Our buddy Brent Rooker and Lawrence Butler and Tyler Soderstrom. And now Jacob Wilson and Of course, Nick Kurtz, they haven't had to extend yet because he was just a rookie this past year. This is a 7 year, 70 million contract for Wilson. So they've just, they've locked up a lot of that core and wherever they're playing in a few years, we have a pretty good sense of who at least will be playing for them. And that's the real strength of this team. And that's something that makes them watchable and pretty exciting on the field. But pitching is also important, I think. Yeah, if I could choose one, if I could choose to build around position players or pitchers, I would choose position players.

[A]

Sure.

[B]

I would go the Cubs before the world championship route of the Cubs theory of the case.

[A]

Yeah, yeah.

[B]

And. And obviously that core didn't turn into a dynasty, didn't stay together as long as people thought and hoped that it would. But it worked. Mission accomplished. They won their World Series. And they're just. There is a little less uncertainty if you can build around hitters just because pitchers, you know, there's so many injuries and you can't count on them long term. And so if you had to choose one or the other, probably build around the bats and then supplement with the pitchers, but ideally a little bit of both, you know, would be nice. So is there help there or on the way in that organization where you could kind of forecast a bit more balance and you know, it's not easy for them to recruit pitchers either in that ballpark and they managed to sign Luis Severino and then he seemed to have regrets about that. So even though they, they paid him a hefty amount to be happy about it. So I don't know. Is there any internal help on the way there pitching wise?

[A]

Morales is interesting. Right. And they, they have Gage Jump, who was a top 100 guy for us last year. I'm not sure where he's going to line up in terms of this year's top 100. But like he threw, you know, a starter, a big league starters, compliment of innings last year to, to some success. He was a 2024 draft guy. So I don't. Can he make the jump? I don't know.

[B]

Ben.

[A]

And of course, you know, they, they drafted Jamie Arnold and they have Gunner Hoagland, so. And, and Mason Barnett and so I think that they, you know, they have tried to, to make some moves to forcibly conscript pitching because I do think that, you know, there will be some difficulty for them recruiting, particularly given the experience Severino has now. I imagine that they think about the extensions and the looming ballpark change. Not that that's going to be like a super pitcher friendly environment, but, you know, it'll be an obviously big league environment, so that'll help. Right? And some of the maturation for these, for the young pitchers they have internally is sort of all sitting together. And I think if they anticipate there being a boost to their attendance and sort of the excitement when they move to Vegas, which just sound farther along than we maybe sometimes give it credit for from a construction perspective, it'll be very nice for them to get there and be like, well, we have cost certainty around a lot of the position player pieces here, right? One of the things that pretty free agency extensions do is get you a discount. And for a team like the Athletics, one that is probably meaningful, but also one of the things that they do is give you cost certainty. So if you think that, you know, Jacob Wilson is an important part of your core, if you think that Soderstrom is an important part of your core, if you know that you have other, you know, valuable contributors like Kurtz, who are going to be around for a long time anyway, you can get to hopefully a new ballpark and say, well, this is a more attractive destination and we know exactly what we're going to have to pay our starting lineup so we can go spend some money on the free agency market. Hopefully some of these young pitching prospects hit. Well, they don't have to hit anymore famously, but you know what I mean, they are successful. You know, if they continue to add in the draft, it gives them more options. Maybe someone like Arnold sort of ready for primetime by then. But also, in theory, you could go say to the market, hey, you don't have to. You don't have to play in Sacramento, though. You get to play in a shiny new ballpark in Vegas. Don't you love Vegas? Now, that's the way that a normal team would operate. Is that the way that the Athletics will operate from a payroll perspective? I mean, assumes facts not in evidence, perhaps, but I think that that would be the idea. Let's get this group on an understandable, sort of predictable schedule in terms of their payroll. And then when we're ready to move to the desert in a couple of years, hopefully good starting pitching comes with us. And again, some of these young guys are in. They've seen big league time already, so it's a question of can they take a step forward. And as Dan noted when he ran his sort of first run of the Zips standings, now that all the Projections are done on a team by team basis. There is playoff potential for the A's in a number of the simulations. It happens more often and to greater effect if the pitching takes a step forward. So there is path dependency there. But it's not out of the realm of possibility because this is an intriguing position player group. This is a, an increasingly good group. You know, last year I was like singing their praises and people were like, meg, you're crazy. No one said that. They said other things about me. They mostly pretend to the Dodgers. But I, I think that like being able to have that be like your contrarian pick, you know, when you're trying to have at least one or two zags when you're making your predictions, that's going to be hard to do. I think that, yeah, that the A's will be sort of a fashionable dark horse candidate. Which isn't to say that like they're all the way there, but it's like if you could kind of squint, see it, you know.

[B]

So yeah, yeah, this might come up later too. But yeah, there aren't that many dark horses teams that have not been good that you can kind of talk yourself into making the playoffs this year. And they would be one of them, even if it's a little improbable because of the pitching. But here's what I'm talking about when I say that they're lopsided. So last year they were 13th in position player war. Yeah, smack dab in the middle of the Astros and the Padres.

[A]

So very respectable.

[B]

Yeah, playoff caliber position players. That's one team that made the playoffs and one team that was very, very close to making the playoffs and had ton of injuries along the way, so that was okay. But then the pitching, they were 27th and that's less good. Only the Rockies, Angels and Nationals had less valuable pitchers than the A's. That's not a great trio. Seems bad. Yeah, it's good to be better than that trio. But they were barely better than that trio and worse than everyone else. And that has not changed this winter because I'm looking at the team depth charts now, which incorporate zips and steamer, presumably. And this is just war. But war wise, they project to be the 12th most valuable collection of position players. And they are between the Diamondbacks and Padres, two teams that certainly have playoff aspirations. They are above the Phillies, they're above the Tigers, they're above the brewers, they're above the Red Sox.

[A]

My God.

[B]

And the Rangers and the Guardians. So they're very much playoff caliber when it comes to how the bats stack up. But the pitching, the news is, is no better. They have the fourth worst projection, pitching wise, better than only the Rockies, the Nationals, the Cardinals. And no, that's it. Because I said fourth worst.

[A]

How's that gonna math out?

[B]

Yeah, so. So again, those are teams. It's. It's such a dichotomy because if I sort by by bat on this page, then the A's are grouped with all these potential playoff teams. And if I sort by pit, there's no pit on the field. There are no pitchers on the field for the A's. If I sort by pit, then they are with the, the projected cellar dwellers and. And teams that have no hope. So it's quite a disparity.

[A]

It's interesting too, because they moved pitching at the deadline to go get De Vries, so they are interested in some amount of consolidation here. It suggests that there might be room for them if they so choose to do consolidation trades and try to bring in pitching that way. It depends on how close and how important they think those guys are going to be for them ultimately. But I don't think you, like, move Mason Miller to go get Leo De Vries to then like, flip him again. That seems like an unlikely thing. So it's just, it'll be interesting to see kind of what direction they go here. But I do think that they have some options. You know, like, they, they are still constrained by their own unwillingness to spend money. And I think, you know, they made their own bed as it pertains to having to pay play in Sacramento. So I'm not trying to, like, be overly sympathetic to this year, but I do think that that is a legitimate impediment to their ability to sign like, quality free agents. Like, how long does Franber Valdez have to be unsigned before even a big contract from. I still always want to say Oakland. You know, I really do. I still always want to default to that where I'm like, I've said A's a lot. I said Athletics a lot. Let's pick a third thing.

[B]

No Ace fans or former Ace fans also want to say.

[A]

Feels like I'm rubbing it in and.

[B]

I'm not trying to.

[A]

But, you know, I do think that they have, like, this legitimate constraint that is making it difficult for them to bob and weave in that space. Even if, you know, ownership woke up tomorrow and were like, actually, I'd like to give you $50 million more dollars to spend. I don't know that they would necessarily be able to with a really dramatic overpay attract pitching. But they have more options now. They do.

[B]

Yeah. And DE isn't even part of the projection that I just cited that optimistic positive. Yeah there is on the depth chart on the fan graph step chart. He is Projected to get 35 plate appearances right now. I guess that's just a hedge. You know maybe he debuts, maybe he comes up gets a cup of coffee or something. So. So only 0.1 war of that projection is attributable to Leo Devries. So that's how many guys they have without even counting one of the top prospects in the game who's he got up to Double A.

[A]

So yeah, but he's.

[B]

He raked there in 21 games.

[A]

But yeah, he's a young 19. He did get an invitation to big league camp.

[B]

So we'll see.

[A]

We'll see.

[B]

He's not yeah super distant but. But when he comes then you add him to and if you have the other Max Muncie like if he could hit it all, if Denzel Clark could hit it all. It's just a lot of really interesting players there. Remember when Zach Galoff came up and was amazing for like he's still 300 plate appearances. Yeah. And he hurt and also just wasn't good in four and wasn't good last year when he was playing. But yeah I imagine if he had continued to be as good as he looked in in that first extremely nice 69 games in in 2023. But turns out don't even need Zach Elof to be good. Maybe because they have all these other guys anyway it's an enviable collection of hitting talents so if they could just balance it out a little bit and of course there's always the option to trade and you could balance things out that way. But then you're Robin poor Peter to pay Paul. And if you could keep that group of hitters together but also develop some pitchers or, or signed some even better. So I will be watching their career with great interest. I guess we shall see where they go. Okay.

[A]

I will be engaged with professional baseball.

[B]

Yeah. Okay. We talked the other day. I remember. I don't know what the context was but we were talking about pillow contracts and whether the sort of contracts that we've seen lately qualify as pillows because I, I rejected that suggestion. I was uncomfortable with the idea that it's a pillow unless it's a one year deal. And and so Zach Kreiser over at the Bandwagon. Yes. He wrote about the history of this type of contract Structure that we seem to be seeing more and more these days. And he drew the distinction between pillow and what he is coining. He's labeling it a trampoline contract. So it's a. Because it's sort of a springboard, I guess. I mean it. Yeah. Now, Jeff Sullivan, if he were here, he would say a trampoline contract is very careful. Yeah, that's stay away. Definitely. Yeah. Like you don't want to get anywhere near a trampoline. In this case. The trampoline is, is actually pretty good for these players because it gives them some security and safety, unlike an actual trampoline, which is just a death machine. Or they can then use it to sort of propel themselves back into the market. I guess that's what Zach is getting at, that they can bounce back immediately and test the market again because they have an opt out after a year or two. So I like the, the pillow versus trampoline distinction. Maybe we can adapt that. I think when I brought this up the other day, I cited the Adrian Beltre contract with the Red Sox as the classic pillow the or pillow contract and the one that I think Oris even kind of coined the term for that one. What Zach reminded me about in the bandwagon here, I did not recall that although that was a one year deal, it was a one year deal with a player option which had different salaries based on playing time incentives. And so as Zach writes, for all intents and purposes, it was a two year deal with an opt out, a trampoline deal. So he's actually reframing my understanding of what I thought was just the, the classic prototypical pillow contract. He's saying it was masquerading as a pill country. It was a trampoline all along. Yeah. So. So maybe it's just the different terminology. Maybe if, if that deal were signed today, it wouldn't be a one year deal with a player option. It would be a two year deal with an opt out or something. And then we know what happened next. And it led to history and the hall of Fame and his great second act with the Rangers or whatever act he was on. But he was trying to pin down the first of these. And according to his research, the first kind of classic trampoline deal example he could come up with was J.D. drew, who ahead of the 2005 season signed a five year deal with the Dodgers, but it included an opt out after year two, which he then exercised and he went to the Red Sox. And J.D. drew was a Scott Boris client, as was Beltre so it's really when we talk about Boris, we talk about his puns all the time. But the thing that, that just still charms me about Boris's punning and, and hackneyed as it is just he is such a power broker in baseball. And so the, the fact that that's what he does with his platform, I mean that's not all he does with his platform, but that he uses his platform, parlays that into just this really kind of cringeworthy standup routine a couple times every off season. It just delights me because he is such a mover and a shaker and this is another illustration of that, that he really has put his stamp on free agency and on the way that contracts are structured and, and you know, there's a whole history of him finding loopholes and exploiting them. And he's just, he's very clever. He's pretty good, pretty good at the whole agenting thing. I think it's safe to say not a small sample when we're talking about Scott Boris. So, so this was him, I guess, kind of innovating in contract structure. And that's more than 20 years ago that Drew signed that deal. But as Zach documented, it has become increasingly common in the past several years. And he identified the winter of 2018-19 as something that may have sparked this increase in opt outs because that was the winter when Machado and Harper were free agents forever. And Craig Kimbrell and Dallas Keikel sat out the first half of the season or so because of the qualifying offer. And that was when the Dodgers tried to sign Bryce Harper on a Kyle Tucker esque deal and didn't succeed that time. But then after that there was Nick Castellanos who had a trampoline contract with the Reds and then the Trevor Bauer deal with the Dodgers. And then the following off season, a Bunch of guys, seven of the top 25 free agents as ranked by MLP trade rumors had trampolines. Carlos Correa who, who had an unusual situation, of course, but Javier Baez stay away from trampoline's Carlos with that ankle. Yeah. And then it was Sean Manaya did a couple after that and then of course Bellinger and Blake Snell and Matt Chapman. And last winter eight of the MLB trade rumors top 25 went for trampoline deals as that classified them, including Bregman and Alonzo. So this is happening more and more. And here's some interesting math that Zach did. He sort of stat blasted the trampoline contract and found that in a way Maybe it's much ado about nothing. Not much ado about nothing, but ado this. It kind of just. It equalizes like it comes out in the wash, more or less. So here's what he found. He says, I averaged the expectations in reality, of the 25 trampoline deals we've seen resolve themselves since 2020. Looking at the MLB trade rumors projections for the contract size, that is the actual contract signed and the contract that followed if an opt out was used or leveraged for an extension. So the initial projected average deal for these guys was 4.8 years and 104.9 million. And then the initial deals, they actually got three years. So almost two years fewer than the projection. And 68 million.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

So almost 40 million less. And then the total money then was, if you add in the resulting deal as well, whatever they sign when they trampoline back into the market, they ended up getting on the whole 4.3 years and 104.2 compared to the projection, which was 4.8 and 104.9. So looked almost exactly dead on. And then he looked at it in terms of the total expenditure resulting from those completed deals, which was 2.5 billion. And then the projected total expenditure on the initial deals from movie trade rumors, 2.5 billion. It's like 3 million apart in total. And that's not accounting for deferred money or inflation or whatever, but it's basically exactly the same. So these guys who in many cases have had to settle or have decided to settle for the trampoline contract, if you account for what they get then, and then what they get when they then reenter the market, it works out exactly the way that it was projected to. So in that sense, the math just kind of works out just as. As projected.

[A]

I wonder if I don't want to, like, blow smoke at Scott Boris, but it suggests to me that he is more often than not correctly gauging who the beneficiaries of this shortened initial structure will be. Does that comport with your read of this data? Right. Because it's like we looked at, you look at someone like Bregman this year or Pete Alonso, who we had spent a year kind of feeling bad for that he hadn't taken that initial extension offer from the Mets. Right. And you look at Matt Chapman, like all, all of these guys.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

And Snell kind of end up making good in the end. Now, I imagine some amount of that is good luck on their part. Right. That they stay healthy, that they don't have a year of underperformance or whatever. But like, if you're, if you're a free agent, I don't know that like that shortened contract is necessarily feeling so, so much like settling, right? Because it's like you can look at the market and be like, well, I don't know, Bellinger got his. Right. Like, ultimately it worked out for Bregman. Like, it ended up being fine for Matt Chapman. I'm sure that you would prefer the, the longer locked in amount, but, you know, this is, this has kind of gone okay for these guys. And I, I do wonder if, you know, some of this is the ones, at least the ones who were Boris clients kind of ultimately ended ending up getting kind of good advice, right, that they properly gauged that they would have an opportunity to reenter the market and then sort of make good in the way that they wanted to. I don't know. I find that interesting because it's like, I feel like we're always having this meta conversation. Not always, but often having this meta conversation about like, has Boris lost a step? Right? Is. Is the, the fastball ticks slower than it used to be? And I think kind of not really. You know, it's the, the puns are objectively worse. You know, that part not working out great for Scott. Sorry, Scott. Like you need a writer's room badly. But these deals are kind of going okay now. We'll see how the ones that got signed this offseason end up comporting themselves and if there's a desire to even opt out. Because I think some of these deals like that have opt outs built in the, you know, it's like, it's like Clemens said about Bellinger. It's like, is this him having an opportunity to reenter the market or should we think about this as like a five year deal with like a tiny escape hatch in case he like pops an MVP season or whatever. So I don't know, I'm just, I think it's, I think it's interesting. Like we end up with the benefit of hindsight on this stuff and it's like, I don't know. Does okay.

[B]

I think so there might be some cases where they were just sort of forced into it because that was what the market offered. And then.

[A]

Sure, sure.

[B]

After the fact, we planned this all along. We were brilliant.

[A]

But yeah, yeah, again, I think that they would prefer to have a longer deal. But, you know, it, it ends up being okay. Or maybe the, maybe the better way to put it is like the guys who end up opting out are the ones where it worked out. The other guys just don't.

[B]

Yeah, it is a really marked difference though, because you used to have opt outs that would come in the middle of a long term deal and often they didn't really get exercised. Zach dates that to the A rod deal which did get exercised, but in many cases they didn't and it was hard to know exactly how to value those. But yeah, now we have really sort of front loaded the opt outs in a way that feels distinct, even if it does date back, at least to J.D. drew. And someone will write in and tell us about some precedent. Everything has happened before at some point, but maybe that's the modern ish precedent. But a couple things occurred to me. One is when we were talking about that pass in line about how the next couple free agent classes look weak and I was connecting that back to when I wrote something for BP more than a decade ago about how oh, is free agency dying because everyone will sign extensions. And it's true that if you look at the guys who are going to reach free agency the normal way, that the classes don't seem inspiring. But they could get stronger because some guys break out and really raise their stock in the interim, they could get weaker because some guys who are projected to be free agents won't end up being them because they will sign extensions themselves or they'll get hurt or something. But also if we have this arrangement where guys are sort of serial free agents, just repeat free agents because they keep testing the market and then coming right back. So maybe next year's class looks kind of weak, but then Boba Shet could be back on it and Michael King could be back on it and maybe Tatsuya Imai has a good debut year and he's back on there and then it'll be time for Bellinger and Tucker to come around again if they want. Or you know, it's like, like Bregman and Alonzo just did that. So maybe we can't exactly write those guys off. When you're looking ahead to future free agent classes, you really have to remember to scan all of the opt outs because that could dramatically change things. And so, yeah, it could just be it. Also, I guess it gives you some, some flexibility. So maybe your skill set in a particular market, maybe it's something that's affecting the market as a whole. If you were hitting the market after, you know, the lockout or the pandemic or whatever it is, and maybe that was just depressing spending or if it was just that There weren't a lot of teams with a need for you and your particular skill set or the position you played that time. So give it another roll and see how you do the next time. Or maybe you think I could be even better. You know, if you're Kyle Tucker, Bo Bichette, you're pretty appealing as it is. But you might think, yeah, but what if I don't get hurt later in the season and I'm fully healthy and no one has to worry about my knee or anything else, or whether I can hack it for a full season and maybe if I remove that last little stain on my record of this one thing that might give teams pause, then I could test the market again. And if I don't, well, at least I got myself a few years here. So it's not like I have to be back on the market next year. I could, I could buy my time. So does give you a bunch of bites at the apple, I suppose. And it seems like players are preferring that more than just the safety, the long term security of knowing that you have a gig, at least for certain players in certain positions in certain years, but more and more of them. I mean we're up to like a third of prominent free agents now kind of coming to the conclusion that that benefits them. Plus as we mentioned, the, the qualifying offer benefit of not being subject to that the second time around.

[A]

I do wonder though if part of the calculus. So like you want. You're in an interesting spot for the guys who had a qualifying offer and have an opt out. And I do wonder if the guys who have a have an opt out after one year next year. If the teams are sort of looking at that like they're probably going to not exercise that because they'll be worried about the lockout. Do you think that there's like. I do wonder how that piece of it is factoring into the payroll calculus for clubs. I don't know, it's just like, and that's a, that's specific perhaps to this market. And I imagine this is a structure that's going to persist past this year, obviously. But I do wonder about that as a wrinkle or like the guys who have it after the second year who may or may. I mean, I guess they're going to know whether or not they played that year. That's the thing about time. You can remember the stuff that happened before, but it is just like how that opt out decision plays next offseason is going to be fascinating because they'll have to make that choice before, as we've discussed, you'll have to make that choice before December 1st, which is when the agreement expires. So. I don't know, Ben.

[B]

Yeah, the other thing, I think Zach touched on this, too, but from a fan perspective, I think on the one hand, okay, so we know that teams like this because they get to avoid the back end. Hey, it's another. Another meaning of back end that we can apply at the back end of the contract where the player is old and declining and you're sort of locked into that deal that you signed when they were young and in their prime, and for a long time it was, okay, well, they'll front load the production and we'll make more than. We'll get more than our money's worth in the first few years. And then on the back side of that deal, then we'll sort of pay the piper. But if you can avoid that, it seems like teams are pretty happy to pay a premium in the short term, even in some cases a super premium, because they're over a competitive balance tax threshold. If they can, then avoid paying that player until they're 39 or whatever it is. But from a fan perspective, I wonder whether there's a downside in that. You can't quite get attached to a player. If you're a Mets fan, sure. Are you really going to form an affinity for a bond with, say, Bobaette? And is there any part of you that's conflicted because the better they do well, that's good. You want to root for your players to do well because it helps your team do well, but the better they do, the more likely you are to lose them. So there is kind of a conflict there where you know that if that deal's paying off, then they're gonna leave you, or at least they're gonna test the market. And. And so that was the thing. It's like, if, okay, if you sign Juan Soto For 15 years, yeah. There's probably some part of, like, the back of your mind, you're thinking, well, how long is he gonna play the field? Can he even play the field now? You know, what's he gonna be like when he's. But that's also kind of not your problem. It's not your money as a fan. It's only your problem in the sense that it might preclude your team from doing something. And if your team is owned by Steve Cohen, then that might not even apply. I was just.

[A]

I was just going to say, like, if you're. If you're ranking. If you're ranking the potential concerns of the fan bases that have guys signed to these deals, I would put the Mets at the bottom. Just because your ability, whether it ends up being true or not, to talk yourself into, into the idea that, well, Uncle Steve will just give him a new offer pretty high, you know.

[B]

Yeah. Yeah. And it's, and it's so far down the road you can think, ah, that's, that's a problem for the2030s. You know, like we, Right. We, we won't have to. Let's just, we'll read the rewards right now. We'll, we'll stress about the sewing.

[A]

Right? Yeah. Worry about the. For, for the 15 year guy. Worry about it later for the, on an option guy. Don't worry. You can. I'm. What I'm saying is you can talk yourself into not having to worry at all because you can just be like, hey, Uncle Steve will just blow Bo away. You should all be embarrassed about the Uncle Steve stuff. I want to continue to say that because it's important that we.

[B]

It's true.

[A]

Keep our eye on the prize here, you know.

[B]

Yeah, it's, it's a little, I don't know, paternalistic or what's the avuncular. Avunculistic. I don't know.

[A]

Anyway, avunculistic, I don't think of unculistic is a word, but now I want it to be one, but I don't want it to apply to Steve Cone. So I'm, I'm in a bind. I feel like I, I spent all my Friday energy on Wednesday. I'm trying to locate it mid episode and I'm, I'm working on it. I want, I want you to know I also hear me sounding kind of down and I don't feel down especially, so I'm going to try to be up anyway.

[B]

Here I reverse the sewing and the reaping. You do the sewing first and then the reaping comes. And maybe the reaping is, is bad if you sign someone to a 15 year deal. But yeah, it's not quite as much your problem and also it's a problem for another day. But the, the opt out coming after a year or two.

[A]

Right.

[B]

That is sort of your problem as a fan because, you know, well, I might lose this guy and the better he plays, the more I will be happy we have him. But the, the likelier it is that we won't have him for very long. So you can't really count on anything. Of course, in, in the game like you know, anyone could get traded, anyone could get hurt, things happen. But. But when someone is a free agent or has an opportunity to be a free agent, and when the odds of them testing free agency increase with their performance, then yeah, there's got to be a little bit of a conflicted feeling there. Whereas if you sign someone to a 10 year deal and they come out of the gate just crushing and raking, it's like, oh, and we have this guy for so long, you know, Whereas it could just end up being a one year deal and you might miss them even more. So I don't know. I think that does sort of affect the fan experience because you look at all the moves that the Mets have made this off season and it's a new look team, as we covered last time, but it also might not be a look that lasts for that long because Freddie Peralta, Luis Roberts, Boba Shet, like, these guys are going to be back on the market sometime soon if they don't sign extensions or something.

[A]

Yeah, again, I think that they, if you're a Mets fan, and I don't think this is like cope or whatever, I think you can probably reasonably talk yourself into a couple of those guys being on the roster in 2027, assuming we play baseball, because not all of them will opt out. Some, some of them will just end up signing new contracts and it'll, it'll be okay. You know, I think it, wow, like, encouraging Mets fans to be optimistic.

[B]

It's dangerous.

[A]

Yeah, it's dangerous. But also like try something new, you know, And I also think that Mets fans, they're probably tired of hearing about it, you know, about the Mets thing and that's fine. You're in a different, you're in a different era that you define your own era. It could be a different, could be different.

[B]

You know, it's pretty to think so, at least. So the thing I want to ask you about is which, which team's inactivity has frustrated you most this offseason? Because we talked last time about how news has been slow lately and, and I've seen some other people remarking on that or producing pieces to that effect. Baseball Prospectus did a piece the other day about six teams putting the off in off season and Joe Sheehan had an edition of his newsletter where he listed some of the teams that have not been busy and the Athletic did a, a tier of teams that are trying and not trying. So I guess it's only natural when we're lamenting the lack of moves lately and Granted, most of the moves have been made, so that's why they're not being made now. They were made previously, but there's still some moves to make that are not being made. And there are some teams that just kind of never got off the mat this winter. So, you know, some of them maybe it's a little less frustrating just because they're so bad and hopeless that it's just like a lost cause. Regardless, if they were to acquire someone, it wouldn't change their short term fortunes in an appreciable way. But which teams maybe stand out to you? And we can talk about which one stand out to me too as just like do something. Why? Why didn't they do something? They seem to be in a position to have done something and they didn't.

[A]

I've been thinking about this question since that piece ran at bp. I thought that their collection was a well thought out one. Although some of this I think has to do with what are your expectations relative to what they have done. Right? So like I didn't expect the Guardians to do anything during the off season. You know, to say they've done nothing is wrong. They extended Jose Ramirez and they've made some bullpen moves, but it's been a pretty quiet couple of months from them. But then again, I expected them to have a couple quiet couple of months. Right. I didn't really expect much of the Reds because I so rarely do. I think that the Tigers are pretty high on this list for me. I'll let you maybe talk about the Mariners to the extent that you want to and then I can circle back around to them because, because I'm of two minds about Seattle and I'm trying to have one of those minds be from a place of objective analysis rather than just fanning. And it is the side that is maybe less annoyed by their inactivity than I think some have been. But the Tigers to me really stood out because you have the combination of stakes and I would understand their stakes to be, hey, you only have one more guaranteed year if you school bowl. And also the expectation of, of the last season success, right, that you were able to get to the playoffs even though, you know things looked dicey. So you brushed up against, you brushed up against your own mortality but then were able to push through it. And also you, you don't know for sure you're going to have school for that much longer because it seems like you're not going to spend big money. So I, I found, I found their off season to be a little Puzzling, because they are. They're not a bad team and they were obviously a playoff team, but I think they are a team that could stand to be upgraded in a couple of spots and they've opted not to do that. And I find that disappointing because, you know, how long are you going to be good? Well, for sure, maybe only one year more. And that's not to say they haven't done nothing, but what they've done has been sort of underwhelming relative to what I would like them to do. I think they would probably say, hey, Meg, you dope, don't you remember we play in the AL Central? Haven't you just talked about the diminished expectations and the lack of ambition? And to that I would say, sure, but think about how much you could seem like you're being ambitious with just a little bit more. And I'm sorry, it does take a little bit more than like Kenley Jansen, you know, or Drew Anderson or, you know, they've made, they've made moves that I think are not bad from a, from like a, you know, reinforcing the bullpen perspective, but like, have a. Have a little bit more ambition.

[B]

Like, that's pretty much it. They, yeah, they reinforce the bullpen. They resigned Kyle Finnegan, right? Yeah, they resigned Gleyber Torres.

[A]

But yeah, it's just, it's not a lot. And so I think I would put the Tigers high on that list. They have the combination of stakes and also opportunity. Opportunity to be just a little bit more ambitious, having a tremendous benefit within the context of the Central. So I think Detroit is pretty high on my list. I don't know that I need to say all that much more about my frustration with Baltimore's approach to their rotation, but I'll just reiterate that despite the moves they've made. I see. Gotta get one more. You guys. You still, you still could use one more. You still could use a dude, go get it.

[B]

Yeah, I said the other day, just like, sign Fromer and be done with it.

[A]

Right?

[B]

MLB Trade Rumors did a. A poll, a survey of its readers. Who do you think will sign Fromer? And the orioles were number one by a lot. It was like 30% of the respondents said Orioles and no one else was above 10% or something from market is. Is strange, perplexing. I don't know whether it has anything to do with the character concern stuff that we talked about last year with like the maybe intentional, possibly cross up of his catcher or what or whether it's just other stuff or there's always going to be someone who's like the last prominent free agent out there. But yeah, that just makes so much sense. If, if the Orioles would just sign him, you know, Astros connections, former Astros connections. Just, just go get that done. And, and if things go wrong for you in the season, then no one will really fault you because you kind of did what everyone demanded that you do finally. So. Yeah, but I'm, I'm with you on the Tigers. And if, if anything could have illustrated for them that they do have more work to do, it was the way last season ended. I mean, I know that they ultimately triumphed over the Guardians in the wildcard series, but the fact that they were like second place in the Central, I mean, that they were overtaken by the Guardians, that could have been a wake up call. Like, hey, yeah, you've got some good players here, but this is not exactly a powerhouse and you have Tareks Goople for maybe just one more year, so make the most of that. So, yeah, go get someone. So that has, that has been a good one. I don't think there's any statute of limitations that expires on being frustrated with the Ohio teams. I'm with you on. Well, what did you expect? So it's not surprising, but it's. If you could still be disappointed or if you're not disappointed, you could still disapprove. It's just, especially if you're gonna sign Ramirez and sort of semi restructure the next few years of his deal, which was described as a way for, for maybe them to have a little more spending room. Well, then to do that, spend like, I don't know, just get an outfielder for once. Like sign a Harrison Bader or something. I mean, I know you have the lotter coming in, but it's just, yeah, it's year after year after year. And so it's the opposite of surprising. It's completely predictable. But that just makes it all the more frustrating. And I know, you know, you hope that, that Bazana will, will come up and contribute and that his walk rate will survive the, the promotion and they've got those young guys. I know, but. And yes, they're perennially close to contention or in the playoffs and, and they do manage to just keep coming up with pitchers. So all credit to them and their developmental acumen and their front office for making it work one way or another. But it's, it's the classic, as you, as you say, playing on hard mode where just like one major signing every now and then. Would just really put you over the top potentially. And there are always so many obvious places for them to upgrade. You know, there's always some clear positional needs where if you just plugged in just like even an average player or something and not have to try to figure it out on the fly. Like they just, they really were not a good hitting team at all last year and you could project some improvement from holdovers and rookies and everything, but just, just go get a bat. I just, it shouldn't be an impossible ask. So year in and year out, it's the same with them. And yeah, the Reds, The Reds just have, as usual, not given us much reason to talk about them this winter. So can you blame us for ignoring the Reds? What. What are we supposed to talk about with the Reds? So they just, they've done so, so little this winter. I'm looking at the handy dandy off season tracker at Roster Resource and man, it is, you know, filter out the minor league contracts and there's just JJ Blood day. Like it's Pierce Johnson. I mean, Rock Burke, come on, get me, get me a little excited. You know, they just, they squeaked into the playoffs just barely and didn't last long there. And, and that was, that was nice that they made it back. But yeah, have, have some ambitions here. You know, do something to convince Ellie that he might want to stick around aside from, from paying the man, which you will also have to do, but also do something to reassure him that this is going to be a competitive team for the rest of his career. So, yeah, very, very deflating off season for that franchise.

[A]

You're not excited about being able to say bra.

[B]

Rock Burke. Yeah.

[A]

How do you feel about the Mariners off season, Ben?

[B]

Well, it started well and then it was kind of over, I guess almost before it began. So. So retaining Naylor, that was nice.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And. And trading for Ferrer, I, I think that was a good pickup if, you know, you're not going to really have room for Harry Ford. I get that. And then Ref Snyder comes in and then I guess that was it. That was pretty much a wrap. So I'm more forgiving of that just because I do think the Mariners are, are good.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And so, yes, obviously a team in their position where it's not as if you, you know, can move from not making the playoffs forever to taking the playoffs for granted, but they do seem like clearly the best team in that division. And they have, you know, I guess you could say they did. They did some work during last year and they brought in Naylor, and then they kept him, and that was a good fit for them. And you hope that they'll get better health and production out of the pitchers, which seems reasonable to expect, because that was. That was the hope. That was the expectation coming into last year. And then they were maybe more of an offensive team than anticipated. So some bounce backs. I. I guess there aren't that many places, even though they've lost some guys, too, like Polanco left and, you know, so I don't know what's. What's the greatest need right now. When you look at this roster, which is. It's pretty strong, pretty well rounded, so I would never say, like, take your foot off the gas because you're the Mariners and you've never made a World Series, and you'd really like to do that at some point, so press your advantage while you have it, and while the rest of the division is not too intimidating. But also, even though they sat out much of the winter, they. They do still stack up fairly well. So I guess I'm. I'm a little less up in arms about the Mariners because they have a lot of arms.

[A]

They do. They are in a spot right now where they kind of are anticipating some combination of their top prospects making the opening day roster or like a load bearing Ben Williamson at third. And I don't know how great an idea that is. Great fielder.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Not sure that guy can hit a lick, but the glove is legitimately quite special. So he has big league utility, I think.

[B]

But Gino's still out there.

[A]

Gino is still out there. And, you know, I think that what they would say is that, like, their top position player prospects are in a spot where, like, they can grab some sort of role.

[B]

Right.

[A]

Where if Colt Emerson has a good spring, might just be on the opening day roster. Right.

[B]

So literally the minute after I was talking about how many arms they have, Jeff Passon tweeted that Logan Evans had Tommy John surgery. Yes. One arm down.

[A]

One arm down. Yeah. You started with Logan, and I was about to be like, you are being awful casual about the really bad news you're about to. To deliver to me unadulterated on Mike. But Evans instead of Gilbert is. Sorry, Logan Evans, a trade I will take. Ben, you just scared me so bad. Still feel like my level's low. Not my mic level, just like, my level. But I was like, that's one way to get me. Get me going in the up. Oh, poor Logan Evans. That's too bad. Anyway, if I'm going to accuse The Centrals collectively of a lack of ambition. I could say the same thing of the AL west, which is like, hey, some of you need to like perk up a little bit. And if you're the Rangers, you're like, well, Meg, we traded for Mackenzie Gore. And I'm like, sure. But like, you know, you're projecting kind of mid right now. The east has been so active and busy and then there are teams, you know, like that I think have legitimately been trying to be busier than they've been and just have been outbid or bamboozled in some way by their own expectations. Like, I think the Phillies really wanted Boba shot and they didn't get him, you know, so there's that the Dodgers could be busier. No, I'm kidding.

[B]

Yeah, I would, I would put the Pirates in this class because the bar is set so low for the Pirates that I guess this does look like an active off season for them.

[A]

Sure.

[B]

But it hasn't really been that big an upgrade or that big an outlay. And then there was all the big talk or reporting at least about how they had money to spend and they're prime to spend and all this stuff and they haven't ended up spending very much. It's like they have committed, I think I'm sorting the spot track off season spending and I'm scrolling down, and I'm scrolling down and I'm scrolling down and I finally got to the Pirates there at about 37 million almost. It's, you know, it's Ryan O'Hearn and I know that they made some other moves and they made some trades and they did get Brandon Lau. And it's just the. The batting bar is set so low for them too, that just getting any kind of competent hitter is good, I guess.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Okay. They got Jake Mangum, they got Brandon Lau. These are all upgrades for the Pirates. But it would have been nice if they had managed to sign some major impact bat. That, that would have been good. And. But I know everyone's super excited, of course, about Connor Griffin, best prospect in baseball. The buzz about him is building and understandably so, and he will help, but that just seems like all the more reason. Like, you have Paul Skeens, the best young pitcher in baseball. You have the best prospect in baseball, Connor Griffin. You have this really promising homegrown rotation. You have hopefully Jared Jones coming back. You have Bubba who came late last year, and, and so you can maybe expect a full year of Bubba Chandler. And just there's so much to like There and the pitching was pretty impressive already and just, just like one major move for a bat. And yes, I know that they would have to persuade someone to sign there too. And maybe some players would be understandably reluctant about playing there long term or even signing a trampoline contract there. But if they would do that, if Bob Nutting would not nut and would just pull out all the stops and say I'm gonna pay through the nose to get whoever named top free agent who signed some deal with an opt out or something. And maybe that would be better because if you're not signing a 10 year deal with the Pirates and locking yourself into that, you could just kind of test the waters and give them a year or two and see if they actually make good on promises. And if you can get closer to contention and if they don't, then you're out of there and not that much harm done. But yeah, imagine what they would look like if they had just landed one of the big bats instead of settling for O'Hearn and Lau and Menkham. Yeah, trying to see how they stack up in terms of lopsidedness, which is where we started this episode with the A's. But last year, let's see, the Pirates in terms of pitching WAR in 2025 were fourth, fourth best in baseball. So it's maybe, it's maybe even more extreme and lopsided because, yeah, fourth best pitching team by fan graphs, war and batting 28th better than only the Rockies and the White Sox. So. Well, yeah, they're going to be at the bottom of every, every possible leaderboard seemingly, but depending on which way you sort it. But yeah. So their terms of projections for 2026, let's see how they stack up pitching wise. Pirates, we got Red Sox, Dodgers, Phillies, Tigers, Braves, Mariners, Blue Jays, Reds, Pirates. So they are very much there. They're above the Yankees. And yet if I sort now by batting war, let's see how far. Okay, they are seventh from the bottom. Rockies, White Sox, Nationals, Angels, Reds, Marlins below them. So yeah, sort of similarly lopsided, maybe even more pitching, better pitching than the A's have hitting. What we need to do clearly is merge the A's and the Pirates and then you would have a sort of super team.

[A]

Make him a super team.

[B]

Yeah, you'd have the A's young position player, core and you'd have the Pirates pitching and profit. You'd have, you'd have one of the best teams in baseball if you could just put the Pirates and the A's together and you'd also have an actual.

[A]

Major league payroll and a major league ballpark.

[B]

Yes. A nice one, even. Yeah, this is a great idea.

[A]

One of the better ones. I mean, I see this having never been there, but one of the best ones to watch on tv. My sim league team plays in pnc.

[B]

Nice. Yeah. I've made multiple visits and it lives up to the billing. Really nice place, nice city, but not a great collection of position players still, so. Well, I've come up with the perfect solution. This is how they solve the issue. They just.

[A]

There you go.

[B]

Smash the two rosters together in some sort of super collider, and we end up with some. Some pirates. A's, like, substance that is really good on both sides of the ball.

[A]

So you get a big mess.

[B]

Yeah. But failing that, contracting one of these teams, combining those two teams just. Would it have killed them? Maybe. Might have actually killed Bob. Nutting to.

[A]

I think if we put them in a super collider, it might kill.

[B]

That might kill. Yeah, that's true.

[A]

But we can't do that to our friend Brent Rooker.

[B]

No.

[A]

He won't be able to come back on the podcast. The next time we have Brent on the show, we should tell him about how we propose putting him in a super collider and see how he responds. Because who knows, you know, he started with, like, weather, Twitter, and he could end up down some. Some like, physics rabbit hole and he might be like, honestly, I'll do it for science. Or he might say to his agent, don't book me on that show again.

[B]

He's an intellectually curious sort.

[A]

Yeah, I agree.

[B]

Yeah. Yeah. Next time we have him back, we got to talk about aliens, because I was researching him further and he has weighed in on. On aliens and their existence. And that's.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Yes. A subject that I'm. I'm interested in. So we'll. We'll get his thoughts on that next time he's back. But yeah, because I was saying, like, how many legitimate dark horse candidates are there? And to be a dark horse candidate, you have to be good enough that it's not that big a surprise if it actually works. So you're not like the. Out of nowhere. You're such a surprise team. I was, I was say pedantically that, like, if you're. If everyone picked you to be a surprise team, then you're not really. Yeah, it's kind of like with the Jose Ramirez, most underrated player in baseball. But everyone thinks that. Is it still true in that case? So. So how many teams actually fit that bill for you. Like, weren't good, didn't make the playoffs, but you think they have a legitimate chance. I'd probably put the A's and the Pirates in that category without even combining them in the super collider. But who else, really?

[A]

Even absent an experiment that no universe would allow, that would not get through internal review. Oh, this is a good question. And I do think my. My. My definition around it is not yet as fully realized or particular as yours. But I. I'm. I think I feel about the term dark horse the way that you maybe feel about breakouts, where we were being a little too loosey goosey with dark horse as a. As a way of describing clubs, because we are often. I feel like. I see it applied to teams that are like two wins away from the postseason and the year before. I'm like, that's not a dark horse team. That's a. That's a. Yeah, you'd be better served describing them as an also ran than a dark horse. You know, what are my dark horse teams? Here for me is the team that I think is the dark horse. And maybe I'm defying my own. No, I think I'm right. Here's our Friday energy. I think the Marlins are my dark horse team for 2026.

[B]

I was gonna mention them.

[A]

Let's see if you're gonna mention it then. Then it's too.

[B]

Maybe I wasn't gonna mention them with conviction, though. Yeah.

[A]

Oh, okay. As long as it's a weak dark horse. You know, it's like one of those ones that, like, needs more hay.

[B]

Yeah. You know, it's almost an invisible horse. It's like just blending.

[A]

An invisible horse. That's not it. But then doesn't that.

[B]

Well, we'll stipulate that anything could happen that any team that. I mean, I don't think the Rockies.

[A]

I don't think that to call them a dark horse, they actually have to be like. You don't have to be like a. A dark colored horse to be a. Right.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

No, it's just dark horse.

[B]

I hope it's nothing terrible.

[A]

See, this is always the danger. You're like, what does that mean? And then you're like a guy with a calipers came up with it and you're like, no, not again. So many of you. Genesis. Gosh darn it. Stop it. Put those away. They have no place in a civilized society. Get out of here with us.

[B]

Wikipedia says the term began as horse racing parlance for a racehorse that is unknown to Gamblers and thus difficult to establish betting odds for.

[A]

Okay.

[B]

I don't know why it's dark in particular, but.

[A]

Because you're in the dark.

[B]

Yeah, I guess you're in the dark.

[A]

Right. Because you're in the dark about the horse.

[B]

So the horse we'll go with that.

[A]

Could be any color. You know, it could be like the horses in wizard of Oz. Remember, they change colors.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Yeah. Okay. All right. We're. We're getting into the Friday energy, and I haven't even opened a beer. So I think that my pick would be the Marlins at this juncture because I feel like I can't go back to the A's. Well, you know, and they're not going to be a dark horse. It's like I said, like, they. They're going to be too popular. They're going to be fashionable. They're going to be a fashion. Can you have a fashionable dark horse pick? Are you then out of the realm of dark horse again? Like, how surprising do they need to be? How.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

When do they need to have fallen out of playoff contention the season before? And what. There's some sweet spot between the.

[B]

The.

[A]

The falling out of postseason contention the season prior. And they're like preseason playoff odds. Like our X ray Extra. Our playoff odds are going to go live on Monday at Fan Graphs. Everybody get ready to be grumpy about stuff, because that's the way that we interact with this now, I guess. But we'll. We'll be launching the odds on the playoff odds on Monday because Zips is ready. And so it's in. We have it. It's running.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Go, go, go. Zip, Zip. Zips. But all of that to say I think the Marlins are a good choice because people still make some of this, too, is like, how much fun does the Internet make of you? You know, you have to be made fun of at least some. I made fun of the Marlins a couple of weeks ago. I was like, the east is a psyop. And also the Marlins are there. But I think the Marlins would be a dark horse choice. You do have. I think that to be like a credible dark horse, you have to be. You have to have one part of the roster that is like, legitimately respectable, you know, like the Marlins, I think, will have respectable pitching, and they. They have like a. At least one good outfielder. And that's something, you know.

[B]

Yeah, I guess it depends a little bit on the audience, too, which is something people sometimes say about this is.

[A]

The problem with breakouts.

[B]

Yeah. Which I tend not to look at it as a breakout in terms of raising your national profile, I tend to think of it more as performance. But if you do regard it as this player will go from being largely unknown to being a national name, a household name. Okay. But for a dark horse, I think it depends on the audience as well because we lead this episode talking about, oh, look at all these interesting position players the A's have and. And your average couldn't name a single one of them. Exactly right.

[A]

They couldn't even name good friend of the show Brent Rooker and probably not.

[B]

Yes. So he's been an all star two time all star. Yeah. So. So I think it depends on just reading the room, really. Like for many people, the A's might be a dark horse because they haven't thought of them and they don't know who is on them and they haven't made the playoffs in a while and it might be a surprise to you're a casual follower of the sport or someone who's not plugged in the way that of course all effectively wild listeners are. And so they're quite plugged in. Yeah. So it might be a surprise.

[A]

Names on the Marlins. Man, there are a lot of really good names on the Marlin. Jacob Marcy is one of my. I feel like I should be saying it in a spooky way every time I say Jacob Marcy's name. Yeah.

[B]

So yeah, the effectively wild audience. And by the way, we welcome the noobs as well. If you are. If you are new and just learning, then we are happy to hold your hands as well. We don't want to gatekeep. This is not exclusively for the sickos that we do tend to attract.

[A]

We do tend to have sickos though.

[B]

Yeah. But we, we convert some casuals into sickos, so.

[A]

Right.

[B]

That's our.

[A]

Sorry about that.

[B]

I guess that's the function we fulfill. So yes, I think it is dark horse is audience dependent. But I think A's might be too obvious for, for us. But, but, but Marlins would not be, I think because Marlins are sweet spot. Yeah. Now they were in contention late last year, but they were. But not in a really serious way where anybody was buying them, I guess. So, yeah, I think they qualify. You could put the Twins in that category. They've kind of perennially been in that lately where it's just like, well, they're not bad and they, you know. Which I guess makes them a candidate for the inactive, frustrating off season list as well for the third off season running or whatever it is. Because as usual, they haven't done a whole lot and it seems like they're good enough. They have a high enough floor that if they could just try to raise that ceiling by doing some stuff then they could have faulted themselves into a more competitive position in that division. So you could put them on that list. I guess you could maybe count the Royals. I don't know if they're, they're far enough for me.

[A]

Yeah. I don't think you can have a team who was. That was as recently in the playoffs as the Royals were.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Also they have one of the best players in baseball.

[B]

Yes. Yes. That makes it a little harder. Yeah. His national profile, Bobby Witt Juniors is lower than it should be, probably just because he has been overshadowed by Ohtani and Judge.

[A]

But do you think that's because they're taller?

[B]

Not exclusively, but partly. But yeah, like they're, I meant that more in terms of their off season, which has been. And they've, you know, they've had some aggressive of years lately, but this off season has not been especially busy or active for them. You know, they made the Isaac Collins trade. There are a couple minor moves, but yeah, not, not a lot of big additions there. And I've also mentioned my. Just frustration or just. It's like the, the soporific off season that the Giants have had just, you know, kind of okay pickups but nothing that changes their outlook from the stubbornly.500 team that they have been for the past few years. So I might group them into that category. Not that I think they conceivably could have really like we're taking down the Dodgers this year, but at least to make themselves a more realistic wild card candidates. I think they, yeah. Could have done more, maybe so. And yeah, I don't, I don't know if they count as dark horse either because they've been close. Ish. Like, could you talk yourself into the Rays? I, I don't, you know, I don't know that I could really. Obviously it's just a meat grinder of a division. And so they're the one team that really hasn't. Hasn't gotten better, hasn't gone for it. They've made many moves but putting them.

[A]

In, in particle acceleration.

[B]

Meat grinders smashing bugs bodies together in all sorts of grisly ways. Yeah. So I don't, I don't know. Like, I guess it wouldn't shock me if they, they pulled some sort of raise. They had some sort of raised trick up their sleeve and managed to be better than Expected and projected. But yeah, unless we count the twins, just because that franchise has just been kind of moribund lately.

[A]

I think you can count them because they're an intro. They're in an interesting spot where like there is a, a, there is a fairly large gap between the popular perception of the team and the way that they are projected. Like, they don't project terribly, they project respectably and they play in the central. So yeah, no, but I do think that like the, the understanding of them in large part because of how aggressively they move moved guys at the deadline last year. So it's not like an unearned perception. You know, they are thought to be, I think, worse than, certainly worse than they're projected. They're projected to be. And I think worse than they are. Like, this is, you know, they have, if we're, if we're thinking about Dark Horse, by the loose definition we're starting to build here, which is that you have to have one, at least one like legitimately respectable unit on your team. Like, I think that that rotation is like, they had some, they had some guys. They had some guys in that group and I don't dislike that bullpen. I will never remember which Rogers it is. Did you see me post about this the other day? I, I'm never confident. I, I, I think that I double check that in pieces more than almost any anything else. Also, how people spell minuscule, they always get that wrong.

[B]

Oh, yes. Yeah, yeah, it's Taylor. Taylor the twin. And Tyler's in Toronto.

[A]

We're both twins.

[B]

Yeah, well, yes, but the twin who is also a team twin.

[A]

Yeah, that's, that's doesn't help me. That's, that is a useless way for me to remember, for you to say Taylor the twin. They're both twins.

[B]

Beth, maybe you remember Taylor. Toronto. No, Tyler. Toronto. Tyler's in Toronto now I'm just gonna get it right.

[A]

I'm never ever gonna get, get it right.

[B]

I think they could oblige. Now, obviously, visually, when you're watching them.

[A]

Like get a tattoo on their face.

[B]

When you're watching them pitch, they're quite distinct. So that helps.

[A]

Once they take the mound, you're like.

[B]

Oh, yeah, yeah, but, but yeah, you'd think just make it easy on everyone. Tyler and Taylor. Tyler and Taylor just have to. Whoever gets the short straw, I guess. But yeah, just Tyler and Taylor have, have different sounding names at least to make it easy on everyone if you're going to be similar.

[A]

Right, right. So part of my, part of my complaint is, is clearly with their parents, because it's like, you should have named them more different things. Their names need to be further apart on the name spectrum than Taylor and Tyler. That's. That's effectively the same name. You know what I mean? Like, that's basically the same name. It's a different name. But is it really not. Not enough. Not different enough. One of them should have been named, like, Jason or.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

You know, or something. And then. And then my. My secondary complaint is that one of them has not been like, this is confusing to people. I need to get a face tattoo. What would it be? Like, a little kitten or something? You know, something sweet or like a dragon? You can't get a. You can't get a tattoo of a thing that has an. That is a team name. Because then what if you get traded? And these guys are getting traded all the time. They're constantly being traded. Like, you look at. You look at the transaction tracker for. I'm looking at Taylor right now because that's just the. We were talking about the twins, and so I opened Taylor's. I'm not going to remember. When we're done talking, though, is the problem. Like, I can keep it. It's like, you know, it's like water through sand. It's only there for a moment, and you're just like, wow. So many different team. Look at all these different. Different teams. He's been on so many.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

My God.

[B]

Yeah. They're itinerant twins. They should. They should both get matching face tattoos, which won't make it any easier for you. Just tattoos too.

[A]

Matching. No. What needs to happen is the one. The. Whichever of them ends this coming season with the. The least war, the lower war total. That guy has to get a face tattoo.

[B]

Okay, that's. It's pretty high st. Yeah.

[A]

I mean, look, I'm. I'm not. I don't want it to sound like I'm anti face tattoo. I mean, I think it's a bold. It's a bold choice.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

Right? You have fewer options if it's a face tattoo. Almost anywhere else on your body if you want to keep that private, or if you think that there are, like, settings where maybe you don't want your tattoo displayed. But why? Because, like, it's not embarrassing unless it's an embarrassing tattoo, and then you might want to cover it up. I'm just saying you have fewer options if you get a face tattoo to cover it up, because often you're like, well, I gotta have my face out there.

[B]

You know, I will also Just mention Milwaukee because the brewers have spent the smallest amount on free agents of any team this off season. The aforementioned Akil Badu.

[A]

Badu. About nothing.

[B]

Yeah, they're only major league free agent signed and he might not even be a big leaguer for them all the time. So, yeah, I, I give them a bit of a pass because they did just have the best record in baseball and they did bring up a bunch of young guys and everything and they've been good and you know, but I.

[A]

Think, you know, if we, if we are to offer a piece of feedback to the, the organizations of Major League Baseball, with a couple of exceptions, granted, it's that, you know, you need to, you need to have like a. I'm going to do a swear and Shane's going to bleep it. And I just, I want you to know that I think freaking in this context is an appreciable downgrade. There are times when I swear and I could use a different word and we would be none the worse for wear. And I hear that feedback, particularly from the parents among you. I do think that this is a downgrade, but I understand also that it is a big swear and so we will bleep it. But I want you to hear it in its original version.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

In your mind, in your mind's ear. I want you to hear it because your kids can't hear your mind's ear. You know, they can't hear it. I just think that more teams need to have a let's go kind of mentality about the off season. And I understand, like they're looking at their own internal models. They're looking at their own internal models which I'm sure have a greater degree of precision in any number, number of ways than public facing models just because of the data that they have access to and what they're able to feed into those models. And so, you know, maybe I'm being unfair. Maybe some of these teams and their off seasons, they constitute the, the, the let's go approach because they know things I don't or whatever. But I do think that more teams should have that approach. Now, I will be fair again and say it's hard to have that mentality in a free agent market like this because it's light on, let's go guys. You know, I mean, I'm sure each individual guy in his, once he takes the field tries to have that mentality for himself, but in terms of real difference makers, they were lighter on the ground this year. And so, you know, I want to be sure that we're grading on an appropriate curve given what, you know, what options were available to guys. But to take it all the way back to the beginning of the episode when you have dudes signing these contracts with opt outs after a number of years suggests to me that there was, you know, there could have been persuasion with more money and bigger deals. But yeah, that's not what we got.

[B]

So, yeah, you know, ah, David Robertson was retiring.

[A]

Do you need a moment?

[B]

No, but I'm sort of sad because I do.

[A]

Yeah, he's one of the big guys.

[B]

Big David Robertson appreciator. Yeah. Really just one of the most effective, mostly non closer reliever. I mean, you know, he had several years where he was a closer, but yeah, really, really excellent career. Really. He's up there in terms of career war among just, you know, primarily set up man guys and, and yeah, it was really quite effective almost up until the end. And I guess maybe like the last guy who sort of dated from my fan era because he came up with the Yankees at the tail end of my still, you know, really rooting for them in the way that I did as a kid. So I have some, some fondness for him. And one of the first players I interviewed as well around that time when I was with Yankees magazine as an intern in the publications department for the the Yankees. So yeah, happy trails, Drob. I will miss you. Had quite a ride. Okay. Yeah. All right. So I will just end here by reading a couple of the responses we got to our Lord of the Rings discussion. Got extensive responses to this, which was probably predictable. First of all, Mulder bat flip Patreon supporter in our Discord group pointed out that we could have said bag end of the bullpen. We're talking about back end. And then we pivot to Loder.

[A]

Wonderful.

[B]

Yeah, I think he actually, he wrote that before he even got to the Lord of the Rings part of the podcast. And so even more appropriate. But that's one of those, you know, that's an episode title that got away. I wish I had gone in that direction. There were a number of people, I think, who pointed out that maybe Aragorn would have been a good choice in center. You know, Strider. Right. He covers a lot of ground.

[A]

Sure.

[B]

And that maybe Legolas could have been a good shortstop given his incredible reactions and coordination and everything. Yeah, a number of people pointed out because I, I suggested that maybe an ent. Maybe Treebeard would be an asset on the mound, just with the downhill plane and the height and everything. But pitchcock violations. Obvious, obvious issue. If you have to have an end moot every time to decide which pitch you want to throw, like you're not gonna get, you're not going to get any pitches off in 15 seconds. So that is, that's a big impediment, I think.

[A]

I would imagine that Ents would reject pitchcom as a technology. I think that they feel very uncomfortable with that.

[B]

They're kind of old school. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And so we got one good response from some, some scholars wrote in and some citations from the books. And I know that the question specified that this was the movie versions of the characters, but, but I like this email from William who cited some good literature. So first Gandalf William makes the case that he should be on the mound because he throws heat, literally. And he's quoting here from chapter six of the Hobbit. He gathered the huge pine cones from the branches of his tree. Then he set one alight with bright blue fire and threw it whizzing down among the circle of the wolves. It struck one on the back and immediately his shaggy coat caught fire and he was leaping to and fro, yelping horribly. Then another came in, another one in blue flames, one in red, one in green. They burst on the ground in the middle of the circle and went off in colored sparks and smoke. Especially large one hit the chief wolf on the nose and he leaped in the air 10ft and then rushed round and round the circle, biting and snapping even at the other wolves in his anger and fright. So, yeah, he throws gas. He's like a flamethrower. Not only the accuracy on display there, but also the pyrotechnics, if that's even allowed. Yeah, not a bad one. And also similarly for hobbits, they've got good arms and they've got good accuracy. So this is from the prologue of Fellowship. Though slow to quarrel and for sport killing nothing that lived, they were doughty, at bay and at need, could still handle arms. So hobbits pitching potentially. And I think some people also suggested, you know, good two way. Players. Like, we didn't really consider the, the batting order or that aspect of things, but obviously the, the size, you know, strike zone. We're into Eddie Goodell territory there. Tough to throw strikes to those guys. So I think that's something to consider here Also. Aragorn the Strider point. His range pretty legendary. This is from two towers wide. Wonder came into Amir's eyes. Strider is too poor a name. Son of Arathorn, he said wingfoot I name you. This deed of the three friends should be sung in many a hall 40 leagues and five you have measured ere the fourth day has ended. Hardy as the race of Elendil so. So, yeah, he can cover a lot of ground. And, you know, I guess canonically in the books, like Aragorn, these guys are big, you know, because they're just like descendants of Numenor. And Aragorn's like six, six. And, and Boromir's big, too, and Legolas too. Like, you know, we were going with movie versions, but. But these guys, they have some height. But William suggests maybe Boromir at first base because he's gonna have some range. You know, big guy over there, he could sure have some reach. And, you know, I guess a lot of good things to consider here, really. And Bilbo was a great stone thrower too, so it's really sort of a hobbit thing. So I think those are some pretty good points. Even though we were explicitly considering the movie versions of these characters, there's real.

[A]

Potential in the actual source material that we were not incorporating into our decisions here. Yeah.

[B]

Yes. And people were musing about, well, what if you can use the One Ring? And, and, and by the way, I think I, I, offhand, I made some remark because we were talking about the arms and, and Frodo and the ring and Mount Doom. Of course, he did not throw the ring into Mount Doom. I guess he had an assist, though. But you gotta give Gollum some credit for that one. But, yes, like, if he's allowed to use the ring, like if he can go invisible.

[A]

Right.

[B]

You had people in the Patreon Discord group wondering about the allowability of that. Is that legal? Would you allow an invisible player, which. No.

[A]

I mean, seems like the obvious answer to that is no.

[B]

Yeah, I don't think you. You could. Now, if it were, again, like the mutant situation that we were talking about, then that's one thing. But we got a Patreon email from Matthew who said, would you allow a player who's invisible? I guess everyone would be confused about the strike zone for such a player. Yeah, that's. That's a problem.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Might be an effective pitcher, Matthew says, although maybe not. If the batter can catch the spin of the ball signal significantly earlier, potentially even before the ball is released, would be great. At pickoff outs, they could use pitchcom to call for a pickoff plan. No one else would even know until the pitcher turns toward the base. But any kind of call, I mean, like, tag Plays force plays like you can't see them at all. And if you did replay review, they wouldn't appear on the tape. And so you couldn't confirm that they were ever safe. And yeah, the strike zone would be a huge issue as well. So if it's something inherent to you, if it is a mutant game, then maybe you have to make some accommodation. But if it's just that you have been seduced by. By the call of the ring and you're putting it on yourself, then that's. That is cheating. Which we also talked about last time.

[A]

Okay, I have a question. When mutants are able to go invisible, does it affect their clothes or do they have to get to be invisible? Because if, if, if they have to be naked to be invisible. Well, I think you have a reasonable accommodation. They just have to wear their uniform.

[B]

Yes. If the uniform doesn't disappear that you still can't see the appendages.

[A]

But it would help for some things, Right? Yeah, you're right.

[B]

In the movie at least Frodo's clothes disappear too.

[A]

Covers the clothing, makes you invisible. Invisible. Like you're just invisible.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

And it does it in the book too, right? Invisible. He doesn't get naked in the cave with golf.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

He just puts the ring on.

[B]

Yeah. Although. Yeah. Not wearing very much himself, but.

[A]

Yeah, but I think that's a. I mean, choices may be too strong to describe the. But he has a little in.

[B]

He's got a little loincloth. Yeah. It's not like shred of the hobby. He used to be in there. You know, there's still some good in him. So. And some.

[A]

Or some concern about seeing the downstairs on. On film.

[B]

Yeah. Yeah. I just saw 28 years later at the Bone Temple. So I've. I've had plenty of full frontal exposure.

[A]

Lately, but I have heard enough about what happens in that movie to be like. I appreciate that people say this is good, but not for mega. No, thank you for.

[B]

I loved it, actually. It's my favorite movie in the franchise.

[A]

Yeah, I've heard it's very good. But I've heard that there are parts of it that are real rough.

[B]

Well, you're spared. I did a whole other podcast about that on the Ringiverse feed coming out this weekend, so people can get my thoughts on it there. And. And the only other thing, I guess is that people wrote in a lot about the. The outfielder who has the dome or repels the ball, and people had other questions about that. We didn't consider whether this would also apply at the plate, but that was not specified in the question. And. And that's pretty important. I would say. So, yeah. Because if the ability to repel the ball extends to the plates, then this guy is really overpowered, probably. We got an email from Patreon supporter Daniel who says that player would be highly valuable as a DH who could on base a thousand lead to wild pitches and help baserunners advance. If the force field is big enough and, or the dugout close enough to home plate, their whole team could on base a thousand. Yeah, if. If the pitcher cannot get the ball over the plate because it's protected by the. The force fields, then yeah, that would be kind of a game breaking bug, I think. So we'd have to do something about that.

[A]

That.

[B]

Yeah, but that was also not in evidence. I think that would have been specified in the question. We were just considering the defensive ramifications. I think that was the important thing.

[A]

Yeah, I think that's right.

[B]

Okay, well, thank you for, for all the feedback, all the, the many responses. People clearly enjoyed that conversation.

[A]

I mean, it's a good fun time, man.

[B]

Yeah, no, it was great. All right, that will do it for today and for this week. Thanks as always for listening. By the way, one week ago when we had Vin Pasquintino on, I asked him about his upcoming arbitration case. Well, it never came. He and the Royals agreed to a deal so they don't have to go to a hearing. This was his first time eligible for arbitration. He asked for four and a half million. The Royals offered four and they avoided the whole hearing by just agreeing on a two year deal worth more than 11 million with some incentives that could take it up to 16 million. So now he doesn't have to sit in that room and hear how bad he is. So Vinny's getting paid. And if you'd like to help us get paid, well, good news, you can do that directly by supporting the podcast on Patreon. Just go to patreon.com effectivelywild and sign up to pledge some monthly or yearly amount to help keep the podcast going. Help us stay ad free and get yourself access to some perks. As have the following five listeners, Jack Elliot Higgins, Josh Green, W And M, Martin Faden, Simon Gilbert and Alex Volman. Thanks to all of you, Patreon perks include access to the effectively wild Discord group for patrons only, monthly bonus episodes, one of which we will be recording this weekend. Sign up now and you can get it hot off the podcast presses, plus playoff live streams, personalized messages, prioritized email answers, shoutouts at the end of episodes, potential podcast appearances, discounts on merch and ad, free fangraphs memberships, and so much more. Check out all the [e-mail] effectivelywild if you are a Patreon supporter you can message us through the Patreon site. If not, you can contact us via email. Send your questions, your comments, your intro and outro themes to podcastancrafts.com youm can join our Facebook group at facebook.com group effectivelywild. You can rate, review and subscribe to Effectively Wild on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube Music and other podcast platforms. You can find the Effectively Wild subreddit at R effectivelywild and you can check the show notes notes in the podcast posted fan graphs or in the episode description of your podcast app for links to the stories and stats we cited today. Thanks to Shane McKeon for his editing and production assistance. We hope you have a wonderful weekend and we will be back to talk to you next week.

[A]

Riley, I wanna hear about your Hail Tiny Trout with three army.