Effectively Wild: A FanGraphs Baseball Podcast - Effectively Wild Episode 2028: Baseball Band

Episode Date: July 4, 2023

Ben Lindbergh and Meg Rowley banter about All-Star-roster minimums and maximums, what the Aroldis Chapman trade tells us about the how teams value prospects, Jake Diekman’s exploits with the Rays, Evan Longoria’s late-career contributions, and the same-named siblings of Carlos Pérez, Carlos Pérez, Wilmer Flores, Wilmer Flores, Wander Franco, Wander Franco, and Wander Franco. Then […]

Yeah, there's a new oak in town And he's the king we need right now No one knows how long he'll stay But say hey, show hey, do it your way today Oh, oh, oh, oh, Tony Oh, oh, oh, oh, Tony Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, Tony. Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, Tony. Oh, oh, oh, show, hey, oh, Tony.

Hello and welcome to episode 2028 of Effectively Wild, a baseball podcast from Fangrass presented by our Patreon supporters. I am Ben Lindberg of The Ringer, joined by Meg Rowley of Fangrass. Hello, Meg. Hello. of The Ringer, joined by Meg Rowley of Fangrass. Hello, Meg. Hello. You are all listening to the fading strains of a new song called New O

in Town. It is not one of mine. I did not record this in my spare time as an ode to Otani. This is a new song by The Baseball Project on the new album by The Baseball Project, which is called Grand Salami Time and just came out. I almost stumbled in our intro and said a baseball project from fan crafts.

It came very close. Saved myself at the last second there. But we love the new Baseball Project album. And we are talking to two of the people who made it today, Steve Wynn and Linda Pittman, who will be joining us soon to talk about it. The other members, of course, are Scott McCoy, Peter Buck, and Mike Mills. This is their fourth full record. It's a true supergroup in every sense of the term and a fairly long-lived one by supergroup standards. But I've been listening to it a lot in the last few days, and I like all the Baseball Project's music. Probably their first album was my

favorite heading into this, and it's always tough to tell how many listens you need to give something to sort of not have a small sample reading on how much you like it. It's true talent, right? How much you're actually going to like it long term. But my early indications are that this might now be my favorite album by The Baseball Project. And from talking to Steve and Linda, it sounds like they may agree. Yeah, it's really very, very good. It's really very good. Yeah, it's just great. I mean, for people who are not familiar with The Baseball Project, you should be because it's basically what would happen. So aggressive. What would happen if we took half of REM and the Dream Syndicate and Young Fresh Fellows and the Minus Five and Filthy Friends and the No Ones and all these great bands and smushed them together and had them just write songs about baseball?

Again, it's kind of a musical dream come true for baseball nerds like us and music lovers like us. So check it out. and music lovers like us. So check it out. We will be playing a few selections from the new album on this episode, and we will be talking soon about how it was made and the history of the band and many other subjects. But before we get there, just a little bit of banter.

I was trying to come up with some sort of take on the All-Star teams, and I was struggling because I'm not really someone who typically has takes on the all-star rosters or all-star snubs. And it's always premature to get exercised about someone who is left off an all-star roster because inevitably they will be added on as a replacement for someone, right? But my only take, and it's less a take than a question, is we have a minimum number of players from a certain team on the All-Star team, right? Every team has to have a representative, which is not easy sometimes. You kind of have to scrounge around to find a representative.

Do we need – is there any reason to implement a maximum for the number of players from any one team on the roster. This stray thought, perhaps partly inspired by the fact that the Atlanta Braves have eight all-stars this year. The Atlanta Braves, they're a really good team. They're maybe the best team in baseball. They should have a lot of all-stars. They have a lot of all-star caliber players, but they're hogging lots of roster spots. You know, I think they're tied for the most all-star representatives for an NL team. There have been some AL teams that had more than eight, but it's a lot of guys, you know, and it's far from the most egregious instance of all-star ballot box stuffing that we've seen various fan campaigns in the past where you think,

really? All-star? Okay. Even if that honor is a bit watered down these days, that's still sort of stretching my mental definition of an all-star. Not so much with these Braves guys. I'm not saying that they're all the most deserving at their respective positions, but they're all stars.

They're all good players, or at least have been for half a season. So is this concern trolling? Is this creating a dilemma where there isn't one? Or do you feel like at some times and some teams, there's an overrepresentation that is perhaps deleterious to the fan experience? Well, it does seem like there's a bit of tension between the notion that a team can have just sort of not limitless, obviously, but a great many all-star representatives. And also that every team has to have an all-star representative, right? Because I think the idea there is that, like, look, we want fans of the Detroit Tigers to have a reason to tune in, watch the all-star game.

And, you know, it seems like the one might get in the way of the other a little bit, but you don't want deserving guys to be left off simply because I'm not going to, I'm not even going to name particular guys, but you know, there are some,

there are some guys on this all-star team that are there because their team needs a rep. Right. i do wonder if we need some like um if if we might not benefit from like and we don't have to be super public about it because the purpose of this exercise isn't to make somebody feel bad right like you don't wanna you don't wanna like that's a guy on a day when he should be excited but like i think that um the the architects of the voting uh and i'm not saying that they should put their thumb on the scale you know we want

we don't want honest voting here but like they should maybe have a couple of like boxes they check like um okay so we have x number of guys who absent a requirement that every team gets an all-star uh selection would otherwise not be on this roster right we have some number of those and we we the the tabulators we know who those guys are you know if we're like being honest and not talking to their moms um and so we should uh figure out how many of those there are and then like add some extra spots so that you know if you have a group of dudes who say aren't on a team whose fans are stuff in the the ballot box and aren't guys who are getting in by virtue of the at least one guy rule uh you know make the team on for selection on merit um so that

we're not looking around being like wander frander Franco's not an All-Star. And here's another check. Like, I know that the fans and the players, they might not be looking at this when they're making their determinations because All-Star selections ultimately, at least for, especially for the fans, and I would imagine at least partially for the players,

it's about, like, feelings and not numbers. But, like, you know, for instance, like, maybe it's just should be a rule that like if the voting doesn't put the league war leader into the game that you just are like, but he's, you know, here we here you go. Right. Scoochie, scoochie, you know. So maybe we need some like a, you know, a patina of post hoc ballot checking, you know, because that's never controversial to yelling. Yeah, no, there's never a perfect way to do this.

If the players vote, they would often, I think, disagree with what the audience of this podcast would probably select. Fans, I think, probably do a better job on the whole. But yeah, they're going to have some head scratchers and some groaners and some hometown picks sometimes. Although speaking of hometown picks, if you're going to put your thumb on the scale to get players on the roster, then I think you would want to do that for the team of the city that is hosting the game, right? The Mariners have one all one also representative luis castillo currently at least right yeah but you know what i would say ben you know uh a really good way to guarantee that the hometown team has more all-stars if they play better so yeah have better players

on my part but like or or players playing to the level we know they're capable of. Right. Luis Castillo is an all star. Like, I don't I mean, I don't think that he was just an all star because the Mariners needed one. Like he's had a really great season. He's fourth on the fan graphs leaderboard for right by a Mariner. So there were some other possible candidates. Yeah, it's nice.

It's nice when you can cheer for your fans in the ballpark. Yeah. Like, you just play better and then it takes care of itself. Like, you don't want them to be, you don't want selections. And we already flirt with this by requiring one per team, right? I don't think you want the selections to feel like patronizing, you know? You want them to feel, you want it to feel meritorious. Yeah, I'm remembering now, long ago, I think we answered a patented question about hometown discounts and whether you actually have to be from that town, whether it has to be your hometown or whether you just have to play for that team. So I'm not suggesting that Luis Castillo is originally from Seattle, if anyone was wondering, but he plays for the Seattle team. So the home

crowd is going to get psyched to see him. And I do think that MLB has done a pretty good job, and we've complimented them on this in the past, of just leaning into the exhibition nature of the All-Star festivities and not having to shoehorn some way that it counts into the All-Star game and also creating room for legends who at this point in their career are not going to get there on the on-field merits anymore, but you can put an Albert Pujols on the roster in his final season because everyone wants to see him take one last bow, right? So that kind of thing I think is nice or bending the rules to have Shohei Otani be on there twice when that was unprecedented. And it's like, no, everyone wants to see him be a DH and also pitch in the All-Star

game. Why would you limit anyone from doing that? It's the showcase for your game's talent, and he's the marquee talent everyone wants to see. So show him off, obviously. So I think that they have largely learned that lesson. And as you said, there's always going to be some tension between this is like a little league and everyone gets to play and everyone has someone to root for. And then also everyone's going to get mad if the players having the best seasons are not on the team. It's an unwinnable situation to some extent. It's a time-honored tradition complaining about how the all-star teams are formed and who's actually on them in any given year. It's a tricky exercise, right?

Because it's not, on the one hand, it's not serious, right? It's just not. Like, it's not a serious thing. It doesn't – we've taken pains, I think appropriately over the last couple of years, to make it not matter, right? So, it's not serious. And it should be fun. And I think it can be light and it can, you know, we don't have to twist ourselves into knots to like come up with logical reasons to do a thing we all just want to do because it's a lifestyle game. Like just do the fun stuff because it's supposed to be, you know, it's so fun. If the purpose for fans is fun, then I think you end up with a better exercise.

Right. Well, whatever that ends up looking like, because you want the flexibility to prioritize the fun. So there's that piece of it. But I, you know, I don't want to discount what it means to these guys. You know, like it does it does mean a lot to those guys. You know, like it does mean a lot to those guys. And I don't want to lose sight of that because there are multiple constituencies to satisfy. And for better or worse, like the selection piece of it, you know, is a guy who was a one-time all-star, like, is he going to get into the Hall of Fame or not get into the Hall of Fame because he didn't go a second time? I mean, probably not, right? Like, that's not going to be enough on its own to keep someone out who is otherwise deserving. But when we look back on guys' careers and legacies, like, that's a thing we cite, right? He was a seven-time All-Star,

you know? And so, you want it to have some seriousness, you know? Yeah. It definitely means something to some people. So, yes, got to take their feelings into consideration. And that includes the fans who vote on these things and like to see their guys suit up, even if it's eight of their guys on one team at one time. Just hogging the roster spots is, disproportionate number of roster spots, but I guess it's a disproportionate distribution of talent across the league as well. And as you said, don't want to arbitrarily, artificially prevent anyone from going, hey, you're a deserving all-star,

but sorry, you're teammates with X number of other deserving all-stars too. So you don't get to go. You had to draw straws to decide who gets to go to the game. Yeah. It's a tricky thing. Yeah. Speaking of teams that maybe had to dig deep to find a representative, I was kind of wondering who the Royals all-star would be after Aroldis Chapman was traded shortly before the all-star elections were publicized, so all-star selections, because he seemed to be an obvious candidate. And now he is no longer a Kansas City Royal. He's a Texas Ranger. And I guess predictably and appropriately, they're taking Salve, right? And Salve's not having an incredible season, but he's a star, right? He's not having a bad season. So yeah, send Salve. Everyone wants to see him at a game

like that. But that Chapman trade, which we did not get to talk about last time because it broke after we bantered. But I don't know if you had the initial reaction that I did, which was that's all, right? Because that was kind of the kickoff to trade season, right? There are always trades happening, kind of a background hum. But this felt like the first one that was like, all right, this is a deadline deal, even if it was technically not even quite July yet. But it was aggressive for the Rangers. They needed a closer, they needed bullpen reinforcements, and they went out and got probably the best bullpen arm available. And they didn't have to give up a whole lot, right? Or at least that was my impression, my initial reaction. They basically

gave up kind of a consensus fifth starter back-ends guy, right? In Colbrack. In Riggins. Yeah, right. Riggins, Riggins? Good question. Maybe the fact that we're not entirely sure about that speaks to his status in the game, but- It could speak to that or it could speak – Or our lack of preparation.

It's mostly that there's no pronunciation guide on the B-Ref page. I looked, Ben. I did look. Yeah. They also – the Royals got an outfielder, Ronny Cabrera, who is very young and very far from the majors and could be something someday. I guess that's the kind of lottery ticket, as these players are often described, that you just sort of hope that you scratch them off and they get good someday. a huge haul, at least in my mind, for probably the best bullpen arm available who's being dealt more than a month before the deadline. So you're getting those extra innings too. And maybe I've just kind of got to recalibrate what players get traded for at the deadline

these days. Joshian wrote about this. I think he's made this point before. Maybe we've brought it up before. But there's been a pretty dramatic change seemingly. I will have to research this, maybe stat blast this at some point. But Joe made the case that blue chip prospects don't get dealt for deadline rentals anymore, right? So it's kind of a nifty bit of work for the Royals who picked up Chapman. I mean, whatever you think of Chapman, he was coming off of a season where he seemingly just kind of quit on his team and wasn't all that effective when he was with his team. And they nabbed him for a one year deal for less than4 million, most likely with an eye toward rehabilitating him and then dealing him at the deadline, right? So that was, I guess, a nifty transaction for them. But Joe made the point, not the first time that Aroldis Chapman has been dealt at the deadline when he was in his walk year. And famously, of course, he was traded to the Cubs in 2016. And he was having

roughly the same sort of season then that he is now, at least if you look at peripherals. So again, whatever you think of Aroldis Chapman, he has had a lot of longevity, I think sort of unexpected, impressive longevity when it comes to the way that he pitches. Right. Particularly given the velo, yeah. Yeah, just power, flamethrower. He has not lost a lot of velo. It looked like he was losing some, and then some of it has come back this year. And we expect bullpen guys to be inconsistent and to have sort of short peaks.

And he's been pretty good now for 14 years in the big leagues. So he's about as dependable as they come with some blips and hiccups aside. So in 2016, when the Cubs traded for him, they had to give up a lot, right? And it was a lot at the time and even more later in retrospect, so July 25th, 2016, he's traded for Adam Warren, Glaber Torres, who was the headliner. And he was like a top, I don't know, 50 prospect or something at the time. He then climbed prospect list subsequently, but he was already a rated guy. Plus Billy McKinney, who was a prospect at the time and another minor leaguer. And that was all for, what, three months, several, two months, right? Plus the playoffs.

Now that was the Cubs and the Cubs really, really wanted to win a World Series at the time, perhaps even more than most teams do, which is already a lot. But I don't think you'd see that deal get done today, right? Any deal like that, this is kind of, I guess, as close to sort of a natural experiment as you can because it's Rolls Chapman having sort of the same half season and not getting as much even though he was dealt earlier. So if you're expecting lots of big name prospects to get dealt, particularly for impending free agents. Maybe adjust your expectations because I'm having to adjust mine when I saw that. And I was thinking, that's all.

But maybe that's all you're going to get for a player like that these days when teams are either hoarding or appropriately valuing their prospects, depending on your perspective. Yeah, I think that there are a couple of things that like stand out to me as obvious differences. And then I think your broader point might still be true, which is like, so first of all, you know, you're right to say that he netted a lot more in terms of prospect return when he was traded to the Cubs. And it wasn't as if he was like an uncontroversial figure at the time. Even more radioactive from a PR persona at that point, probably. Right. Because the incident in his garage with the gun was quite proximate to that deadline. So, or at least the revelation of it. And so there was, you know, it's not like he was,

So there was, you know, it's not like he was, I wrote about that trade, like through that lens at the time. Right. So it wasn't like he was all that removed from it. But I do think that like his, you know, he was obviously younger, which I think what transpired with the Yankees last year probably had more to do with his perceived value as a potential trade piece than than what had happened prior to the Cubs trade, because it seemed like it was going to a more, might say more about his on-field performance than not. The timing of it for the return is probably the piece that is the most surprising to me because yes, you get more time with him. You get more innings from him. And so you would imagine that that would both drive up the potential return and also give Kansas City the leverage to say, well, he's still going to be a valuable bullpen contributor. You know, if we deal him closer to the deadline, we don't just have to take the first deal we're offered, which I don't know that that's what happened, that this was like the only deal they were offered. But it is kind of texas is highly incentivized to like just drive their lead as far as it will take them in the aos like i i have my qualms with chapman but as a general philosophy like i like it when teams

don't wait until the deadline and say look we, we want to solidify a competitive position. We're going to go get guys now who can help us to either push and get into a playoff spot or keep and guard against any advances that other teams in our division might make. So there's that piece of it that makes it kind of confounding. Like, why didn't they just wait a little bit, you would think. But I don't

know like he he had the velo dip i wonder how real teams thought this couple of months of performance is relative to the decline he had exhibited last year he seems like it seems like the best you can say is that he's like a weird guy. Right. And so even if you don't care about some of the obvious like character issues that have arisen with him, like, I don't know if he's the best like clubhouse dude anyway. know it was a kind of a weird a weird trade to me but you're right like of the relievers that we sort of perceive to be available like he was the best one from a performance perspective so i don't quite know where that leaves the market i yeah i struggle i don't know it's like a very relevant question to my life how busy will the deadline be ben and how will we know about any of the trades because there won't be a Twitter by then. I'm just going to have to be bugging people on the phone all day, which, you know, that's fine. But goodness, I'm so much more efficient.

Work in your sources. There will have to be a literal transom. The news will have to bring back telegraph wires. Just be monitoring that somewhere. How did they used to do it? Yeah. But it is, by the way, Cole Ragan's. Ragan's.

I thought it was. See, you made me not confident. Yeah, you were right. Your instincts were correct. Another thing about Chapman, I guess, is that he's sort of established himself as a pitcher that you can't or probably shouldn't ride really hard in the postseason, right? Which I guess he sort of showed in 2016, but he's not necessarily one of these closers who's suddenly going to be pitching in any inning and pitching lots of multi-inning outings

once you get to October. You probably should not break glass and use him in that sort of emergency way based on what we've seen, which is not to say that he's not still valuable, but maybe a little less so than some dominant bullpen arms. So that could be part of it too. But yeah, I mean, Joe went beyond that. He was noting some other examples like the A's got Sean Mania for two months of Ben Zobrist. The Mets traded Michael Fulmer, who was a pretty big prospect at the time for two months of Jonas Cespedes. The Orioles traded Eduardo Rodriguez for 20 innings of Andrew Miller. Andrew Miller was one of those guys you could use as sort of a Swiss Army knife, at least later.

So he's making the case that we just don't really see that happening ever anymore or as much anymore for someone who's only going to give you two or three months of performance just because teams have their models now. Maybe they're too conservative when they're going for it or should be going for it. But I guess the math works out that way where how many expected wins are you going to get from a reliever in half a season, including the playoffs, if you're lucky enough to get there? And then how does that compare to some top-rated prospect who's under team control for six or seven years? And how do you weight the near future more so than the long-term when who knows if you'll be in the running for the playoffs? So I think there has been some change in the calculus. I'm not saying we'll never see it anymore, but maybe I have to adjust my expectations when I see the return for someone

like Chapman and I'm underwhelmed at first. Maybe that's just the new normal or who knows, maybe someone will pull off a heist or get extra aggressive in the next month. We have no idea how active the trade deadline is. I would say that if you could poll, quote unquote, baseball insiders about what the deadline is going to look like, I really don't know that they would be any better than just a random guess. Because I remember sometimes where it's like the deadline is going to be super busy and then it's kind of a dud or the deadline is going to be slow and then it's more active than expected. It's really hard to know. You can look at the standings and the playoff odds and see who's in theory positioned to be adding or subtracting, but it changes up until the last second and there are so many variables that go into it that, yeah, I think you could convince me of either argument that this is going to be an especially slow deadline because there are so many teams in it or that there are some teams that you would never have expected to be divesting themselves of talent that maybe now are getting to be in a position to do so because their playoff odds are increasingly bad.

So maybe it could turn out to be more active than usual. I have no idea. I'm not going to pretend that I have any idea, so I cannot help you with your dilemma. We got to get Passon and Rosenthal breaking news on Lewski. I know that's not how you say it, but I can't not say it that way. That seems like how it should be said, Ben. You know, like

one of your Midwestern relatives describing a volcano blowing up, you know? A blue ski! Yes, we are both on there now. Are you on blue ski now, Ben? I am on there. I did not take steps to join, but an Effectively Wild listener kindly asked me

if I wanted an invite. And I said, sure. So I'm on there. For all I know, I have zero followers. So you can be my first follower at Penn Lindbergh on Blue Sky. But we've got to get an Effectively Wild account for Blue Sky, as you pointed out, just as Twitter comes crashing down. Yeah. It's not.

You have four followers already, Ben. Oh, wow. Look at that. Yeah. Building up. Just generating some buzz here. No. Uh-uh.

Yeah. Not that. I don't know. It feels very shaky over there. So who's to say? But, you know. Yeah. I have not rushed to join whatever the new Twitter replacement is.

I've kind of waited. And I'm not notable enough that anyone is squatting on my name, I guess. So it was out there for me, even though I didn't really put a rush on that. Anyway, we're on blue sky. If you want to find us there, I don't know that I will ever do whatever you call sending a message on blue sky, but maybe. I'm still finding, I'm still finding my, you know, I'm still finding it over there. Yeah. It's, it's f's feral you know and i mean that in a good way mostly but it is uh you know it's it's a different it feels like it's gone

back in time uh which is probably good i don't know yeah not that twitter was ever not a wild west but right this is a different kind of it's a yeah's a better – it's a more enjoyable Wild West maybe. I don't know. We'll see. bet about what his FIP would be with the Rays, putting the contention to the test that the Rays can just fix anyone. Everyone, few pitchers were in as dire a need of fixing as Jake Diekman. When the White Sox let him go and the Rays, with a shorthanded bullpen, picked up Jake Diekman, well, Jake Diekman now with the Rays, again, he had a 5.93 FIP and 7.94 ERA with the White Sox in 11 and a third innings and 13 games. And they decided no great shakes in the White Sox bullpen, but they said, no, we don't need Jake Deakman anymore. He can't help us. The Rays said, let's go get Jake Deakman. He has now pitched in 20 games for them, 16 and two-thirds

innings. He has a 2.16 ERA and a 3.17 FIP. So neither of us expected or projected that he would actually do that well. So provisionally, the Rays have done it again. No, he's a reliever. He could have one bad outing and that could blow up everything. But we both projected Phipps in the fours, which was where his projection was. And we basically said, he'll be maybe a little bit better than his projection. So we weren't giving the Rays a ton of extra credit for being able to enhance the performance of Jake Diekman. But to this point, they have done it or he has done it. It has happened. It has happened. It is here. The Diekmanissance. Yes, exactly. And this is like the ultimate test. This is why we chose Jake Diekman as our test subject here. It's like, this is a challenge. If the Rays can fix Jake Diekman, then maybe they really can do everything. Although their bullpen on the whole has been pretty bad or started out the season pretty bad,

which was one reason why they needed Jake Deakman. A lot of guys were hurt, but they're not necessarily miracle workers. And yet they have seemingly turned Jake Deakman into a productive pitcher, at least for 20 games, which is what they needed, a stopgap. And he's given them that. So all hail the Rays. Kudos to the Rays. Good job, Jeff. I'm sure it was all Jeff, but they've done it again. There's a lot of glory.

It isn't loud glory, but there's a lot of glory in being the guy who can plug a hole, you know? Yep. I had one other observation about a player who seemed to be past his prime and is, but has also had a little late career renaissance of sorts. Have you noticed that Evan Longoria, he's still a pretty good hitter after all these years. And I remember when Evan Longoria went from being a superstar and basically being on a Hall of Fame track at the start of his career. And then suddenly he went from superstar, one of the best players in baseball to like pretty good. He just kind of went from like a six or seven war player to like a three or four or ultimately two war player. And it happened sort of suddenly when he was still fairly young, like in his late twenties, when you would have

said that he's still theoretically at or close to his peak. And he just wasn't quite the same player anymore, but he has hung on for quite a few years now and I guess burnished his Cooperstown case. I think it would be a tough sell probably to voters, but he's pushing his career war into the territory where you really have to sit up and pay attention. But he's got a 126 WRC plus this year, 115 last year, 122 in 2021. And if you look, now he's not playing third base all the time these days, and he's not playing it as adeptly as he did in his youth, but purely offensively, if we look 2021 to 2023, minimum 600 plate appearances as a third baseman. He is tied with another oldster for the sixth highest WRC plus 127 over that span. So it's Jose Ramirez, Rafael Devers, Austin Riley, all-star, Yandy Diaz, all-star, Nolan Arnauto, all-star, right? Maybe not quite as deserving as usual, but all-star,

I think. And then it's Justin Turner and Evan Longoria. So he's still hanging in there. I guess he's kind of in the compiling phase of his career, the part-time diminished player phase of his career. But he's found a productive part-time role where he's adding clubhouse presence and mentorship, presumably, at the same time. But that's not all he's offering. He's been a more productive player than I expected him to be, given his apparent decline trajectory from several years ago. angle how the Diamondbacks are where they are, which is sitting three games up on the Dodgers in the NL West. The people who are surprised, which are famously, not me, not me, not surprised,

thought they'd be good. Didn't think they'd be this good, but thought they'd be good. Yeah. You picked them as a surprise team, which means that you are not surprised that they've been good, I guess. Right. I'm unsurprised by their goodness. I am pleasantly surprised by the degree of goodness, right? The caliber of play is exceeding my expectations. So, this is like what teams ought to do when they are like, okay, we have our young guys. The youngs are here, and they're all really talented, and they're all playing very well. I mean like maybe not out of terms, but like they're all playing really well and they are going to drive us into the next era of like good insert team name here, baseball. And then you want to supplement them with like, you know, kind of role guys, which is what what Longoria is at this point, but like a really productive role guy. And I think that the difference for teams sort of making that leap either earlier than we expect them to, or to a greater and more emphatic degree than we expect them to, or some combination of both of those

things is when they hit on the right ones, because, you know, you bring in role guys and some of them just end up being like, you know, they're there. They're like taking it, you know, they're taking at-bats. They're throwing some innings, but they're like... And then, like, sometimes you pick the right ones. I don't have any insight into how Evan Longoria specifically is doing that. It is surprising that it has persisted in this way. But, like, you know, there are going to be... When the season, regular season ends, and we are preparing to like preview the postseason,

and we are in all likelihood previewing a more into October bound, they really need to stop the season at the end of September, right? Because it's so nice to be able to say, play October baseball and have that be unambiguous because you get tired of saying playoff and postseason all the time, you know, and I don't like fall classic. It feels clunky. So, and it's specific, you know, it doesn't apply to all those. So anyway, when we prepare to preview the Arizona diamondbacks playoff team, part of a big part of what we will focus on is, you know, the season that Corbin Carroll had and how good Zach Allen has been, and hopefully the deadline acquisitions they make to reinforce the bullpen and you know Merrill Kelly being solid and Perdomo's surprisingly good year and Cattell returning to form and all this stuff right but you know a piece of it or at

least a couple is going to be like and then they got like good third base you know production out of Longoria and And that helped. And they got rid of Madison Bumgarner. Maybe that also helped. Who could say? Yeah. And my last little observation here. So Carlos Perez came up, made it back to the majors.

And you have to ask which Carlos Perez because there are two Carlos Perez's, Carlos's Perez. And they are brothers, both named Carlos Perez. Are they really? Yes, they are. Oh, I didn't know that. Yeah. Well, why would you assume that they were? But they are.

So Carlos Perez, the White Sox catcher, just came back up to the majors. He was briefly in the big leagues last year, too. He's 26. back up to the majors. He was briefly in the big leagues last year too. He's 26. And then there's Carlos Perez, the elder, who's been bouncing around the big leagues for a while now. And he's been with the A's this year after a few years of not being in the big leagues. So he is big brother, Carlos Perez. He's 32. And this is not a unique phenomenon, right? Because somewhat legendarily, there's Wilmer Flores and the Wilmer Floreses, right? So there are three brothers in that family named Wilmer Flores, and I believe also a father and a son named Wilmer. And then Wander Franco has the same sort of situation. Multiple brothers named Wander, I believe, also a father and a son named Wander. And I was wondering, is this common? I mean, everyone always laughs and jokes about this, and I find it amusing and surprising as well. And I don't want to be culturally insensitive

if this is sort of a naming convention in the Caribbean or in Latin America, right? And I messaged Octavio Hernandez Pernia, who is a former Venezuelan journalist. He's been on the show. He now works in baseball. He's a statistical analyst for the Diablos Rojos in the Mexican League. And I asked him, he knows a ton about baseball in Venezuela and Venezuelan players. And I said, is this a common thing? Is this a tradition there? And he said, no, that it's as surprising to him as it was to me. He says, it's actually weird. This is not common.

I personally don't know a single example of siblings with the same name. Haven't seen it in Venezuela nor Mexico. But then again, here are these cases. Maybe it's a good technique to get to the majors, but really it's not common. And I sort of assumed that if we have these few baseball examples, and those probably aren't the only ones, that it must be the tip of the iceberg and that this is kind of a common cultural practice, but apparently not. Apparently, it's just sort of a cluster of them in baseball. And I guess it's not unique to certain countries or

to baseball. I mean, George Foreman, of course, is a famous, infamous example of this where he named all five of his sons George, right? And you just wonder about the mechanics of that and how it is not confusing, how it could not be to be in a group setting or to be talking about your family members with other family members. And how do you specify which Wander or Wilmer you're talking about? Maybe they have kind of a shorthand. Maybe there's like they have nicknames or something. We would have to come up with some sort of system to avoid just having it turn into an Abbott and Costello routine and just which Wanderer, which Wilmer are we talking about, right?

And have cases of mistaken identity here. But this is something that I just love about baseball, especially if it is uncommon and there's just an odd cluster of these same-named siblings in baseball, then that's even more whimsical and wonderful. So I say, bring it on. I want all of the same-named players to be intimately related, and I don't know how or why it's happened. And I welcome insight and input into why we see seemingly so many of these relative to their incidents elsewhere. But I can't get enough of it. Just give me more Wonders and Wilmers.

It's wonderful. As long as one of the Wonders is an all-star. Yeah, right. Exactly. Not enough Wonders are all-stars, even though as one of the Wonders is an all-star. Yeah, right. Exactly. Not enough Wonders are all-stars, even though there are so many Wonders. I'm sure it's going to get sorted, right? Probably, yeah. I mean, someone will get hurt or will opt out, and he's got to be close to the top of the list, right, for potential replacements. So I would think. The George Foreman, he's got George Jr., George III, George IV, George V, and George VI.

And they all have nicknames, I guess, except George Jr., who just gets the junior. So George III is Monk, and George IV is Big Wheel, and George V is Red, and George VI is Little Joey. I have not done the research to find out why those origin stories happened. But George Foreman said, I named all my sons George Edward Foreman so they would always have something in common, which is interesting. I mean, they're already siblings. They already have so much in common. I say to them, if one of us goes up, then we all go up together.

I say to them, if one of us goes up, then we all go up together. And if one goes down, we all go down together, which I guess is true if one of them brings disgrace on the family. Isn't that a Decembrist song? Yeah, sort of. But if one of them brings disgrace upon the name, then I guess when you Google that name, then it taints all of them. So it's true. They all have to look out for their good name because it's the same name. But it's also got to be tough if you're, from a baseball talent perspective, the lesser Wander Franco, right?

Because these brothers, some of them have also played or are playing professionally too. And then it's got to be constantly like, whoa, Wander Franco. Oh my gosh. But not that Wander Franco. He's my brother. I'm the other Wander. No, the other, other Wander. It's like if you have to constantly, it's like we were talking about with Elie de la Cruz's much more diminutive twin brother. At least he doesn't have the same name. Whereas now you constantly have to be sort of saying, no, it's not me. It's the other Wander, which I wonder is even a bigger blow to your ego potentially, unless you have that form and ethos of what

one of us accomplishes, we all accomplish because we have the same name. Well, and I do wonder though, because, you know, there are guys with the same name in the game who are not related to one another. And I don't think that we like attribute the prospect Julio Rodriguez does not take on the ethos of Julio, right? Like the Max Muncy that is, no, the other Max Muncy, the other one that started with the ace, you know? The other Luis Castillo. Yeah, there's so many examples. Right. So, you know, we don't, I don't think that we make mistakes there.

Although sometimes we do tag the wrong guy, you know? And by we, I mean me. The fan crafts auto name tagger. I've run into that issue myself. But this is great fodder for a baseball project song. We will discuss people suggesting topics for a baseball project song. But I would think same name siblings and family members. That's perfect material for them if they have not already workshopped that.

for them if they have not already workshopped that. And so that is an excellent segue into our interview with Steve Wynn and Linda Pittman of The Baseball Project and of many, many other bands. Just a heads up that later in the interview, there's a faint drumming sound on Steve's track coming from the practice space next door, the occupational hazards of interviewing musicians. We can have them silent cell phones, but not necessarily percussionists, but it's not very noticeable. And if anything, it adds authenticity. And we will play another sample from the new album, Grand Salami, here to take us into the next segment. This is a song called The All or Nothings. Large Angle M.I.P. It's a philosophy

Well, on the first song on the first album by The Baseball Project, Steve Wynn and Scott McCoy sing, One thing you can say about time is that it always passes. One thing you can say about the game is that it's not getting any faster. The first sentence is still true, but the second sentence, not so true anymore. Enough time passed, 15 years, in fact, since that song was released, that the game did get faster. And in other exciting news, enough time passed that there's a new album out by The Baseball Project called Grand Salami Time, which came out last week.

And we are joined today by two of the driving forces behind that record and behind The Baseball Project since its inception, the husband and wife duo of Linda Pittman and the aforementioned Steve Wynn. Linda drums and sometimes sings on the Baseball Project records, and Steve writes, sings, and shreds as one of the band's trio of guitarists. Linda, Steve, it's always risky to introduce multiple people at the same time and risk them saying hello at exactly the same time, but I figure you two are probably pretty practiced at doing interviews together. So, hello. Welcome. Hello. Good to be here with you.

Good to have you. Hello, Linda, as well. Hi, Ben and Meg. So I'm guessing you hear this fairly often. I know you hear it sometimes because I heard Rob Nyer say almost exactly the same thing to you a few weeks ago when he had you on his podcast. But I think there's a sense among fans of this band that it's almost too good to be true, that this band should never really have existed, that all of these talented artists from other great bands could have come together to form a band that writes baseball songs. And not only as a one-off project, but then to do it for several records now over the

course of 15 years, it really does sort of feel like a pinch me moment that this has not only happened, but has persisted this long. And I wonder how often you do hear that from people who feel like this is such a perfect sort of in the center of the Venn diagram of my musical interests and non-musical interests that by all rights, it should never have existed. Maybe you feel that way too. Yeah, actually, I think we do have to pinch ourselves every now and again too, because we just have so much fun doing it. It's kind of ridiculous.

You're filling a vital need because there is sort of baseball music. I think we're all familiar with Centerfield and various sort of terrible pop country songs that have tried to engage with the game. But it's such a literary sport. It's such an expressive sport. It feels like one that naturally lends itself to film, to writing, and to music. And, you know, for our listeners who are a little less familiar with the Baseball Project, can you spare a moment to talk about the genesis of you all coming together? Sure. And you're right. I mean, it really it's funny because when you say, well, this band exists, this made four albums about nothing but baseball.

A lot of people say you got to be kidding. I mean, it's it's it is for in some ways you could say a particular audience who likes the game and likes the music we all make. But really, you think about it, and there's been a whole history of, well, Johnny Cash made complete records about trains, about, you know, there have been records about outlaws, records about all kinds of things. And much like all those other subjects, they work on a surface level of you're singing about a certain subject, but also they work as a metaphor for bigger things in life. And that's how we look at the baseball project. We do, as the two of you will tell from our lyrics, we do know about the game, follow the game, love the game, but we use this as a jumping off point

to sing about some of the same things we've been singing about in all our bands for years. So I just wanted to touch on that. But the genesis of the band is that, unbeknownst to each other, Scott and I had for years have been both thinking about writing a record about baseball because we both love the game so much and we both write a lot of songs. Wouldn't that be something? And the two of us really didn't know each other at all, essentially, even though we'd come up in

the same scene and had a lot of friends in common. But we were, all five of us, five members of the band were at the party the night before the induction of REM to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame back in 2007. Is it Linda? Yes, 2007. And we were there. They threw a great party the night before. They got inducted here in New York City where Linda and I live. And Scott and I really essentially met for the first time that night.

At the end of the night, as has often been the case in years since, we were the last ones at the bar standing there. And there was Linda and Scott and I standing there at the bar just talking about this and that and getting to know each other. And at some point, I guess the conversation turned to baseball, as it would. And I said to Scott, you know, I've always wanted to write a whole record about baseball. And he said, I have too. And I think at that point, we both were fired up to find that somebody else had had that idea. And we almost immediately, I mean,

within weeks, wrote the bulk of the songs that are on the first album. And we're in the studio just a couple months later. Because I think we just, knowing somebody else shared this crazy, never done before idea, kind of said, all right, safety in numbers, let's do it. And some of you, of course, had known each other for decades and had played together and had toured together. And then Scott was sort of an overnight best friend, I guess, for the two of you. And you kind of connected over baseball, which is something we've probably all experienced. We haven't all formed bands about baseball, but we've probably connected with people,

made friends over baseball. It's something that affords an instant connection or an icebreaker at least, right? And then you went on to form a band and churn out three albums and really four albums worth of songs, if you count your Broadside Ballads project that you did in 2010 for ESPN.com in fairly quick succession. And then, of course, almost a decade went by between the third album, titled Third, and Grand Salami Time, which came out this week. And I know there are probably a lot of reasons for that, right? Life got in the way in any number of ways. Of course, health issues, you know, Scott, of course, had a stroke and recovered from that. And there was a pandemic and you all are juggling so many

projects at the same time, as is I know your producer on this album, Machister. So how did it come together? And when were some of these songs written? Because some of the subjects are things that could have been written about years ago. So I wonder whether you were compiling these things for some time and waiting for the right moment or whether they all came out in a burst of creativity when you finally got in the studio. I think there was a little bit of stockpiling going on. I know Scott and Steve both keep notebooks of ideas and they've always got a pretty deep notebook of things going on. But I don't think there were very many, they weren't very far along, most of these songs until we got much closer to the recording date. And the fact that we did have to postpone it so

many times because it was a situation where we actually had pretty solid recording dates on at least three occasions and they had to be, all plans were waylaid sometimes for years. So it was a little bit frustrating because we all knew we wanted to do it. We all knew there were some good ideas kicking around. But I think typically, Steve can talk about it, but he tends to write really well when there's an assignment. So when it gets close, right? When it gets closer, you know, the ideas that have been percolating.

Yeah, exactly, exactly. Deadlines are coming. And then, you know, turn on the genius faucet. Um, but the idea of where to record it, it never got to the point where we needed to get so serious about actually, you know, putting down that deposit and picking a studio in the first three records were made at Type Foundry in Portland. Well, actually, Jackpot was the first one in Portland. So I take that back. The next two were at Type Foundry in Portland. Well, actually, Jackpot was the first one in Portland, so I take that back.

The next two were at Type Foundry. But then at a certain point, Type Foundry, Adam Seltzer decided to kind of go a different direction and started working from his home and gave up that studio. So we really did at some point go, well, we don't have that to fall back on. We've got to figure something out. And Mitch had been involved in mixing the third record, and I got it in my head that I just really, really wanted to do this record with Mitch if there was any possible way.

And just for the benefit of any of our listeners who aren't familiar with R.E.M. lore, Mitch Easter was the producer of R.E.M.'s early album. So you already have half of R.E.M. in the baseball project, if not more, including Scott, who played with them for years and others. So now there's a reunion with Mitch, which I think led to a somewhat different sound. And it's certainly to my liking. Just wanted to point that out to people who might not have known the name. You know, for so many reasons, that was appealing, I think, to all of us. So I brought up the idea of having a band field trip and going to North Carolina and doing it with Mitch. And, you know, for me, I had never worked with Mitch in person. So that was like a new experience. But for other people in the band, it was kind of like coming home and

full circle for, you know, for Peter and for Mike. I felt like it was a really charged, emotional, great atmosphere. And Mitch is just unbelievable to work with. So. And you brought the idea of the songs and stockpiling songs. And some of these actually, yeah, we had first planned on doing the record, I think, back in 2016, the normal two-year break between the previous record. And as you mentioned, Scott did have the stroke, and we pushed it back. And then we really were planning on making the record in 2020, and we all know what happened then. So some things were stuck around, you know, like, for example, the song, That's Living, the song I wrote about the death of Jose Fernandez, I wrote that, I think, the morning after the boating accident. I was so,

I was so, I was so just, you know, saddened and moved and just then thought about all the issues I bring up in the song. So obviously that song, you can pin the time on that when that was written pretty easily. But I think one thing with the writing of the songs, because I know Scott has some saved up, I think the yips for me goes back a little ways. So yeah, we were, you know, some things we were stockpiling. But one thing

that is very different about this record from the previous ones is Peter, Peter Buck became a real writing machine. He kind of really all of a sudden, that itself is not new. Peter's been writing for 20 projects the same time for years. That's just what he does. He's a riff master. But he really wanted to get involved in this record and writing some of the songs. And he just started sending out riffs and bits of music or demos to me and Scott. And Scott and I were kind of having our draft picks

where I say, okay, I get the first and fourth pick on the Peter demos, and they were fantastic. And I think that was a little 11th hour jolt into the recording process. Like, great, we've got, you know, Scott and I, we know how we write songs, but having an outside, not an outsider, because Peter's not that, but having another person's musical perspective into the mix kind of gets you, gives you new ideas. And so a lot

of songs like Uncle Charlie and Journeyman and Grand Salami Time and a lot of the really rocking songs of the album came from that, that having the extra writer in the mix. Ben and I have had the experience as we've sort of navigated baseball becoming our full-time jobs from being fans of it early on in our lives where, you know, you have a remove from the game that's a little bit different than it was when you were just going to the ballpark as a kid and enjoying it as a fan. And obviously, this isn't the totality of your musical lives, but I'm curious if working on this project and sort of having the baseball project as a vehicle for baseball-related thoughts has altered the way that you watch the game, maybe when you're not looking for song ideas, but will have them come upon you, does it change your relationship with baseball at all?

Yeah, because we have a hard time now watching games, I think, without thinking, can we talk about or write about something that's happening here? Sure. Right. Well, we all love the game. I think obviously the fans will think, oh, that would be a good song idea. But now we just still watch the game and get agonized over our teams not living up to what we'd hope they might be living up to. Sadly, I think for at least I'd say for three members of this band, our viewing of the game has been less affected by writing songs about it and more affected by fantasy baseball.

And that is addressed in one of the songs. Who is that based on, if you can divulge that? Is that a composite character? Yeah, thankfully, it's not a true story in any way.

But it is kind of funny. Mike and Scott and I are all involved in a fantasy league that was actually started in 2008 by Yep Rock Records, our label at the time, to promote and find a little angle behind the first record. And they put together this little league with other musicians like Ira Kaplan from Yellow Tango and Steve Berlin from Los Lobos and Steve Malcom from Pavement. We all just kind of go at it. So I think it's kind of funny.

And that's why that song was written. added. So I think it's kind of funny. And that's why that song was written just like, or maybe I wrote that song maybe as a reminder to myself to like, hey, pay attention to the game. The real game is where it's all happening. One thing I've always appreciated about the baseball project is that you really use the entire tapestry of baseball history on your records. I think that's something that a lot of us love about baseball is that there's just so much history and it still feels alive in a lot of ways. And we can compare contemporary players to past players. And so you will sort of range all over the baseball histories, right? You will talk about players you saw growing up. You'll talk about players who preceded your being born.

You'll talk about current players. And I wonder whether that's kind of a conscious choice because the band members are all within, what, about 10 or 12 years in age, right? And so if you were all writing about the players you remembered fondly from your youths, then you might be mining a certain slim band of baseball history very heavily. So I wonder whether you're conscious of needing to differentiate and expand your references to different time periods. Well, I will point out that as Scott likes to tell the story, he was having a conversation with somebody at Yelp Rock after the first record. And right before we were ready to go into the

studio for the second one, they said, yeah, maybe you could write about some players that haven't been dead for a hundred years. So maybe that kind of spurred us on a little bit to think outside the box. Come on, the kids love Ed Delahanty. Yeah, big Ed Delahanty. You know, you know, Ed Delahanty of the Delahanty brothers. Yeah, but if you have a contemporary player like Shohei Otani, who, you know, I'm composing sonnets to on this podcast constantly, then how can you not burst into song, I suppose. But I appreciate that it's not just backward looking, that you're kind of taking the game as it is today and also finding inspiration in that.

Yeah, we do try. The Otani song that Scott wrote is fantastic. And it really is of the moment. And, you know, he just, each time you think he's done everything he can do or has reached his peak, he surpasses it, you know, on a daily basis. We have in various times written about contemporary things. And it's tricky to do that because it's not just because, oh, we're nostalgic for our teenage years

and our, you know, the players we grew up watching. It's because like anything else, once something is in the rear view mirror, you can take a better perspective on what it all meant. And sometimes you write about something that's happening right at the moment and two years later you think, well, that didn't turn out to be the story I thought it would. Or it does. I mean I wrote a song a few years ago about Steven Strasberg and how he – what it must be like for him to be a phenom. The song is called Phenom and everything he's looking forward to and what that would feel like to be the name of the moment like that.

And now, look, he's going to be – it's a career that was a good – a solid career but not what everyone expected. Is that song still what I was hoping it would be when I wrote it? Maybe, maybe not. Yeah. Maybe it's time for a sequel to that song. Maybe so, yeah. You've written about Larry Yount, right? But I guess you could do a kind of tragic follow-up to the Phenom who has an early end to his career. Maybe so, yeah. get the facts right because baseball fans will call you on it if you don't. Right. So I wonder what sort of research you do.

Obviously, you're all very familiar with baseball, but do you supplement your own knowledge with reading or consulting expert sources just to make sure you're not misrepresenting things? We do. I mean, I think when we're writing about a subject, we make sure we're getting it right. But we do know a lot about the game, as you would imagine. So we don't have to, you know, it's not like we're pouring over the Bill James abstract or the baseball encyclopedia to pull songs out. But, you know, we want to get them right. I know for me, personally speaking, the trickiest one was the song Harvey Haddix.

I wrote the first album because, of course, I had to name all the pitchers that threw perfect games, have them all rhyme or fit in some type of lyrical scans with the other names and make sure I got all the details right and things like that. But that was fun. That was like doing a jigsaw puzzle. I don't think, and Linda, maybe you'll correct me, I don't think we've ever gotten anything wrong. I don't think anyone's ever said, yeah, I love your record, but you actually got that one detail wrong. We're pretty fastidious about it. Yep. I can't think of anything where anyone has docked us points. Or maybe they're being nice.

To Ben's point, I'm sure that if there had been an error, you would have heard about it based on how we get these. Oh, my God. Oh, my God. That's so true. So true. You've played the Sabre Convention, so certainly someone would have... That was the most attentive audience we have ever, ever, ever played for. And it was kind of thrilling just watching, you know, everybody was like politely seated. It was in the Palmer House in Chicago in a ballroom where not long afterward I was doing production myself thinking about how I was just here a few months ago playing to a seated audience who just were laughing, smiling, responding to every single line.

No, you know, this is the most knowledgeable audience you could play for. So they got everything. They got everything. And it was pretty fun. Yeah. I have to correct myself, actually, I was ever getting a detail wrong. The one person who ever has actually called us on a lyric to one of our songs was Mike Mills himself for the song on our second album, Don't Call Them Twinkies. And it was a lyric written by Craig Finn of Hold Steady. Mike did take exception to the idea that Ron Gant was pulled off the bag. I think that's our most controversial lyric, and I think he still plays that line, that verse, under protest. That'll be the baseball project behind the music someday.

That's what tore you apart. It has come close. It's rarely in the set list, and I think I know why. Well, you mentioned wanting to make sure that you had some songs that were about players who weren't from 100 years ago, but I'm curious for both of you, sort of, how do you find baseball today? We've had this season of, you know, sort of monumental role changes and as sort of lifelong adherence.

Where do you find yourself in terms of enjoying baseball as it stands in 2023? Well, it means we can watch more games in a day. I have watched four or five games in a day in this current season, and that would have been impossible. It would have been mathematically impossible in the last few years. So, I mean, I certainly have no problem with the pace of the game now.

You know, I maybe missed a little bit for the first month or so. I found it a little bit. month or so, I found it a little bit, I was missing some of my favorite announcers having the space to ply their craft in the way that they had been. But, you know, we're lucky to have good announcers to listen to. I think most of our, I don't know, when I listen to a lot of the announcers out there who I'm not super impressed with, I'm perfectly happy to know that I'm not going to be listening to them an adjustment, of course, in how they, I'm really impressed with how most of them were able to make that adjustment because they're having to, especially like radio announcers, because they're having to like describe the action and get everything in there and still keep up with the pace. So, yeah, I think it's been pretty impressive. Yeah, I agree. I'm actually really enjoying all of it.

I mean, look, it's more the rule changes, especially the pitch clock, is making the game more like the game we all grew up watching. So, yeah. So, I love it. Yeah, I was going to ask about that, because I guess there are a few songs on this album that could be construed as sending the message that things used to be better about baseball, right? Like the all or nothings or screwball or your song, Having Fun, Steve, which I really like a lot. And that song mentions the

idea that it used to be just for fun and players were just loose. And when did everything get so serious? And I couldn't tell whether you were sort of inhabiting a persona of someone who remembers baseball that way when they're a kid, even if it wasn't ever truly that way, or whether that reflects your actual feelings. But I mean, you could go back to Pastime, the first song in the first album that I mentioned in the intro, and even that was kind of questioning, are you past your prime, which is part of the constant conversation about baseball, right, even among people who really love it. So I wonder if you're kind of conscious of not wanting to be

a back-in-my-day type of person, right, when it comes to baseball, because people who are sort of strident about that, that can get tiresome. And I think that's why it's so great that the album would celebrate someone like Otani or other contemporary players to point out that, hey, there's still a lot to love about this sport. Yeah, I mean, I know you mentioned that, you know, we write about players from our sweet spot of maybe the 70s. But, man, players were just so much fun and exciting. Maybe less at stakes, less money. So I understand why things have to be so careful now because one false move, not just in character and charisma, but also even just like a pitcher.

I hate pitch counts and things like that and pitchers being pulled out of perfect games after seven innings like Kershaw was really this year. But I understand there's a big investment there. So everyone's like kind of being careful. I do feel like maybe this year there's some attempt to bring some personality back into the game. And I feel like, you know, with the –

I mean, there's some great young players coming up right now. So there's maybe hope for the future. But, you know, it's true. When did it get so serious? And no, I wasn't a happening persona. I really believe that, you know, the 80s and the 70s and how much, you know, character and Reggie Jackson are written about who's, you know, he can be exasperating in some ways, but also you just, you know, it gave you plenty to talk about.

So, you know, I like that. Does the Baseball Project have big fans who aren't also big baseball fans? Because as I was saying, it's just squarely in the center of the bullseye of my musical interests and my subject matter interests. But I wonder how fans of your other non-baseball related work who aren't baseball fans respond to it. Do you get a lot of people who say, I have no idea who or what this song is about, but I dig it anyway?

Yes, absolutely. We do. I would say half of our fans are, you know, casual fans or really not paying attention to the game at all, but just like the tunes. I remember one particular friend of ours, an acquaintance showed up to a gig and he said he kept pulling out his phone to look up players and incidents while we were doing it because he had no idea, but he was getting really interested. And he was like, I want to know about this person, even though I really don't watch the game, you know? And I think he started becoming a fan through the band. So it's kind of, we're good for baseball, damn it. Let's face it. What would they do without us?

We're bringing fans to the game now. Now we just need to get you guys as the soundtrack to like the fall league and spring training so that I don't have to hear the same like terrible pop country songs over and over again. Well, there you go. There you go. We'll leave that up to you. We think you can make it happen. All right. I'll get going. You know which one you're talking about, Meg. You're being very polite, but.

It's just, it's, you know, it's the song on its own, but then the repetition is what really kills you. Yeah. It's just, you know, it's the song on its own, but then the repetition is what really kills you. I am curious if, you know, given sort of the range of baseball fandoms, if you guys have gotten any requests for future songs. Are there players or time periods or games that have inspired people to say, hey, you should write a song about that? So much you wouldn't believe it. It's kind of a constant influx of emails, texts, messages, people coming up at shows. Yeah. And there's a lot of great ideas out there. Definitely people have come up with some great ideas, but I can't think of any time we actually used one. I don't really think so.

Oh, no, no. Except for Larry Yow. Larry Yow. Yeah, Larry Yow. Exactly. You're right, Linda. That was one in particular. You're right. Other than Larry Yow, it's funny when people come up and say, you know, you guys should do a song by Tony Canigliero. I said, we did a second album, you know, 10th track. Yeah, yeah,, 10th track. So sometimes people... Yeah, that's more common. Yeah, exactly.

That does happen. But no, you're right, Linda. Besides Larry Young, probably not. But hey, we're always game to hear about stuff. And there's something always going to be something we didn't know about.

It seemed like this new record we're writing about is our picture record. This is a record about screwballs and curveballs and putting stuff on the balls. So I guess that was our concept album this time around. It sounded to me on first listen, maybe more musically varied than even your previous records. I don't know whether that's an accurate impression

or not, because that's always been a hallmark of the band, as you would expect, given that you have so many different songwriters and singers and a lot of my favorite bands, that's one of their traits in that you have this kind of constant give and take and back and forth and different styles and different sounds. But it sounds like you maybe took that up a notch even further here. Can you talk a little bit about how, if at all, the recording process differed this time, the sound of it. Maybe it's a little more rocky. I know that you all record together and there's a lot of improvisation.

So has your sound evolved over the years, given that you were all experienced artists when you started this band? Yeah, I think it is a little bit rockier, this record. A little more, even more high energy. And I think that was, you know, slightly conscious. We wanted it. We were feeling it, you know, definitely. But there is a, you know, there's also some just weepy tearjerkers and...

A disco song. Yeah, disco song, exactly. It's a wide variety for sure. A disco song. got and Steve who write the majority of the songs, right? They have an idea of what it will sound like when they come in with it, but it can and often does change a little or a lot. So some of these did really take their true shape just once we all start playing them. And basically we didn't all start playing them until five minutes before we would track it. So, you know, it'd be like, here's the next one. And it goes like this. And so, you know what I mean? And, um, but what if it went like that? Yeah. What if it went like that? And we definitely arranged them on the fly. So it'd be like, I don't know, I think we oftentimes can just get you out of any comfort zone

or rut that you might find yourself in otherwise. And so it just, I think it enhances the spontaneity and the differences in the songs. We were all just reacting in the moment to them. And I'd like to think that we all have a pretty wide musical vocation the differences in the songs. We were all just reacting in the moment to them. And we, I think, I'd like to think that we all have a pretty wide musical vocabulary. So we're able to pull off fake disco and, you know, whatever else, you know, country, country shuffle.

It's like, ooh, can I do that? How good? Yeah. But, you know, yeah. So, but it's something I think it's a way that we all enjoy tracking. I think most of us came from an era, you know, later 80s where it was like oh you know bigger productions and things slowed down and it was a lot of a lot of junk got in the way of spontaneity um and now we're all getting to revisit that. Hey, we just come up with it and throw it down and we're not perfectionists or precious about it. And we share it warts and all or whatever. But I mean, I don't really feel like there are any warts on this record.

The thing about this band is like, let's face it, like the five of us have all made a lot of records over the years with a lot of different projects. And we're all in our own ways bandleaders. It's like, let's face it, the five of us have all made a lot of records over the years with a lot of different projects. And we're all, in our own ways, band leaders. We've all been the type to go into a session and know what we want to hear and how we're going to get it and then add Mitch Easter to that mix. And it was the kind of record where everybody constantly had ideas. And we all, we're all really good friends along with being people playing in bands together and all of that. And so to mix sports metaphors, whoever's got the ball can run with it, you know, and take it downfield and swing for the fences and slam dunk it. That's three sports at once. There you go.

Nice job. Your next concept album. Sports mishmash. Yes. Your next concept album, the sports mishmash. Yes. I did want to ask about that aspect of your careers because you wrote a song called Journeyman with Peter Buck on this album. And I don't want to call you musical journeyman or journey people because that has – I guess so. It kind of has a maybe derogatory aspect to it in baseball where it implies that you couldn't stick in one place, right? And so

if you call someone a journeyman or a utility player, the idea is that, well, they can't deserve a starting job, right? Which I don't think is true of any of you. Maybe we could call you super utility players, perhaps a Zobrist-style Tony Phillips-type player. But you've all played in so many bands and so many projects that I guess it's almost hard to tell what the side projects are and what the primary projects are at any given time. And some of those bands you're in together and some of them you're in with other people. Because when a baseball player changes teams, I don't think it's quite like it is in, say, basketball, where the chemistry with the other players on the floor with you matters a whole lot, right? In baseball, there's certainly something to that, but there's a lot more plug and play. You know, you're going to hit when your spot in the order comes up, and it's not that much affected by who's ahead or behind you or who's sharing a clubhouse with you. But in a band,

of course, that interplay is all important. So I wonder, especially when you go back and forth from other bands you're in together or with other members of the baseball project, and then you kind of form the Voltron of the baseball project every now and then, how the vibe or the chemistry or the feeling differs. I mean, I think there's something very freeing about having done this for a long time. And when you talk about a primary project or not primary or side project or being a journeyman or having a job to do, it's kind of like at this point, we all go into every session, into every gig and just say, what is the vibe now? What is needed tonight?

What's going to make this the best experience possible in this moment, given the people I'm playing with or the kind of music I'm doing? And that's, you know, I see the journeyman thing actually as a very positive thing in the song. And then what we do is that you have something, whether it's a left-handed relief specialist or a rhythm guitarist in a rock band, you have something that's going to make the situation a little bit better. And wherever it is, you're going to bring that to the mix.

Yeah. And I play in several bands with Scott and Peter. So it's a great nucleus. we have a sort of a telepathy or a musical shorthand. We have a good musical relationship, um, on stage and we, we know who's going to sort of carry the unique flavor for each band that we're in to my playing so that's something i am actually aware of to to sort of keep a certain flavor and to keep it a little bit separate you know um you know obviously something that's appropriate for the band and for because we're typically sort of backing other singers so whether it's in the minus five where scott sings um and they're his songs or if it's filthy friends where we're we've got corin tucker from slater kinney uh as the singer or luke haynes from the auteurs who we have a band with called, you know, Peter Buck and Luke Haynes. They are leading that flavor. And then we're sliding in behind that.

But the other important thing is I just, you know, have to make sure that I'm changing my wardrobe appropriately. I think that's maybe first and foremost. So I'm always having to come up with a different sort of sartorial choice for every tour. It's a lot of pressure. Let's be clear. Yeah. People root for laundry. You can't show up where your baseball project outfit while you're playing with your filthy friends. You're so right. Steve, when you write a song like Journeyman, that's sort of one genre of baseball project song where it's not necessarily explicitly about one person or one historical event, but it's sort of an archetype. Are you thinking about one particular person, sort of the journeyman who most embodied the concept

of the journeyman for you when you were growing up? Or is it an amalgamation of many journeymen? Are you trying not to have it be too identifiable as any one person? And then I guess also when you're writing from the perspective of this character that you've created, how do you make that personal and say something that you want to say while also having that character say something that they would say? Well, that one is no particular player. I did actually do the research and try to look up players who play for the most teams and kind of that was, you know, just more out of curiosity than anything. But in fact, there's a line about back in Baltimore, wrapping it up in four. And several people said, I Baltimore wrapping it up in four.

And several people said, I went and looked up that team. There was no left-handed reliever on that team who left the next year. I said, yeah, I didn't get lucky with that one. It would have been great if it was actually based on somebody. But that was actually just one of the things going into the records. We knew we'd be working with Mitch Easter. And I knew that Peter was up for writing some of the songs. And I said, you know, Peter, since we're going to be working with a guy who made your first two records,

and it would be kind of cool if you maybe could give me some music that feels the same you might have written back then. And he said, yeah, I can do that. You know, I wrote those songs. So he finally, I was on tour, doing a solo tour across the country, the first tour I did after the pandemic back in 21. And I was staying in a particularly lousy hotel outside of Buffalo. You get bad luck every so often. One is not as good as the other. It's like, oh, my God. Here I am. I had a good show, but I was back from the show.

I was like, okay, you know. It wasn't Bob Seger turned the page or feeling sorry for myself too much. But it was a little bit of kind of like, yeah, here I am. And right when I got to my room, the music that Peter had written was in my email inbox. And I listened to it and just said, this is great. And I think the feeling of being just on a long tour, of thinking about baseball, that song was an example of being about the subject, but also being a very personal song as well. Maybe we kind of touched on this,

but I wonder for those of you who have been prominently associated with other bands, I guess as long as the Baseball Project lasts and as acclaimed as it is, probably the first line of Peter Buck's Wikipedia page or Mike Mills' is not going to say they were in the baseball project. And also they were in REM before that, right? Same with you and the Dream Syndicate, Steve, right?

So I wonder how you think about the baseball project, though, sort of within the firmament of your own discographies and accomplishments. in the firmament of your own discographies and accomplishments. And I wonder also if it's outlived how long you ever expected and or hoped that it could possibly last to be so enduring where it almost rivals your original or primary bands and just how long lived and prolific it is. That's a good question. I mean, I think that, again, I think at this point, we all, all the records we've done, and we've done a lot, you know, I think we just look at them all as the body of work we've done. And we know that we're all aware of the things, all five of us, the moments, look, when you're starting out, no matter who you are, whether you're, you know,

you know, the Rolling Stones or whatever, or Paul McCartney, people are going to look back with certain nostalgia to the things you did at the beginning because that's when it was brand new and nobody knew what to expect. But I think, you know, for me, I've made probably about 40 albums of original material, and the Baseball Project are four of them, and I think they stack up pretty well. And I've always said, I think Scott might say the same too, is the songs we've written for the Baseball Project are probably as personal and as emotionally driven as anything we've done in any of our bands. There may be about, you know, it may seem like on the surface to somebody who's not paying attention as a novelty band or a concept band or a kind of a weird, you know, side project.

But actually we're writing about things that mean a lot to us. So, you know, I might say, well, sure, on Days of Wine and Roses, I wrote about things that mattered a lot to me when I was 21 years old and still do. But I think a song like Journeyman, a song like Larry Yount, is emotionally engaging as anything I've done any time in my life. You know, I know that you guys have played Fenway doing the National Anthem. You've been on Letterman. I'm sure that you have had incredible venues

that you've toured in, both for the Baseball Project and just in your general musical careers. But I wonder if there are any sort of baseball-specific venues or events that are sort of on your bucket list where you would say that, but we're a baseball band, so...

and want to play those spots more than others? Well, I think we kind of, you know, hit the mother load when we played Cooperstown. There's nowhere to go but down when you've played inside Cooperstown, you know, in that little grandstand theater area that they have there. Anyone who's been there will know what I'm talking about. But that was incredibly special. And then we've played the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. We did a residency there a couple years ago when the All-Star Game was being played in Cleveland. They invited us out to come and play for three days. We did a couple shows a day at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

And we sang the national anthem at a Red Sox-Yankees game at Fenway. So, I mean, really anything else is just going to be icing on the cake in a way. But we've done some really interesting stuff, including playing like Innings Fest in Arizona was a lot of fun. And we've thrown out first pitches at several games. And yeah, we've had some great baseball stadium moments for sure. How about you, Steve? Is there one that stands out you you named a lot a lot of really good ones i mean it is funny for example on this we're going to be on tour um this august and september and we're playing all over the country and i know in part as part of

our tour we're going to be doing the national anthem at a nationals game and then an affiliates game a couple days later and it's still kind of you know for for all the fact that all five of us have done really amazing things in our lives things we of, you know, for all the fact that all five of us have done really amazing things in our lives, things we've really, you know, wouldn't have believed as kids, you know, had playing at big music festivals or, you know, of course, Peter and Mike and Scott have done some really high level things, but we didn't really ever think we're going to be walking onto so many baseball fields. I mean, that's the thing you just, you know, sitting in dugouts and standing on pitcher's mounds and Wrigley field and things like that. That you didn't figure was part of the

equation of being a rock and roller and making it. So that's, it's kind of a giddy, exciting thing for us to anytime we get to do that. Like here we are, you know, here we are, here we are standing on a major league baseball field, like we own the place. That's kind of still a kick for all of us. And more terrifying than any stage I've ever been on. Last songwriting question. The eternal question is always what comes first, music or lyrics? And it differs by the artist and by the song. I wonder if it differs for you in the baseball project as opposed to other bands you've been in where you set out knowing, okay, I'm going to write a song about Ted Williams. I know the subject matter. Here's what a song about Ted Williams should sound like, or whether you have the music or you get the music from someone else in the band, and then you construct the subject matter around it.

Well, that's a good question because for me, it's always been music comes first with very few exceptions. I get the chord progression or a riff or whatever comes along and then I figure out what words might fit the mood of the song or somehow phrase well within it. That's always a case for me. But the baseball project, it's not. It really is a case where it's like, I'm going to write a song about this and here we go. It's a lot of fun. I've always said that baseball project songwriting process is almost more like an editorial board meeting for a newspaper than it is a rock band. Scott and I will sort of maybe talk at some point.

What are you writing about? Oh, great. What are you writing about? Oh, well, you might want to say this in there and don't forget to mention that. And what's the angle? What's the angle on that story? Well, you know, here we go. So I think I think have sort of a fantasy casting person in mind for, hey, maybe they could join our traveling Wilburys group here, right? You have so many artists and musicians who are associated with baseball. You know, spin every spring, does this musicians predict the 2023 baseball season? And it's like book length. They had over 100, 113 people predicting the 2023 baseball season, not even including any

baseball project members. So that's how many there are. It's a deep bench. And you've got your Ben Gibbards and your Mike McCready's and your Jack White's and your Jason Isbell's, who I know you're opening for on the upcoming tour. And Stephen Malkmus, you mentioned, and Craig Finn, you mentioned. So is there someone or someones, whether they're in your musical orbit or not, that you've always thought at least for a guest to? And it'd be great to have them in the tent here. We do have. We've had several guests. So, yeah, that's a lot of fun.

If there was somebody else to guest, I don't know. It would be fun to have Geddy Lee. You know, I could be very specific. I wrote a song for the last album, for the third album, called Monument Park, about Bernie Williams. About him maybe not getting the respect he could have gotten because he's always going to be in the shadow of Mickey Mantle and Joe DiMaggio's great Yankee centerfielders. And we wanted so badly for the guitar solo on the song to be played by Bernie Williams. It was like, this would be so perfect and so meta and didn't work out. So that was, you know, kind of, I guess not a rock and roll guess, but that was like, wow, could have had Bernie Williams on the record would have been pretty cool.

Hey, he's got a Grammy. I don't have a Grammy. Yeah, he's not. I don't have a Grammy. Great. Yeah, well, you could get Geddy Lee and Stephen Malkmus, and Malkmus could say, what about the voice of Geddy Lee? How did it get so high? Do a duet together and also sing the baseball. Hey, meta. Yeah, perfect. I love it. Well, we encourage everyone to check out the new album by The Baseball Project. It is called Grand Salami Time. They are going on tour soon, August. And we will link to where you can find the album, where you can find the tour. My only complaint is that you're coming to my neck of the woods and playing Brooklyn

Made on August 18th, which is a great, intimate little venue where I saw a show last week. And I'd love to see you there, but I'll be out of town at the time. So I wish we had coordinated before you planned your tour, but yeah, probably too late to change that. But I know it's your neck of the woods as well. So I hope I'll get to see you all again at some point. And Steve has other projects out now too. You mentioned the Days of Wine and Roses and there's a new four-disc edition of it called The History Kind of Pales When It and You Are Aligned that just came out late last month too, which I've been listening to. So I've been spinning a lot of Steve Wynn lately. So once you get through the Baseball Project discography, then check out the Baseball

Project Expanded Universe. And even if you're familiar with REM or the Dream Syndicate, check out Filthy Friends, check out the Young Fresh Fellows, check out Minus Five, check out the No Ones. It's a real rabbit hole. Once you scratch the surface with this band, you find that they're all in 10 different bands and they're all pretty good. That's true. That's true. Well, we've been talking to Steve Wynn and Linda Pittman. It was a great pleasure. I hope that you have many more baseball songs still in you. Oh, I think we do. Thank you both. It was really, really fun to chat. All right. So we

will end with the Future Blast, which comes to us from the year of 2028 and also from Rick Wilber, who is an award-winning writer, editor, and college professor who has been described as the year of 2028 and also from Rick Wilber, who is an award-winning writer, editor, and college professor who has been described as the dean of science fiction baseball. And here is what he has cooked up for us this time, 2028, De La Cruz, and Be There. While the designated runners ran wild in 2028, raising the overall average number of runs per game to an all-time high of 6.1, it was the power hitting of Eli De La Cruz that was baseball's top story of 2028. With his incredible five-homer day for the Reds in May, five homers in a game, it finally happened. All five homers were off different pitchers as the Cubs bullpen struggled to keep

the ball in the park in a 16-3 loss. De La Cruz went on to finish as the first 65-65 offensive player with 66 home runs and 75 stolen bases to go along with his splashy 385 batting average and his 148 RBI. I know we're talking about a different offensive context with different rules here, but this is still a season for the ages. So far, so good for the Reds who coughed up $400 million for a 10-year deal with De La Cruz in 2026. All right. Great extension. In 1928, baseball's march into the technological future continued with the Atlantic League trying out the Apple Be There system, where players wearing motion sensors and sunglasses that held smart glass cameras and mics had their sight, sound, and motion transmitted to fans at home wearing the Apple Vision Pro 8 and its haptic sleeves and gloves. This gave the fans at home the feeling that they were part of their favorite player. The first experimental groups of players to wear the equipment quickly found avid fans signing up despite the steep initial cost of nearly $700.

By midseason, the Atlantic League and Apple expanded the system to more players, and by season's end, almost all the players had opted in for the system. It was obvious to baseball pundits that AAA would be next and fans would be able to feel like they were actually in the field or up to bat in the big leagues by 2030. Wow. This is truly a brave new world. I don't know if this is going to be a good development or not, but if you want to feel like you're in the game, the old electronic arts motto, then I guess this will get you there. Not just VR, but the full body feedback. You will feel like you're there on the field. I just want to watch the guys play baseball is the thing. I just want to watch them play. That option is available to you. Okay, thank goodness.

A lot less expensive. Well, if that isn't the future blast that launched a thousand effectively wild email hypothetical questions, I will be surprised. And speaking of home run heroics, we had Dan Saborski on the show recently to talk about the odds of Luis Arraiz batting 400. He has since run the numbers for the odds of Shohei Otani hitting 60 or 61 or 62 or 63 home runs. After his unbelievable June, which may have been the best month by any baseball player in the history of the sport. Entering Monday, Dan estimated that he had a 15% shot of getting to 60, 11% of getting to 61, 8% of getting to 62, and 5.5% to set a new American League record for the second consecutive season. I feel like if the Zips projection system could

watch Otani when he's locked in like this, maybe it would boost those percentages just a tad. That will do it for today. Thanks as always for listening. And by the way, Linda also asked that we let you know that the Baseball Project has a new video coming out soon. It'll be a video of Steve's song, Disco Demolition, which we discussed,

and it will be animated, illustrated by James Blagdon, who did that great Doc Ellis and the LSD No-No video some years ago. So look out for that. It should arrive next week. And again, go see them if you have a chance and check out the album. And in case it wasn't clear, Linda's a Twins fan. Steve grew up in LA, was a Dodgers fan. There is a tribute song for Vin Scully on the record.

Not one of Steve's, but it's called The Voice of Baseball. You will want to hear it. And while you're supporting The Baseball Project, you can also support Effectively Wild on Patreon by going to patreon.com slash effectivelywild. The following five listeners have already signed up and pledged some monthly or yearly amount to help keep the podcast going, help us stay ad-free, and get themselves access to some perks. Kevin Peskiorek, V. Nguyen, Evan Korshan, Melissa Danielson, and A.J. Schreier. Thanks to all of you. Patreon perks include access to the Effectively Wild Discord group for our Patreon supporters only, but for a whole lot of them these days.

Gotta get in on the Patreon Discord group action if you haven't already. You can also get access to monthly bonus episodes that Meg and I record, plus playoff live streams later in the year, and discounts on ad-free fan crafts, memberships, and merch, and so much more. Patreon.com slash Effectively Wild. If you are a Patreon supporter, you can message us through the Patreon site. You can also email us at podcast at Fangraphs.com. That's open to anyone. Send us your questions and comments. You can rate, review, and subscribe to Effectively Wild on iTunes and Spotify and other podcast platforms. You can join our Facebook group at facebook.com slash group

slash Effectively Wild. At least for now, if you're not rate limited, you can follow Effectively Wild on Twitter at ewpod. And if it's not dark, I don't think it is currently, you can find the Effectively Wild subreddit at r slash effectivelywild. Some of these online presences suddenly seeming more precarious than they used to. Thanks to Shane McKeon for his editing and production assistance. If you have a holiday this week, we hope you enjoy it. Happy 4th, and we will be back after the 4th to talk to you again. Here's hoping Shohei continues

to give us some more fireworks. And after our own outro song by a baseball musician, Ben Gibbard, wraps up, you will hear one more song from Grand Salami Time. This is Scott McCoy's Screwball. Screwball Being different is weird

Out of place Like a gang with a beard Let's pretend that you don't really exist Somewhere my partial must be kissed It's all over It's all over