(re-posted for the flip)

Giancarlo Stanton hit his 400th HR

Stanton will be an interesting test case to see how much value voters are still willing to give for reaching old school milestones like 500 homers (as terrible as he's been overall the past 2 seasons, he still cranks dingers with regularity and looks more likely than not to get there). As has been pointed out many times, there's no such thing as "magic numbers" that will get anyone who reaches them elected automatically, but Stanton (44.6 WAR, 24.5 WAA) is much better than the Dave Kingman (17.3 WAR, -6.7 WAA), Adam Dunn (17.9 WAR, -8.3 WAA), or Paul Konerko (28.1 WAR, -5.6 WAA) types people usually bring up when they make this argument. And he was a legit star during his peak - including a 59 homer MVP season (and a runner up) - so he won't just be seen as a compiler who hung on to chase a milestone. If he could average even 1.5 WAR for the remainder of his contract, he'd be up in Fred McGriff territory value wise (52.6 WAR), which should be enough for a 500 guy with an MVP, right? 2 WAR per season would put him on par with David Ortiz (55.3). But of course, Giancarlo's recent production doesn't give much hope that even that meager level of value is possible, much less likely.

So whatcha think is the likeliest outcome for a hypothetical Stanton who reaches 500-520 homers with 45-50 WAR, an MVP plus a runner up, 5 all star appearances, 2 silver sluggers, 2 HR titles, 1 RBI title, and 3 slugging titles?

A) Quick election by the writers (a la Ortiz, who added 3 championships and tons of postseason heroics but who also had the DH and (mild) PED taint and no MVP)

B) Eventual election by the writers after a long-ish climb (a la Walker, Rolen, Bagwell, or Edgar, none of whom reached 500, but all of whom were much better players overall)

C) VC election (a la McGriff, who never came close via the writers but who also never finished higher than 4th in MVP voting and never had more than 37 homers or 107 rbi in a season)

D) Doesn't get elected at all

Stanton probably gets elected within the first few years. An MVP, plus enough career bulk? Should be enough.

Every time I get a bit whiny about the Cubs pythag -- they're one of just three teams in the NL > +100; you can guess the other two -- I see the poor Padres... +64 (77-64; but really 66-75) and remember it could be worse.

Giancarlo Stanton hit his 400th HR

Very different shape to their careers - but who would you rather have in the outfield for their entirety, Stanton or Johnny Damon?

And before you laugh, Stanton only has 2 seasons better than Damon's best - top 10 Bref WAR for each:

7.9, 6.5, 5.4, 4.4, 4.1, 3.7, 3.1, 2.8, 2.8, 2.5
6.2, 5.4, 4.8, 4.3, 4.2, 4.2, 4.0, 3.4, 3.4, 3.0

I don't see Stanton as a HoFer. Dude has barely 45 bWAR, which seems on the low end for a low-defensive-spectrum player.

He's had 7 seasons in which he's qualified for the batting title. He only has one 40-homer season, only three 100-rbi seasons, which seems low for your prototypical HoF slugger.

If he hadn't been injured so much it might be a completely different story.

Stanton’s missed time cuts both ways - reducing his counting totals but also raising his rate stats. His 162 game HR average is 43, and his 13.9 AB per HR is 8th all-time. That seems like a likely Hall of Famer to me, although with 4 years left on his current contract there’s time for that perception to change a bit.

I don't think those are the rate stats that will matter for his HOF candidacy.

A 138 OPS+ isn't impressive for a short career, peak candidate. Neither is a .261/.350 AVG/OBP. I can't see him getting in with well under 2,000 hits (under 1,500 now), WAR under 50, and a 130ish OPS+.

Maybe he gets relatively healthy for the next several years and goes over those thresholds. But it's not looking likely.

#98 -- correct. Pedro Ramos also added league-leading seasons of 39 and 38 HRs allowed. A man well ahead of his time.

50 -- Blyleven
48 -- Lima
46 (3 guys) -- Blyleven, Roberts, Arroyo
44 -- Moyer
43 (2 guys) -- Milton, Ramos
42
41 (5 guys) -- Roberts

The remaining 5 hints:

One guy from the career top 10
One CYA winner (not in that season)
One active pitcher
One sillyball pitcher
One guy I got nothing for really but a 2010s pitcher who made it to 100 wins ... and did it in his final season

It's hard to see Stanton doing what it would take to get to 500 HR much less a serious HoF candidacy. Maybe it's just a bad year but he's below-replacement this year with a 95 OPS+. It was just a 113 last year in a reasonable 450 PA. Even when in the lineup for the last 4 years, he's averaged just 1.8 WAR/650. It's probably an accumulation of all those injuries but he looks more like late-career Vlad (hit the wall at 34, done at 36) or Sosa (hit the wall at 35, terrible at 36, so-so at 38) or Griffey (fragile but productive thru 35 then hit the wall), except Stanton is a couple of years younger.

To do it he needs about 2.5-3 seasons of fairly full-time play which would also get him to about 8000 PAs. He'd have to return to 2018-21 form and he'd add about 10-12 WAR. I guess that's enough to be in the conversation with 500 HRs and a MVP. Even if he gets there, I think the disaster contract will hang around his neck and he'd be dead in the water with the writers. Never predict the VC but he seems a viable candidate there -- the way they've been going lately, surely the VC will add guys like Parker and Murphy soon which will make Stanton seem like a VC no-brainer. But the HoF can change the VC rules anytime they want.

It's a shame, he really was an outstanding player -- elite power, good defense, decent running. He was a Frank Howard or Killebrew who could play a good RF. If he could have hit 290, he'd have been Frank Robinson. Unfortunately he may not reach even Howard's 7300 PAs.

I was thinking "Stanton is Dave Parker without the drugs and era adjusted." But looking closer that is probably a minor insult to Stanton. But still it feels almost right to me.

First pitch of the game and Acuna homers off of Wainwright, and Waino makes it 3-0 in the first inning, fortunately Fried is feeling generous and allows the Cardinals to tie it up in the second.

Guardians at Angels later this evening. How come I just noticed this?

Just like there's no country with the three-letter code SUB. It would have been cool if they'd existed and played the Dominicans in the WBC this past spring. :)

some dude named Pepiot has something cooking in the Dodgers game and has only thrown 65 pitches

and I ruined it....

Wainwright gives up a homerun, but it's hard to fault him when it's to Matt Olson and his 47th of the year.

In terms of overall value and peak value, Parker and Stanton are pretty similar but Parker was mmuch more of an average hitter. Where most of these comps, including mine, sell Stanton short is that he was full-time in the majors at 20. Giveh how good he was, it's kinda hard to believe that Parker didn't have a full season until age 24. By age, Stanton is more Soto but, again, much lower BA and walks. Parker was also very durable in his peak -- ages 24-29, he had 3800 PA, 33 WAR, 5.5 WAR/650 ... Stanton had 3800 PAs from ages 22-28, also 33 WAR, 5.5/650 but over one extra season.

I suppose miracles happen. Parker got over his issues and became a solid durable player for years. From 34-40, 4250 PA, 157 HR, 1000 hits but just 4 WAR (it had to be better than that). Those nubers would get Stanton in for sure even if it took a while.

I hadn't heard of Pepiot until I bumped into his first start last week, did well. He was a top 100 prospect coming into the year but must have hurt himself in spring, didn't pitch until July. But he got just 23 innings in the minors so he must have been ready to go.

He joins Ryan Theriot as the only members of the "first name Ryan, last name ends in iot" team with an honorable mention to Michael Ryan Mariot but, hey, if Ryan Doumit isn't willing to add an "o" to join the team then they don't want him either.

The All-Pep team does a little better with Pepiot, Pepitone, Pepper Martin, Pepe Frias, Pepe Manguel, Peps Harris and Young, some Peppers, Pepperses and Peploskis of little note.

Wainwright is not getting to win 200 unless they can bring him in a tie game, he pitches a clean inning, St Louis then scores, then holds on and he somehow gets credit with a win that way. In relief. There is just no way he can make it through 5 innings and not get tagged for at least 5 runs now.

in what appears to be a completely on-brand occurrence for the angels, luis rengifo hurt himself swinging a bat in the on-deck circle before his first at-bat tonight, and left the game.

About the Cubs # of 10+ run gaes this year, it was asked:

Does that sort of thing distort the whole Pythagorean predictor thing? I tried to run some numbers a few years ago but it seems like it just gets lost in the wash anyhow. Am guessing 1 run games is more likely to distort w/l performance.

Maybe. First, pythag is really more about run differential than runs per se. If you looked at just 1 game, a 10-6 win is the same as a 5-3 win in pythag terms (100/136 vs 25/9). So any skew is really from games like 10-0 or 15-4. Second, as the Cub factoid suggests, teams don't generally have that many 10+ run outbursts in a season -- if it's just once every 16-20 games, there's only so much immpact it can have and, if you're an average team, most of that will be balanced by gammes you gave up a lot of runs.

Still there was a time when that probably was skewing the Cubs' pythag pretty badly. Just 19 games into the season, the Cubs had already hit 10+ 6 times, including a 26-3 run differential in a 3-game series at Oak (so also strength of schedule effects). They hadn't given up more than 9 and had even just shut out the Dodgers 13-0. So they were up 114-66 overall -- a 750 pythag so they "should" have been 15-4 or 14-5 but were just 12-7. But the differential was 71-20 in those 6 games. They were 43-46 in the other 13 ... so they "should" have been 6-7 in those games, were 6-0 in the big-scoring ones ... voila 12-7.

I know there are "ajdusted" pythags out there but I don't know if any of them cap blowouts. It would make sense to reduce the influence of outliers. For example, any run differential of 5+ gets treated as a 5 ... or any game where you score more than 2X runs and the opps score X or less, your RS is reduced to 2X. (Say X is 5). On the other end, I could see an argument for simply setting aside the 1-run records as a "luck" factor and calculating pythag based on the other games -- to project from that, add in a 50/50 record for 1-runners.

With his 2 homeruns tonight, Acuna sets the record for the highest power/speed number in mlb history. still has 23 games to go...

Stanton is not a HOFr. If he were to have a late career renaissance, maybe. But I think he's done.

A glance at Wainos numbers suggests to me that he actually took his season metrics lower again tonight.

At some point here Waino will have a case for the worst starting pitcher season ever. In a perverse way, this may help his HOF case. "Good enough to have the worst season ever"

In a perverse way, this may help his HOF case

He has no HOF case. He can get in the HOVG queue along with Steib, Sabs, Tiant(who I think should be in the HOF), etc.

At 44 BWAR and declining, he's not even good enough to make the HOVG starting 5. Thinking about it, he can get in the queue with the hall of pretty good starters.

Stanton will have a better HOF argument than Waino.

But ow can you put Yadi in without Waino???!!!!!

On the other end, I could see an argument for simply setting aside the 1-run records as a "luck" factor and calculating pythag based on the other games -- to project from that, add in a 50/50 record for 1-runners.

ah yes. That's very clever. I think I'll use something like that to make projections for upcoming playoffs.

Another issue with Stanton that I dont think has been mentioned: does he really have any narrative to speak of? The comparison to Parker was very interesting. But ironically Parker has at least as much narrative or "fame back in the day" as Stanton. Parker was a major part of the 79 WS team and a major part of other good teams during that era. Stanton's only claim to fame is the 59 HR season, I think. Is that right?

As for narrative I think you can argue both being part of pennant winners as well as setting or at least flirting with records. I give you 59 HRs is a pretty major accomplishment but that's about the only thing I can think of.

Waino isn't a HOFr but he appears to have an announcing career ahead of him and he could parlay that with his playing career. That's the Jim Kaat path to the Hall. I don't think he has management or coaching aspirations which would be the Joe Torre path.

But ow can you put Yadi in without Waino???!!!!!

Just more of a case for Yadi as a HoFer: look how much better Waino was last year with Yadi. Once Yadi departed Wainwright has been exposed as the pitcher he is.

But seriously, it's amazing how quickly Waino has completely eroded: just two years ago he was 7th in NL Cy Young voting, going 17-7 with a 1.06 WHIP and 174 Ks in over 200 innings. This year his WHIP is literally almost twice as high (1.97). He went from 7.3 hits/9 in 2021 to 14.2 H/9 this year. His first-pitch fastball that Acuna hit for a homer to lead off last night's game was 85.6 mph.

The dodgers seemed cooked for the World Series run. Not sure how they can win with that staff. The Braves don't really have a great staff either. I think the Phillies could still make a strong run. The NL looks kinda broken to me. These long seasons followed by multiple rounds can wear a team out.

I wish they'd end the season around sept 15 and commence with playoffs earlier

Wainwright is not getting to win 200 unless they can bring him in a tie game, he pitches a clean inning, St Louis then scores, then holds on and he somehow gets credit with a win that way.

Couldn't they pull the starter after 4 2/3 in a game where they have a big lead, have Waino get the last out of the 5th and get through the 6th, and the scorer just happens to find him the "most effective reliever"?

But Duke, what about these thrilling nail-biting races for that near-unattainable 12th best record in the league? :)

TTO classic at Wrigley. Through 4.5+, DBacks with a walk, Cubs with a single and HBP, 0-0. MMeanwhile All Blacks 5 France 3.

Couldn't they pull the starter after 4 2/3 in a game where they have a big lead,

You haven't watched much Cardinal baseball this year have you? Outside of two games this week, and maybe 3 others this year, that is not really something that has happened this season.

1st inning:

Corbin Carroll steals (43) 2nd base. Corbin Carroll to 3rd. Corbin Carroll advances to 3rd, on a throwing error by catcher Miguel Amaya.

6th inning:

Corbin Carroll steals (44) 2nd base. Corbin Carroll to 3rd. Corbin Carroll advances to 3rd, on a throwing error by catcher Miguel Amaya.

After that 1st inning steal/error put Carroll on third, the inning ended when Christian Walker was rung up on a pitch six inches outside. It was the 25th pitch of the inning for Taillon, and the HP ump did him and the Cubs a huge favor by not having the inning extended. He's gotten through the next 5 innings on just 52 pitches.

I was still asleep in the 1st.

All Blacks 8 France 6

Oof! Cubs lose, All Blacks lose.

Cardinals' SP tonight doesn't even come up in the bb-ref results list when you type his complete last name into the player search.

I was looking him up because when I watch him pitch in the 2nd inning his delivery seems to be unable to produce a strike and I was curious about his walk rate (59 bb in 111 ip combined between AAA/MLB---so not good).

EDIT: 41 pitches so far, 22 strikes, so I guess he can throw strikes, just not as frequently as you'd like.

EDIT: just walked the No. 9 hitter to load the bases.

EDIT: Gets out of it by retiring Bader---batting leadoff with a .270 OBP!---on a force-out grounder.

In his last two seasons Bader is hitting .242/.283/.355 in 634 PA, essentially a full season's worth of action. At one time I thought his bat was going to come around enough that he'd be a decent MLB hitter, but he'll be 30 next year and is seemingly going backwards.

He had that big 2022 postseason, but that may end up being his career high point.

Jasson Dominguez continues to impress - with a 2-run HR (#4) to right center putting the Yankees up 2-0 over Milwaukee after 3 tonight. #Promising.

EDIT: That makes Dominguez the youngest player in MLB history (since at least 1901) with 4 homers in his first 7 games, according to YES.

I just think Bader is still hurt. He's had two lower body injuries and I think that can mess with your swing. I'd still bet he can be a league average hitter

I pulled this off Twitter so god only knows if it's 100% correct:

For the list below, which major leaguer has hit the most HRs for each age. The first number is the age and the second number is the number of HRs he hit

Six people appear more than once. Age 44 is shared by two players. Most everyone is quite recognizable. I will give you the first one. Dodger legend Tommy Brown hit 2 HRs at the age of 17 in 1945. The rest are far easier

17: Tommy Brown, 2
18: 5
19: 24
20: 42
21: 47
22: 48
23: 49
24: 58
25: 54
26: 59
27: 59
28: 58
29: 66
30: 65
31: 52
32: 64
33: 58
34: 70
35: 63
36: 59
37: 59
38: 50
39: 40
40: 38
41: 24
42: 31
43: 18
44: two guys. 3
45: 8
46: 9
47: 1
48: 2

22 - Vlad Jr
24 - Foxx
25 - Ruth
26 - Ruth is the 59, but Maris had 61
27 - Stanton
28 - Greenberg?
29, 30, 32 - Sosa, although he had 63 at 30, not 65
32, 33, 34 - McGwire, but he had 65 at 33, not 63
36 - Bonds, but he had 73 of course, not 59

20 - Mel Ott
21 - Eddie Mathews?

Wait, is this list EXACT age rather than seasonal age? So Bonds at age 36 would be from July 24th, 2000 to July 23rd, 2001?

I guess that adds some level of difficulty if it's split across seasons. I still stand by all my previous guesses though.

Edit: And I pick Bonds again every year from 37-39

19 - Juan Soto
23 - McGwire again
40 - Darrell Evans?

It's based on the age that they were on the day that they hit each home run. Barry's birthday is July 24.

Sorry, I forgot to add

Booey - excellent guessing. Greenburg is wrong. Bonds is not 39. In think you meant McGwire for 33-35. Sosa is not 30.
Soto is wrong and evans is wrong

Oops, yes, Mac was supposed to be 33-35 (and 23)

I'll give someone else a chance for some guesses, and if there's still some open spots in a couple of hours, I'll try again. ;-)

Edit: 30 has got to be Judge then. And 31 is Sosa.

Fine, now I'll REALLY stop for a while!

17: Tommy Brown, 2
18: 5
19: 24
20: Mel Ott,42
21: Eddie Mathews, 47
22: Vladimir Guerrero Jr., 48
23: Mark McGwire, 49
24: Jimmie Foxx, 58
25: Babe Ruth, 54
26: Babe Ruth, 59
27: Giancarlo Stanton, 59
28: 58
29: Sammy Sosa, 66
30: 65
31: 52
32: Sammy Sosa, 64
33: Mark McGwire, 58
34: Mark McGwire, 70
35: Mark McGwire, 63
36: Barry Bonds, 59
37: Barry Bonds, 59
38: Barry Bonds, 50
39: 40
40: 38
41: 24
42: Barry Bonds, 31
43: 18
44: 3
45: 8
46: 9
47: 1
48: 2

30 is Judge. 31 is not Sosa

From the same source

Largest MLB contracts ever by age (when signed):

Going from ages 18-45

Age 35 is Mark Melancon which really surprised me. I wonder if anyone can get age 18 who is pretty well known

I will guess that 28: 58 is Hack Wilson.

EDIT: And I'm wrong,

39 is Aaron isn't it?

And I'll WAG 31 is either Brady or Luis Gonzalez.

Last guesses for the night:

19 - Tony Conigliaro
28 - Chris Davis
31 - Jose Bautista
40 - David Ortiz
43 - Carlton Fisk

Edit: 41 - Nelson Cruz

So will the Astros get swept at home by a sub-.500 team for the second straight weekend?

Stay tuned...

17: Tommy Brown, 2
18: 5
19: Tony Conigliaro,24
20: Mel Ott,42
21: Eddie Mathews, 47
22: Vladimir Guerrero Jr., 48
23: Mark McGwire, 49
24: Jimmie Foxx, 58
25: Babe Ruth, 54
26: Babe Ruth, 59
27: Giancarlo Stanton, 59
28: 58
29: Sammy Sosa, 66
30: Aaron Judge, 65
31: 52
32: Sammy Sosa, 64
33: Mark McGwire, 58
34: Mark McGwire, 70
35: Mark McGwire, 63
36: Barry Bonds, 59
37: Barry Bonds, 59
38: Barry Bonds, 50
39: Hammering Hank Aaron,40
40: David Ortiz, 38
41: 24
42: Barry Bonds, 31
43: Carlton Fisk,18
44: 3
45: 8
46: 9
47: 1
48: 2

28 and 31 - ARod?
44 - Fisk again?

Hank Greenberg for the 58.

Hank Greenberg for the 58.

Greg Vaughn for 52?

Robin Yount for 5?

I'm starting to think 28 must be somebody with a mid-season birthday who ended one season hot and began the next one hot. But I don't know birthdays ... maybe Mays? Mantle?

EDIT: Way off on Mays. Also it seems like every slugger I can think of has an offseason birthday. :-)

I found it ... From Apr 23 to the end of season in 2005, Andruw hit 50; he started off hot in 2006 with 8 HRs before his birthday.

Pity poor Ken Griffey Jr with 56 HRs at ages 27 and 28 but can't break into the list.

44: 3
45: 8
46: 9
47: 1
48: 2

My guess is that these are all Julio Franco.

I'll close off the HRs allowed in a season list since nobody's guessed in a long while:

50 -- Blyleven
48 -- Lima
46 (3 guys) -- Blyleven, Roberts, Arroyo
44 -- Moyer
43 (2 guys) -- Milton, Ramos
42 -- Denny McLain
41 (5 guys) -- Roberts, Niekro, Dylan Bundy, Rick Helling, Mike Leake

Bearing in mind that the NeL are now considered major leagues, it looks like age 44 should probably be John Henry Lloyd with 5. B-R doesn't have game logs but his Apr 25 birthday probably doesn't change the numbers.

Yesterday, "comedian" Tom Dreesen showed up at Wrigley to sing ... for 83, he looked fantastic.

It's also Cubs HoF induction weekend. Shawon Dunston looks pretty good and, amazingly, Mark Grace looks healthier now than he did then.

The Cubs seem to have temporarily given up on normal scoring methods, so I'll take Hoerner scoring from first when the D'Backs infield loses track of a 2-out Bellinger popup.

Today's Cubs game is an odd one ... the only exciting moments, and maybe the only way anybody will score, are high pop-ups and flyballs. Every fielder seems to be struggling. So both teams seem to be hoping to get a runner on via a walk or soft single then hope a high one gets lost in the sun.

Pat Hughes just referred to the Manfred Man as the "courtesy runner."

The courtesy runner is rather discurteous to the Cubs along with a sac bunt, a HBP, a passed ball, a WP, a single and DBacks 3-1 ith 1 out.

Fittingly enough, the game ends on a foulout to the C. DBacks 3-2 over the Cubs. Three losses in a row for the Cubs for the first time in a couple of months.

Rambling to crickets ...

I have no idea if this is meaningful or not but, so far this year:

SPs 1236-1347, 479 WP
RPs 880-669, 534 WP

Makes sense in current usage -- SPs having a bad day still get tagged with the loss, ones having a good day probably still have a nice high WP but those having a so-so day may not make it through 5 even if they have a lead. It occurs to me that although we track almost everything in baseball, do we track "left the game qualified for the win?"

Yes we do! Who knew? It's on the "starting pitching" page at b-r. In 2022, 391 potential starter wins were blown but 620 potential starter losses were rescued. Things weren't much different in 2012 but it was almost all about fewer rescues: 398 wins blown, just 550 losses rescued. Back in 1992, about the same number of blown wins (381) but even fewer rescues (487). Assuming the splits are accurate that far back, things were radically different in 1972 with just 194 blown wins and 397 rescues. Slightly more than 10% of gaes featured a rescue and just 5% were blown -- starters allowed to blow their own wins.

Maybe another little factoid suggesting the shift to RPs is tactical, not injury prevention. Perhaps not surprisingly, replacing a losing/struggling starter sooner keeps the comeback chances higher. It's interesting the blown wins numbers are pretty stable although, by rate, those 1992 numbers are higher.

"Blown" is a bit harsh given the SP is often leaving the game with men on base and a slim lead in the 6th inning these days.

From afar this is reminding me a bit of late 2018 when the Cubs were just not really able to keep pace with the Brewers down the stretch.

I follow a couple of Cub-related Twitter accounts and some of the gloating I saw the other night after the Cubs narrowed the division lead to a game and a half seemed premature. Coincidentally, they haven't won a game since and the gap has been widened to 4.5 games.

I haven't gotten to watch much in-game action this year, so I can't speak to the actual quality of this iteration. Their run differential has been one of the better ones in the league all season, so where they are with a few weeks left doesn't feel like a total fluke. Still, the lineup on paper is uninspiring (at least to someone who's only gotten to see a handful of games).

It's been cool to see them turnaround things, but is there much sense that they'll be able to repeat or improve on this next season? Bellinger has been the sort of one-year lottery ticket teams dream of, but I'm not counting on them bringing him back. That's a pretty big hole to fill, since he seems to be what's really driven this offense during the turnaround.

Red Sox score 12 runs on 23 hits. And lose to the Orioles 13-12. Orioles had "just" 14 hits, but 5 of them were HRs including 3-run shots by both Hicks and Henderson.

#177 ... yes and no. The run differential is a little odd, lots of big-scoring games but also lots of the low-scoring ones you might expect this lineup to produce. They are a strong defensive team, especially on the infield. The rotation is quite good, the bullpen is ... anonymous and holding it together.

It has a strong whiff of lots of things breaking their way -- Bellinger, Tauchmannn, the pen. But Jed's also done a very good job with making it a better team as the year went on. Hosmer, Mancini and eventually Barnhart and Smyly out; Morel, Tauchmann, Candelario, Madrigal (picking it), Amaya, Wicks in.

Will they repeat? Maybe. The offense is one of those that annoys other teams -- no great hitters but no terrible ones now and nobody except maybe Bellinger and Tauchmann overperforming. Justin Steele looks very much for real. They do seem to be getting better at finding relievers. But a lot of holes to fill next year with Bellinger, Candelario, possibly Stroman all gone; no doubt the same sort of patched-together bullpen. Obviously they can afford to bring back anybodyy they want and I think there's a reasonable chance they'll bring back Candelario and I think Stroman will probably take the option given he will need to prove himself to get big money. PCA is on the way for CF but 2025 might be more realistic. They supposedly have more SP prospects on the way.

So probably some sort of plexiglass thing next year and they'll hold around 500 unless they hae lots of injury problems. Then hoppefully some of the kids will come into their own starting in 2025. It's not a big FA year so I'm not sure the Cubs can add enough to offset the departures. But if they make the playoffs this year, Jed will be under a lot of pressure to push deeper ... and if they collapse, he'll be under even more pressure to make the plaoyffs. I will say it's one of those teams I often get wrong -- they're decent in so many spots, it's hard to identify the 2-3 spots they could make a big improvement ... but I suppose on the 12-team playoff era, that works better than it used to.

The possitives for this year going forward: Steele is a stud; Wicks might be solid or better; Hoerner keeps hitting more than well enough to keep his glove in the lineup; Madrigal has a glove; Swanson doesn't look like a bust; Amaya might be an average starting C; Alzolay might be a solid reliever.

The only real negatives I'd say are that Keegan Thompson and Wesneski, who I both expected to be solid, have taken steps back. After a hot start, it looks that while Morel's bat is good enough for the majors, it's not good enough to be a full-time DH but he still hasn't found a position. Taillon has been so up and down I'm not sure what to think going forward.

I was gone all day, missed the Orioles game.

Seems like they had it all the way. :)

Apparently the last time a team won while giving up 23 hits was in 1981. Mariners over Red Sox. That one took 20 innings. The Orioles needed only nine.

Fujinami, the only Oriole pitcher who didn't suck, got the W. Who says pitcher wins are a meaningless stat? :)

Andruw jones is correct for 28 and Julio Franco is 44-48 and he is tied with Carlton Fisk at 44

17: Tommy Brown, 2
18: 5
19: Tony Conigliaro, 24
20: Mel Ott, 42
21: Eddie Mathews, 47
22: Vladimir Guerrero Jr., 48
23: Mark McGwire, 49
24: Jimmie Foxx, 58
25: Babe Ruth, 54
26: Babe Ruth, 59
27: Giancarlo Stanton, 59
28: Andrew Jones, 58
29: Sammy Sosa, 66
30: Aaron Judge, 65
31: 52
32: Sammy Sosa, 64
33: Mark McGwire, 58
34: Mark McGwire, 70
35: Mark McGwire, 63
36: Barry Bonds, 59
37: Barry Bonds, 59
38: Barry Bonds, 50
39: Henry Aaron, 40
40: David Ortiz, 38
41: 24
42: Barry Bonds, 31
43: Carlton Fisk, 18
44: Carlton Fisk/Julio Franco, 3
45: Julio Franco, 8
46: Julio Franco, 9
47: Julio Franco, 1
48: Julio Franco, 2

As for hints, year 18 is a player who generated 37 over 21 seasons which he spent completely in Chicago

Age 31 was a bald guy

Age 41 is an inner circle Hall of Famer

176. Where is this page ? How can I find how many starts that wainwright left qualifying for a win but ultimately did not get the win. That would be interesting

As for hints, year 18 is a player who generated 37 over 21 seasons which he spent completely in Chicago

too strong a clue for Phil Cavarretta - the NL MVP in 1945 in the middle of his career (.355 AVG led the league, 6 HR, 97 RBI, also league-best .455 OBP not that anyone noticed).

and don't blame him for the 7-game loss to the Tigers in the WS - he hit .423 in 26 AB with a .500/.615/1.115 slash line

"You know, the law of averages says
Anything will happen that can"
that's what it says
But the last time the Cubs won a National League pennant
Was the year we dropped the bomb on Japan"

Cavaretta is correct !

What, am I the only one who understands that every b-r page has a shitload of links at the top?

Wainwright's advanced stats page ... scroll down to "Starting Pitching" table. You want the Wlst column (hover on the column heading and it will tell you what it is). It's just 25 times he's left in line for the win but not gotten it. (To be clear, this does not include times he lost the lead on his own.) They saved him from a loss 38 times.

It can be far from obvious which sub-page has the table you're looking for and that table may not have an obvious name and the stat may not have an obvious name. But darn near anything you want that doesn't require drilling down (i.e. requires a stathead sub) is there somewhere. Except for days on the IL of course, who would want that? Just keep poking around.

Near the top of any player page you find a set of hover tabs offering an "overview" (which is the main page you're probably already on), "minor league, etc", "split", "game log", "finders and advanced stats", "more" and (this might be new) a link to 2023 Cards, I assume this just for active players. Under each of those (hover) you will usually find multiple page links. The one you're looking for is under "finders ..." and is the "advanced stats" page. There are many tables on this page, some of which are on the overiew page too. From there ya gotta poke around but that's where most weird stuff (other than splits) is. I almost never use the "finders," not sure how well they work if you don't have a sub. I use the HR logs occasionally, those work fine.

So c'mon Duke -- click, scroll and explore on your own. Your computer's not gonna explode or anything.

41 - Ted Williams?

Really surprised that age 31 has proven so difficult. As for the "bald guy" clue, it's not any of the obvious bald guys I checked (Killebrew, Matt Williams, Pujols).

Edit: Frank Howard?

Ted Williams is correct

31 also had a legacy in pop culture on a very popular comedy show. He played for the Yankees briefly.

186. Thank you. I don't have a PC so the functionality (hovering ) doesn't exist on my phone (or maybe it's my browser). The way the site presents itself does not compute with my hierarchical accounting mind. I find it hard to remember where things are or even get back to a page I've found before.

31 is Jay Buhner! He was on a tear the last 2 months of 1995 and the first half of 1996.

There's a name I wouldn't have expected to make this list when fellow late 90's Mariners Alex Rodriguez and Ken Griffey Jr couldn't crack it (plus Mickey Mantle, Willie Mays, etc).

have a question for the people who understand these stats at a deeper level than I do. Tommy Edman is turning in a much worse WAR line than last year and it's seems to be equal parts offense and defense.

I get the defensive side. Both by eyeball and OAA he's been worse. But it's not clear to me what driving the dramatic drop on the offensive side .
His standard line looks pretty close (maybe 7-10% off last year). His stolen bases and caught stealing are roughly similar although I think his overall base running appears worse (maybe compounded by new rules that make everyone better?) He has more power this year than last. Why is his oWAR so much worse?

Does this have something to do with playing less SS and more OF? He'll turn in 75 less at bats this year as well so being 7-10% off last years pace and 15% less at bats feels like maybe he'd lose 1 WAR.

Maybe my question is simply how much do you lose/gain simply by moving positions ?

Yankees owner George Steinbrenner appears at the home of George Costanza’s parents to mistakenly inform them that their son is dead. The only response from Frank Costanza (played by Jerry Stiller) is, “What the hell did you trade Jay Buhner for?! He had 30 home runs, over 100 RBIs last year! He’s got a rocket for an arm… You don’t know what the hell you‘re doing!” (Steinbrenner, voiced by Larry David, replies, “Well, Buhner was a good prospect, no question about it. But my baseball people love Ken Phelps’s bat. They kept saying, ‘Ken Phelps! Ken Phelps!’”)

The Angels are reportedly open to trading Mike Trout if he requests it:

The Los Angeles Angels are willing to trade Mike Trout if the All-Star outfielder requests one, according to a USA Today report. Earlier this month, Trout said he plans to discuss the future path of the organization with team management in the offseason.

"When it's brought up in the offseason, you've obviously got to talk about it, and think about it," Trout told the Orange County Register. "I haven't thought about it yet. There are going to be some conversations in the winter, for sure. Just to see the direction of everything and what the plan is." Trout still has seven years and more than $248 million left on a 12-year, $430 million contract he signed in 2019.

Losing Ohtani and Trout in one offseason?

The Yellow Sox two days in a row?

Verdugo fails to execute in right, and the Orioles get a couple of runs out of it.

#190 ... I forget so many of you are so phone-centric these days. I still do nearly all my surfing on laptop or pc. I only access b-r by phone when I'm desperate (usually travelling and so bored I have nothing better to do than annoy you guys).

#192 ... by bWAR ... he's had a huge drop in defensive value. DRS had him +18 last year, this year just +1. Add in the small positional changes and he's dropped from 2.8 dWAR to 0.5 dWAR so that's 2.3 wins. So yes, half of it is defense. The change with the bat is not huge, just 6 runs, that would be mostly the drop in OBP.

He's also lost a lot of value in running -- Rbase + Rdp was 9 last year, this year just 1. So that is a drop of 14 runs in total offensive value. That's somewhat curious -- e.g. his SB numbers haven't changed -- but I'll guess it's because everybody else's baserunning numbers are up while his have stayed the same so, relative to average, he's not so special anymore. Still, on the surface, it doesn't look like it could be 8 runs. The rest is the reduction in playing time (which will reduce a bit over the last 3 weeks). But he's also dropped from taking the extra base 57% to 46%, in particular he's been much worse going 1st to 3rd on singles. Along with the defensive drop, this suggests maybe he's lost a lot of speed.

I suspect (hypothesize? wildly speculatee?) that there are certain (types of?) players where context doesn't matter a lot. Edman is solid BA, so-so walks, light to moderate power, good defense, good running. The context is never going to change enough that he hits 300, hits 30 HRs, steals 60 bases. Put him in a time machine to 1975 and he'll hit about 260/310/390 with 25 steals. Regardless of my speculation, in WAR terms, part of it is that he's stuck in the trap where he's putting up the same old numbers while the league is scoring more. His OPS is essentially unchanged but last year that was a 108 OPS+ and this year it's a 99. His OBP went down 10 points while the league OBP went up 12 points. His OPS is up 5 points, league OPS is up 35 points. (See the "sabermetric batting" table on his "advanced stats" page.)

From 192: Maybe my question is simply how much do you lose/gain simply by moving positions ?

Depends. Realistically a max of 1 win. A full-time SS gets an Rpos of 9-10 runs. If that player shifted to 2B or 3B (most likely) they'd get credit for only 4-5 runs. Maybe they shift to CF ... looks like that's around 4 runs these days too. Mabye a player was a 3B and gets shifted to 1B ... that would be a bit more than a win, +4 to -9. The theoretical max might occur for somebody like the next Piazza who, when he gets old, gets shifted from C to DH, that would be a shift of about 2.5 wins in positional value by bWAR.

In Edman's case, the positional shift is pretty trivial -- he had 8 Rpos last year, 5 this year and he might pick up a 6th in the last month. If he starts playing a lot of LF/RF/1B then he'll take a hit to his positional value. It's the quality of his defense that, per DRS, has collapsed (still average but no longer elite). Whether statcast agrees you can check. Any decline there might be due to having (short-term) difficulty in returning to a rover role and maybe he will bounce back next year as he adapts to the role.

Sooner than expected, and much sooner than hoped, we've hit the point where Trout has negative trade value. The durability is just not there and, this year, the bat wasn't elite (in terms of production at least, the peripherals still look fine). I'm not sure how much money the Angels would have to eat, but a lot. Which makes it such a PR nightmare -- trading Trout for nothing and even throwing in money -- that I can't see it happening for another couple of years. Best case scenario is a fully healthy 2024 with a 2022 slash line. A 7-8 WAR season will generate plenty of interest.

Did the Wrigley organist just play "I don't know how to love him" from Jesus Christ Superstar when Christian Walker came to the plate?

Apparently Corbin Burnes hasn't give up a hit through 7. He's over 100 pitches so don't get your hopes up. Brewers giving him lots of run support with zero.

Well, it's the right thing to do but letting ohtani go for almost nothing and paying to let Trout go after letting Pujols go and have a great career end. How jinxed can one team be ?