You wrote an article back in the 90s about this when at the KC Star or SI and it said something like, if the chiefs (horrible in those late 90s) played the patriots 100 times, they’d only win something like 10% of the games, but if the Royals (equally awful in the 90s) played the Yankees 100 times, they’d win 40% of the time. That baseball somewhat hid dominance on a season level because there’s so much variability game to game (pitcher, ballpark, weather, etc.).
I freaking hate what the Royals are doing. What fan would trade in more baserunners for more homers without any increase in scoring?
For their next trick, maybe the Royals can figure out how to subvert the pitch clock or increase the number of strikeouts per game until we finally reach 27.
The Royals moving in their fence is interesting, but I'm still waiting for an MLB team, say the Astros, to build a hill in the outfield and place a flagpole in it.
The idea of tuning your park to your team for such a small advantage, one that could easily be wiped out by an injury or two or just the changes due to normal player turnover, sure seems like a sign that the Royals have their collective heads in a place that will keep them from seeing the light anytime soon.
Here's a curiosity about Pettitte - he was with the Yankees for 15 of his 18 seasons, went to the postseason 13 times, and started Game 2 of the ALDS eleven times. He started G2 in 1995 (under Showalter), 1996-2003 and 2007 (under Torre), and 2012 (under Girardi, who started him in G3 in 2009-10). The closest thing I have ever heard to a plausible explanation for this obvious and strange pattern was that Torre "didn't think he was a Game 1 pitcher", whatever that might mean. But given it was mostly created by his longest-tenured manager, it must mean something.
Some of this may be the way that the regular season wound to a close. But I have to ask: was he ever deserving of being the Game One starter? Look, a guy can be awesome and still be the second-best player on his pitching staff. (In another context, Scottie Pippen comes to mind.)
This is half a rhetorical question and half genuine curiosity - when the Bob Nuttings of the world say they need a salary cap to compete, would they want a salary floor of $250m? $220m? 200m?
If you gave the Pirates a budget of $200m, I bet they could make the playoffs. I hope they could eventually lock Skenes up long-term. So, why not have a budget of $200m?
If the answer is: “because we can’t be profitable at that level of spending” - how would you be profitable with a cap/floor unless there was significantly more revenue sharing.
If there needs to be significant revenue sharing to make it all work anyway, why not focus on that, instead of on the cap?
If the goal is to set the cap at something like $110m, where the Pirates could conceivably still turn a profit without additional revenue sharing, then what that is doing is putting (even) more money in Guggenheim’s pocket, in Steve Cohen’s pocket. I’m not sure how that helps Bob Nutting, except for not making him look as bad by comparison.
While A&G cards of Joe and Mike would be a fine addition to the ledger of early 21st century American cultural history … the existence of a card for only 20% of The Baseball Project’s lineup remains A&G’s most puzzling oversight to date.
Joe, you really need to learn how to question raw statistics thrown out by your buddies. The Royals having the "fourth highest ballpark in MLB" is like putting me in a room with Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer and Yo-Yo Ma (all of whom I went to school with) and pointing out I have the fourth highest net worth. These are the elevations of the top three MLB stadiums per one source I looked at:
1. Coors 5280
2. Chase 1100
3. Truist 1050
Here are the next eight:
4. Target 840
5. Kauffman 750
5. PNC 750
7. American Family 700
8, Progressive 650
9. Comerica 610
10. Wrigley 600
11. Guaranteed Rate 600
I see this all the time when people will claim that such an such a team has "the fourth best scoring defense in the NFL" when they don't tell me how close they are to third and how close they are to ninth. Sometimes that's significant, sometimes it's not. In this case, Kauffman's elevation doesn't materially differ from any stadium in its own division.
Here is possible partial answer to. why PEDs are not given much thought for Andy Pettitte. He was soft throwing lefty whose mid to upper 80s fastball didn't seem to change after use. Makes sense?
The disparity between payroll is getting bigger as well, as teams are ignoring penalties. In 2015, (possibly the last year a smaller budget team won it all) the top ten spending teams spent $1.85 for every dollar the bottom ten spent. In 2025, it was $2.44. Keep in mind that those numbers do NOT include luxury tax penalties, just the money spent on players before the penalties.
This is a 69% increase in 10 years in the gap between the haves and the have nots. That is a significant difference
Joe- The Fairness thing... is right out of the movie "The Unforgiven"... "Deserve's got nothing to do with it!".
Someone here did write about the Miami Market and i wondered myself - there's plenty to be had down there in terms of a large city awaiting a winning team! So i've no feeling for Marlins losses (W/L or $)!
So it appears the Dodgers are the new Evil Empire! But the Dodgers also produce good farm talent. And like all teams, have some dead money invested on players. And somehow, they still make the best use of acquiring new talent! Baseball hasn't had a dynasty in quite awhile - maybe it's happening ... now!
You wrote an article back in the 90s about this when at the KC Star or SI and it said something like, if the chiefs (horrible in those late 90s) played the patriots 100 times, they’d only win something like 10% of the games, but if the Royals (equally awful in the 90s) played the Yankees 100 times, they’d win 40% of the time. That baseball somewhat hid dominance on a season level because there’s so much variability game to game (pitcher, ballpark, weather, etc.).
I freaking hate what the Royals are doing. What fan would trade in more baserunners for more homers without any increase in scoring?
For their next trick, maybe the Royals can figure out how to subvert the pitch clock or increase the number of strikeouts per game until we finally reach 27.
Beurle should be in
I just saw this and wanted to share. I don't even recall hearing of the player before, but hope Pos can do a deep-dive background on him.
https://x.com/Topps/status/2015174408390709298?s=20
And still a nice signature at age 100!
2027 BBHOF Ballot:
2027 BBHOF ballot SP - ERA+ 117: Four-square! Jon Lester will be ANOTHER 117 ERA+ SP. Compare function on BR:
1. Lester (W-L - BB) VS. Pettite (War - IP, BB%)
2. Lester (W-L - K%) VS. Buerhle (War -IP, BB-BB%)
3. Lester (G-W-L) VS. Hernandez - War, ERA-BB%)
The Royals moving in their fence is interesting, but I'm still waiting for an MLB team, say the Astros, to build a hill in the outfield and place a flagpole in it.
The idea of tuning your park to your team for such a small advantage, one that could easily be wiped out by an injury or two or just the changes due to normal player turnover, sure seems like a sign that the Royals have their collective heads in a place that will keep them from seeing the light anytime soon.
Here's a curiosity about Pettitte - he was with the Yankees for 15 of his 18 seasons, went to the postseason 13 times, and started Game 2 of the ALDS eleven times. He started G2 in 1995 (under Showalter), 1996-2003 and 2007 (under Torre), and 2012 (under Girardi, who started him in G3 in 2009-10). The closest thing I have ever heard to a plausible explanation for this obvious and strange pattern was that Torre "didn't think he was a Game 1 pitcher", whatever that might mean. But given it was mostly created by his longest-tenured manager, it must mean something.
Some of this may be the way that the regular season wound to a close. But I have to ask: was he ever deserving of being the Game One starter? Look, a guy can be awesome and still be the second-best player on his pitching staff. (In another context, Scottie Pippen comes to mind.)
This is half a rhetorical question and half genuine curiosity - when the Bob Nuttings of the world say they need a salary cap to compete, would they want a salary floor of $250m? $220m? 200m?
If you gave the Pirates a budget of $200m, I bet they could make the playoffs. I hope they could eventually lock Skenes up long-term. So, why not have a budget of $200m?
If the answer is: “because we can’t be profitable at that level of spending” - how would you be profitable with a cap/floor unless there was significantly more revenue sharing.
If there needs to be significant revenue sharing to make it all work anyway, why not focus on that, instead of on the cap?
If the goal is to set the cap at something like $110m, where the Pirates could conceivably still turn a profit without additional revenue sharing, then what that is doing is putting (even) more money in Guggenheim’s pocket, in Steve Cohen’s pocket. I’m not sure how that helps Bob Nutting, except for not making him look as bad by comparison.
…
While A&G cards of Joe and Mike would be a fine addition to the ledger of early 21st century American cultural history … the existence of a card for only 20% of The Baseball Project’s lineup remains A&G’s most puzzling oversight to date.
Joe, you really need to learn how to question raw statistics thrown out by your buddies. The Royals having the "fourth highest ballpark in MLB" is like putting me in a room with Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer and Yo-Yo Ma (all of whom I went to school with) and pointing out I have the fourth highest net worth. These are the elevations of the top three MLB stadiums per one source I looked at:
1. Coors 5280
2. Chase 1100
3. Truist 1050
Here are the next eight:
4. Target 840
5. Kauffman 750
5. PNC 750
7. American Family 700
8, Progressive 650
9. Comerica 610
10. Wrigley 600
11. Guaranteed Rate 600
I see this all the time when people will claim that such an such a team has "the fourth best scoring defense in the NFL" when they don't tell me how close they are to third and how close they are to ninth. Sometimes that's significant, sometimes it's not. In this case, Kauffman's elevation doesn't materially differ from any stadium in its own division.
Here is possible partial answer to. why PEDs are not given much thought for Andy Pettitte. He was soft throwing lefty whose mid to upper 80s fastball didn't seem to change after use. Makes sense?
The disparity between payroll is getting bigger as well, as teams are ignoring penalties. In 2015, (possibly the last year a smaller budget team won it all) the top ten spending teams spent $1.85 for every dollar the bottom ten spent. In 2025, it was $2.44. Keep in mind that those numbers do NOT include luxury tax penalties, just the money spent on players before the penalties.
This is a 69% increase in 10 years in the gap between the haves and the have nots. That is a significant difference
I have often said (perhaps even here) that Pettitte is just Buehrle on a better team.
I have often said that a superstar pitcher is just Buehrle on a playoff team.
Buehrle belongs in the Hall!
I have often said that Pettitte is just Chuck Finley on a better team!
Chuck Finley was Pettitte with a prettier girlfriend. He had confidence!
I have often said that calzones are just pizzas that are harder to eat.
That is a decent comp as well, though Finley was less consistent. Higher peak years, but more off years also.
Joe- The Fairness thing... is right out of the movie "The Unforgiven"... "Deserve's got nothing to do with it!".
Someone here did write about the Miami Market and i wondered myself - there's plenty to be had down there in terms of a large city awaiting a winning team! So i've no feeling for Marlins losses (W/L or $)!
So it appears the Dodgers are the new Evil Empire! But the Dodgers also produce good farm talent. And like all teams, have some dead money invested on players. And somehow, they still make the best use of acquiring new talent! Baseball hasn't had a dynasty in quite awhile - maybe it's happening ... now!