Meg Rowley FanGraphs Chat – 3/3/2020

2:00
Meg Rowley: Hello all, and welcome to the chat

2:01
Meg Rowley: Hope everyone is having a good week amongst all the stressful Real World things – a few baseball-related distractions:

2:01
Meg Rowley: Jay wrote about Cole Hamels and the Braves rotation: https://blogs.fangraphs.com/cole-hamels-cranky-shoulder-will-test-brav…

2:02
Meg Rowley: Craig has a double feature. First, on the Mets’ outfield situation: https://blogs.fangraphs.com/the-cardinals-messy-outfield-situation/

2:02
Meg Rowley: then on the injuries befalling the AL East: https://blogs.fangraphs.com/injuries-are-throwing-the-al-east-for-a-lo…

2:03
Meg Rowley: Also, yesterday Ben Clemens took a look at the dramatic spin spike Trevor Bauer saw last September: https://blogs.fangraphs.com/trevor-bauer-might-have-conducted-another-…

2:04
Meg Rowley: And later this week, we’ll have the Yankees Top Prospect list, so keep your eyes peeled for that.

2:04
Them: Even though I question/disagree with things that are written here quite frequently, and even though I have yet to come close to changing anyone’s mind about anything (or even make them waver slightly in their convictions), I appreciate that you and the other writers here are extremely interactive and engaging, and that you have these forums. I especially appreciate that they are often held during work hours when I might otherwise be tempted to be productive.

2:04
Meg Rowley: And we appreciate you risking the ire of your boss to chat with us.

2:05
Meg Rowley: There’s a reason that it makes sense for us to take holidays off – you’d be shocked by how much of our traffic is the obvious result of people not wanting to do their day jobs.

2:05
Pickin2Click: You’re Back!

2:06
Meg Rowley: Indeed. I am returned from vacation and also, just straight up forgetting to chat last week. My very sincere apologies for the latter.

2:06
Daniel: MLB has a contest out (today I think).  $1m prize for guessing who will lead 9 statistical categories (HR, wins, Ks, MVPs, etc) over the next decade.  Leaving aside the optimism implicit in it, how many people do you think get that right?  Do you think anyone would have done well at it in 2010?

2:07
Meg Rowley: I appreciate you correctly guessing the part of this I find the most interesting (optimism). I expect fewer than 100 but more than five people?

2:07
Jason N: Meg – I’ve granted you magic powers.  As a result, you can take any one of these players and put them on the Mariners:  Acuna Jr, Vlad Jr, Tatis Jr, Soto, or Franco.  And magically, they’re all age 22 with the same contract.  Who do you take?  And how would you rank the rest?

2:08
Meg Rowley: Are the guys who aren’t yet 22 suddenly 22 at their current level, or am I getting the 22-year-old version of Wander Franco, just magically now?

2:08
Adam: Has coronavirus fever made you realize how often you touch your face in a given day? I’m about to start wearing mittens.

2:09
Meg Rowley: It is an extremely difficult habit to break yourself of, and while trying is very worthwhile, I think it underscores how important it is to regularly wash your hands. Wash you hands a lot, all the time, and especially after being out in public (she says, eyeing the day on the calendar when she flies to Arizona).

2:11
John: Hi Meg, I believe the common understanding is there is little to no predictive value in spring training.  Has there been any study/articles (preferably from Fangraphs!) on this?

2:12
Meg Rowley: This is true for a lot of things, but not all the things! My EW co-host Ben Lindbergh has written about some of the stats that do have predictive value the last few years. His effort from last year links to some other stuff that is worth reading, too: https://www.theringer.com/mlb/2019/3/27/18283688/spring-training-three…

2:12
Kiermaier’s Piercing Green Eyes: Were you planning to attend any games soon/once the season starts and how has the coronavirus impacted those plans? Doubting my plans of catching a series in early April…

2:14
Meg Rowley: I have two spring training games and some college contests on the calendar as of now. I think we all have to pay attention and do our best to strike the balance between vigilance on the things we can control (washing hands, staying home as much as your work allows if you do get sick, etc) and not overreacting (buying up a bunch of masks if you’re healthy).

2:14
Meg Rowley: So as of now, I plan to do those things, but understand that this could change very quickly, and that I should also be prepared to listen to experts.

2:15
Matt Chapman: DRS has finally updated to reflect my ability properly

2:16
Meg Rowley: Yes, DRS got an update. Mark Simon wrote about it extensively for SIS:

If you’re a regular user of Defensive Runs Saved from Fangraphs or Baseball-Reference, you might notice our numbers have changed in the last few days

We’ve tweaked the stat, improved it for infielders

Need help spreading word on this

Please read & share
sportsinfosolutionsblog.com/2020/03/02/not…

3 Mar 2020
2:16
Meg Rowley: we’ll have a little Instagraphs about it in the near future

2:17
Meg Rowley: We don’t use DRS in our version of WAR, but we do display it on the site.

2:17
Sir Nerdlington: Ben Clemens is the Jeff Sullivan of the 2020s. Don’t lose him.

2:18
Meg Rowley: We are very lucky to have a super great, rad staff, but yeah, Ben has a little of the Jeff in him. I think he’s a good example for aspiring writers though, in that he is not affecting a Jeff accent as it were, even if his work and approach does often remind me of Jeff. But don’t tell Ben that 🙂

2:18
The Shaker: Yankees + Sox injuries is making AL East more competitive… but why no love for Blue Jays as a darkhorse for the WC or division?

2:19
Meg Rowley: Well, some of these injuries are rather new, but also, the Blue Jays are still a little ways off. I think the Blue Jays would tell you that, even if we see Pearson soon. The Rays have to be thrilled though.

2:19
Meg Rowley: Of course, the Yankees are still projected to be very, very good.

2:20
Narvain: Is the Vedder Cup as important to the Mariners as it is to the Padres

2:20
Meg Rowley: It is important to me personally in that I enjoy this Padres team very much, and so get to watch them in person.

2:20
Evan: how much do you think the fan heckling for 82 road games is going to affect Houston? If ST is any indication this is going to be a loooooong year

2:20
Meg Rowley: I think that we will lose stamina for it.

2:22
Meg Rowley: So while I don’t expect their villain status to wane, fans desire to boo and make signs might ebb and flow.

2:22
Gil: What are your realistic expectations for the Mariners and what are your 99th percentile outcomes expectations?

2:24
Meg Rowley: My realistic expectations is they are a sub-70 win team. My 99th percentile expectations is they are the worst team in baseball and get the first overall pick. This is a bad baseball team, but bad on purpose, and with an exciting farm. This mode of rebuilding isn’t my preferred one from an aesthetic perspective (much more a fan of the D-backs skinny rebuild model) but since we’re here…

2:24
DJ Tanner: Is Arte calling Friedman begging to do the trade again?

2:25
Meg Rowley: I both understand the frustration and also how that frustration determining the orgs course of action was ill-advised. That rotation was scary (not in a good way) before. Now…

2:25
brad penny for your thoughts: craigs article on the *cards* messy outfield

2:25
Meg Rowley: Yes, sorry, yes. Jay wrote about the Mets and their mess. Apologies.

2:26
Greene: The Angels, Red Sox, Reds, Phillies and Padres all figure to be contenders, but they currently rank dead last in MLB in the depth charts’ projected output for, respectively, first base, second base, shortstop, center field, and right field.  Which team is most likely to fill its glaring hole before opening day?

2:28
Meg Rowley: I don’t think any of them sort that out pre-Opening Day. I suppose theoretically right field is the easiest to address because Puig exists, but I’d be surprised if San Diego does that. The Angels could not play Pujols but seem unlikely to do so.

2:28
Kiermaier’s Piercing Green Eyes: Oh, and as long as we’re talking hygiene, sneeze into your elbow, not your ****ing hands. You’re welcome.

2:29
Meg Rowley: Yes, also this. You’re now a vampire! Congrats! You get to be in movies and also fascinate teens, and help others not get sick. You’re so cool.

2:29
Booing: Does stamina increase if they’re world-beaters again or increase if they’re making mental errors and underperforming?

2:30
Meg Rowley: I think it depends when in the season it is – if they are just so-so, and goofing up in August, I don’t think it inspires a ton. If they are very good or very bad to start or end the year, watch out.

2:31
Greg: Most innings pitched this year: James Paxton, Chris Sale, or Blake Snell?

2:31
Meg Rowley: gut feel – Snell, Pax, Sale

2:31
Flex: Will there be player profiles for the 2020 season?

2:31
Meg Rowley: Lemme ask Appelman, but perhaps not.

2:32
Meg Rowley: I don’t manage that side of the site.

2:32
TinFoilHatGuy: What if Jim Crane is actually SUUUPER against sports betting, and is doing everything he can to tank MLB’s pending partnership with gambling enterprises?

2:32
Meg Rowley: Not sure he’s a leading candidate to eschew money coming in the door.

2:33
R: Besides writing every day but what is another important thing to do if you are trying to grow an audience

2:33
Meg Rowley: Read as much as you can (it informs good writing).

2:34
Meg Rowley: Also, and this is going to seem less important than tweeting because followers are fun, and feel important but, observe editorial niceties. File on time. Be conscious of the fact that you aren’t an editor’s only writer. Learn the style guide of the publication you’re writing for, and try to be good about using it.

2:34
Meg Rowley: Clean copy filed on time is so valuable.

2:35
Meg Rowley: Also, and you’re gonna say, “But Meg, of course people do that,” address emails to the right person, using their correct name, without assuming marital status.

2:35
Meg Rowley: The number of emails I have gotten to Mrs. Rowley is staggering.

2:36
Lunar verLander: I…I had no idea this face-touching thing was real. I thought it was just Grant Brisbee being…well, Grant.

2:37
Meg Rowley: It’s a thing! It can lead to you getting others sick and you getting sick yourself.

2:37
Dave: How do you take your coffee?

2:37
Meg Rowley: Just with half and half, generally.

2:37
Big Joe Mufferaw: Think people are overreacting to the yankee injuries? Sure Severino is impactful, but they also won 103 games WITHOUT him last year. They added this winter and they can’t possibly get 30 guys on the DL 39 times again?

2:38
Meg Rowley: It is never good when two of your starters go down with injury, and a third is unavailable for violating the league’s domestic violence policy. Two of those three will come back, and they have depth on the position player side, but it isn’t good, and replicating their production from last year from subs isn’t a given.

2:39
Meg Rowley: They’re still projected to be a very good team, but also…

2:39
Cito’s Mustache: Zach Eflin and Zack Wheeler both remarked a few days ago about the spring balls feeling more like pre-2019 balls. Have you heard of any other indications that the ball may change again this year? Or are ST balls not the same as regular seasons balls so any changes seen now should be dismissed? Thanks, Meg.

2:40
Meg Rowley: I’ve heard what you heard, which is an indicator, but also we know there is a lot of variation in batches of balls. I don’t think we know enough yet to know, and unfortunately, the league isn’t a super reliable source of info on this question.

2:42
Arthur Kinney: The only way an owner would be super against sports betting would be religious convictions. In such a case, said owner would also be likely be super against cheating if his religious convictions were that strong.

2:43
Meg Rowley: This is not confined to religious folks by any means, but you are more optimistic about humans’ baseline ideological consistency than I am.

2:43
Nolan: Who are the best options among the Red Sox 4th and 5th starter candidates?

2:43
Meg Rowley: Congrats, it’s you! Probably Webber and… gosh, Tanner Houck?

2:43
Meg Rowley: yeesh

2:44
Ryan: Did the resolution of the Kris Bryant grievance affect the CBA negotiations at all?  Perhaps, e.g., encourage the MLBPA to take a harder line on new language to limit service-time manipulation?

2:44
Meg Rowley: I want to hope that the union was conscious of the need to codify service time manipulation rules before now, but yeah, this makes the need very clear.

2:45
Logan: If you’re going to admonish people to make sure they address their emails to correctly named recipients, you should at least spell Ryan Weber’s name correctly.

2:45
Meg Rowley: Touché, though I hope those sending pitch emails are doing so with greater care and less rapidity than a chat.

2:47
Meg Rowley: (plus assuming marital status isn’t a typo issue)

2:47
Logan: Fair enough.  And let us both hope those sending pitch emails are making better pitches than Weber and his 5.04 career ERA.

2:47
Meg Rowley: Indeed – rough enough out there for freelancers.

2:47
Appa Yip Yip: The service time manipulation accusations have already started with regards to Nate Pearson but he has less than 150 pro innings pitched, and this is all based on 3 (very fun) spring training innings. Is there meat on this bone or are fans just being (rightly) cynical about team motives?

2:47
5 Run Homer: The Jays are starting Pearson in AAA, and that’s super lame. That’s all I have to say

2:50
Meg Rowley: It seems a little less egregious than say, the pre-injury decision for Vlad Jr. – Pearson has had some non-arm related injury stuff and going into last year, there were questions about what the velo would look like when he came back, but I think being cynical about FO’s approach to this stuff is almost always reasonable.

2:50
Meg Rowley: Given some of their other comments on years of control, they might just tell us though.

2:51
Joseph: thoughts on the Rangers rotation?

2:52
Meg Rowley: That they are going to have one of the better ones in the AL, even if I think some of their offensive deficiencies might make the team win fewer games overall than would be fun to expect.

2:52
Bort: If Sale is seriously injured, the Red Sox should revisit that Myers/Quantrill deal, right?

2:52
Meg Rowley: I’m not sure that I’m convinced that the Red Sox are affecting an especially competitive posture this season.

2:52
Morbo: how is craig such a prolific writer?

2:52
Morbo: does he subsist solely on caffeine and baseball?

2:54
Meg Rowley: Craig is good at his job in a lot of different ways, but I think one of the ones that addresses your question is that he has a really, really good sense of topic selection. Part of being able to write so much is not wasting time on topics that go nowhere.

2:54
TomBruno23: How many of those team previews do you see on the schedule and think, “Do we really need to spend X amount of minutes talking about this team?” Looking at you, Royals.

2:56
Meg Rowley: So as people who enjoy talking about prospects and player dev, the really rough ones are the teams that have nothing going on at the major league AND minor league levels. Those are the ones where Ben and I do a lot of “so, anything else?” in gchat. But we’ve been fortunate to have good, engaging guests, so none of them are a total drag.

2:58
Walker: Will Betts’ next contract be smaller or larger than the contracts of Bryce Harper and Manny Machado?

2:58
Meg Rowley: I think larger – he’s older than they were when they signed their deals, but he’s also better.

2:58
Dave: No one should have ever let Ben know he could take a vacation from the pod, now he’s doing to regularly!

2:58
Meg Rowley: Don’t worry, Sam and I will hold down the fort this week.

2:59
Meg Rowley: And just think – if Ben rests, he’ll live longer, and that means more pod.

2:59
Beeks: Which division do you think will be most fun/interesting to watch in 2020?

2:59
Meg Rowley: Very excited to watch the NL East, very excited to watch the NL West.

3:00
Dave: Speaking of topics that go nowhere, when can we expect a piece writen by you?

3:00
Meg Rowley: Ohhh sad, looks like we’re out of time!

3:01
Meg Rowley: I gotta get rolling.

3:01
Meg Rowley: If you’re going to be in the greater Phoenix area next week, come by our meetup!

3:02
Meg Rowley: Until then, have a good week, wash your hands, and (if applicable) go vote.





Meg is the managing editor of FanGraphs and the co-host of Effectively Wild. Prior to joining FanGraphs, her work appeared at Baseball Prospectus, Lookout Landing, and Just A Bit Outside. You can follow her on twitter @megrowler.

4 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
dl80
4 years ago

I missed the chat but was very curious about Daniel’s comment about the leaders in statistics for the next decade. Here’s who led the 2010s in several categories (I couldn’t find the actual contest, so these are probably not the same ones they are using):

HR – 346 – Nelson Cruz (not many would have guessed him even after 33 HR in 2009)

R – 903 – Mike Trout (since he was in low A ball in 2009, no one would have guessed him)

RBI – 963 – Albert Pujols (he would have gotten a lot of votes after 2009)

SB – 330 – Dee Gordon (he was also in A ball so no votes likely)

H – 1695 – Robinson Cano (I think he would have gotten a lot of votes)

W – 161 – Max Scherzer, by 1 over Verlander (after going 9-11 in 2009, he wouldn’t have gotten any votes)

SV – 346 – Craig Kimbrel (would have gotten zero votes)

K – 2452 – Scherzer again

IP – 2142 – Verlander (after 240 IP in 2009, I think he would have been one of the vote leaders)

AVG – .317 – Miguel Cabrera

Now for some random ones

HBP – 145 – Anthony Rizzo

SF – 71 – Evan Longoria

SH – 88 – Elvis Andrus

GIDP – 215 – Pujols (sad face)

CG – 25 – Clayton Kershaw (this would have seemed shockingly low to a voter in 2009, given that Roy Halladay had just led the league with 9)

SHO – 15 – Kershaw

mookie28member
4 years ago
Reply to  dl80

This was great work, thanks. Not sure I understood Megs reply that more than 5 people but less than 100 would get it right ? Did she mean every category because the answer to how many people would get all of them is 0. I thought so as soon as I saw the person ask but seeing the answers from the 2010s makes it clear. Like there is absolutely no chance.