May 21, 2026 • 54 mins
The Rays have the best record in baseball but are close to the bottom of the league in home runs? Joe Maddon and Tom Verducci examine the differences in the AL East and the resurgence of the 'bunt'. Joe explains when he had players swing away on a 3-0 count. How many pitches does a pitcher really need? Tom notes Shohei Ohtani's growth as a pitcher. Plus, a warning that Joe takes very seriously!
The Book of Joe Podcast is a production of iHeart Radio.
#fsr
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:04):
The Book of Joe podcast is a production of iHeartRadio.
Hey There and welcome back. It's the Book of Joe
Podcast with me, Tom Berducci and Joe Madden. Joe, there's
so many things I want to get to during this
(00:25):
podcast here, including a word of warning from the Royal
Observatory Greenwich. Sounds like very smart people, right, I get
some words of wisdom for us. But first I want
to start out with the American League East, and we'd
like to talk here about analog baseball, right, Joe. I
(00:48):
can't think of a greater disparity, at least in terms
of how they play offensive baseball than the analog Tampa
Bay Rays and the digital New York Yankees. Yankees lead
the world and walks and home runs and the Rays
somehow have the best record of baseball and they are
twenty sixth in the major leagues in home runs. Joe,
(01:09):
it's I can the Rays keep this up? We're talking
about a team that right now has the best record
in baseball. They just swept the Baltimore Orioles big weekend
series coming up against those New York Yankees. Give me
your take on this East Division in the American League,
especially at the top and weather Tampa Bay. Maybe not
(01:31):
this good in terms of almost seven hundred baseball it's crazy,
But in terms of being a real threat for the
New York Yankees.
Speaker 2 (01:38):
Oh, I think they are an absolute threat. Seven hundred balls.
Tough to continue. What there's gonna They're gonna come back
a little bit. But yes, the analog component is fabulous.
I think we've been talking about this for years and
just this morning I'm reading up on what the Brewers
did to the Cubs again and I thought, wow, what
a great World series Brewers versus the Rays. Looking in
(02:00):
the mirror, I mean like looking in the mirror. They
have the Brewers have some really good pitching. They got
a bunch of swarmers on the field. I got a
bunch of know the the old phrase, the gamers, right
we analog uh, analog lee. We always talked about gamers.
I mean that's something that you've heard as a kid.
I heard growing up. That's what they are. I mean,
(02:20):
there's no man, there's just there's there's no fluff about him.
They come after you hard every night. I think if
you know, when they do lose, they just go in,
they take a shower, they dust off and go home
and come back and say when he gets you tomorrow.
Kind of a thing attitude ly, So, I you know,
and I know Cashi uh does does a wonderful job.
I've been around him, and I know Murph up there
(02:41):
in Milwaukee and they Murph. You know Murph twelve for
many years like he was, he was a lead singer,
then he became a backup singer profession then he became
a lead singer again. Think about Murph. He knows, he
knows what he knows, he knows what he's doing. He's
very intentional and in everything that he does. So I
don't think you could underestimate the benefit he's had on
(03:03):
that group. The influence he's had on that group is
obvious to me knowing him for a long time. He's
when he answers questions afterwards, the stoke nature, the little,
the grand not afraid to be playful, all the different
things that he does in the locker room. So I
mean I'm jumping over to them. I know that, But
I just my point is this morning that was my thing.
(03:26):
I mean, looking in the mirror, the Brewers and the rays.
Why not that would be such an interesting and refreshing
version of the World Series.
Speaker 1 (03:34):
Well, speaking of refreshing, if you look at the American
League standings, the division leaders are the Rays, the Guardians,
and the Athletics. The teams in each division with the
lowest payroll in those divisions are the Rays, the Guardians,
and the Athletics. And then you mentioned the Brewers in
the in the National League. It's remarkable that word a
(03:57):
period right now. And offenses down when you look at
home runs are down, hits per game are way down,
and the teams are just finding a way to put
the ball in play, take advantage of things on the basis.
And yes, bunting. I mean yesterday the Rays stole home
on the back end of a double steal. The Rays
are bunting. The team that used to just decry the
(04:21):
bunt as a weapon offensively giving up it out to
you only have twenty seven. The analytics crowd said, why
give it any up? But this is what's working for them.
They probably give up I want to say, three or
four positions offensively when you're talking about centerfield, shortstop, and catcher.
Very little offense out of those three positions, but they
all run the base as well, and they defend well,
(04:43):
and Joe, I watched them sweep Baltimore Orioles this week,
and they're playing with so much passion. I mean, they
look like they're in the College World Series and they
become a great comeback team. They're on a roll here.
They've won twenty in their last twenty four games. They're
nineteen and five at home. And I don't know if
(05:05):
you've been over there yet, Joe, but you know the
renovations they made to the place. I always thought the
place was actually a little bit overrated as a bad
place to play. I know you talked about it being
a home field advantage. People talked about how it was dark.
You don't want to be inside when you're in Florida.
But it's a much brighter place now. And you can
(05:26):
tell they love playing baseball in that ballpark. It's just
the enthusiasm they're playing with. They're a dangerous team that
now has the IT factor, which is the factor of
belief that they believe and they know that they're a
good team right now.
Speaker 2 (05:42):
Yeah, and I agree in all counts. I mean, I
love watching them keming Els and and Diaz and then
I'm a big Simpson fan. I mean, we need more
of those. This kid plays, which is just said, you
reat you to where passion and my phrase was going
to be they play with their hair on fire and
which you know that counts? How many home runs does
that count for during the course of a season, just
going out there with the passion and effort that they
(06:05):
demonstrate on a nightly basis. What does that mean? I mean,
how do you evaluate that that is something that's controllable,
that should never go in a slump? Really, the fact
that you go out and play a certain way on
a nightly basis. And they're athletically gifted too. I mean
that Kevin row Is at third base, that's a big man,
and I've seen him make some good plays and he's
got a fine arm, and I mean, I don't know
(06:27):
has better batspeed than him. I met him at our
event this past winter in Tampa Bay and Tampa of
a big guy, nice guy, and then I watched him
swing the bat and I go like, somebody hits the ball.
It's like, wow, that is like Dante Bichett batspeed in
my eyeballs. Just really he's all of that. So yeah,
they're they're not going away. No, No, they're not going away.
(06:48):
They're gonna They're definitely gonna hit a bad bumping road
at some point. Absolutely they are. But I think they
have the ingredients to overcome that, and part of that
is what they feature. Their strongest point about them is
something that is controllable daily and like you just had passed,
playing hard first to third, playing defense, et cetera, et cetera.
They have all of that. Just last point you talked about, Bunny.
(07:11):
I watched the replay of the Diamondbacks game last night.
Marte he goes deep, deep, deep, deep one at bat.
Then he comes up with runners on first and second
and drops down a bunt, beautiful bump. They go second
and third. He moves the runners up and he's safe. Also,
so those the bases. Then we I think we get
a sacrifice slide, then we get a double down right
(07:32):
field line. Tory Lavulo is just like smiling in a dugout,
like shaking his head. Of course, he wanted Marte to
swing the bat, but that's something that I think that
was like him saying to the rest of the team,
let's play as a team. And I know sometimes he
gets aggravating to a manager and the guy like that
who's so good at the plate does set the example. However,
(07:53):
it paid off absolutely. And last point, also, you're talking
about more contact, bulpam. You know he's uh, since he's
come back up much more patient's where he's looking over
things a lot better. And part of what I've been
reading Ralison had said something to the effect that getting
away from that real uppercut all or nothing kind of
a swing and he's just clearly trying to stay short
(08:13):
use the whole field. My god, what a revolutionary idea, right,
I really wish this kid well after everything he went
through last year. So anyway, as you started talking about that,
I just had to write three different things now because
they're all they're all pertinent, they all they all are
like we're talking about analog baseball. They are important, this
is this is how the game is intended to be played. Yeah,
(08:37):
we all love Homer's absolutely, they're a weaver world and
what he did. Of course we love Homers, but homers
don't show up all the time. What do you do
with the rest of those at bats? And that's what
I find really interesting.
Speaker 1 (08:48):
Yeah, great point about the bunts too, And I've talked
to Murph about this that sometimes it's just the idea
that you may be bunting that can have an effect, right,
And I think where the game is now, I don't
want to say the bunt is embraced, like you know,
it's John McGraw in nineteen oh eight again, but you know,
there was a point there where it was almost taboo
(09:11):
and guys wouldn't even show bunt and corner infielders would
always be back because they never have to worry about it.
Speaker 2 (09:18):
Now.
Speaker 1 (09:18):
Actually, you know, last night or Thursday Wednesday night, and
I'm doing a Yankees Blue Jays game and John Schneider
is bunting in the third inning with his number eight
hitter because it's a pitcher's duel any but it's twice
in that game. And you know what, sometimes you have
to roll the corner infielders in because the team has
shown that to you. So I think it's a it's
a really good play that now you're seeing guys now
(09:41):
actually can do it. First of all, because now it's
it's become an accepted part of the game again. And
I think it's a fun part of the game. It's
a strategic part of the game, and I think it
is part of winning baseball, And so we're looking at
the team like the Rays Joe against winning teams. You know,
sometimes these can be misleading, but I like to look
at that figure. I don't know if you did when
you were managing, but yeah, I did, of course, the
(10:02):
Raiser thirteen and eleven against winning teams. It's not like
they're just taking advantage of the schedule. In fact, that's
a lot of games this early in the season against
winning teams. And this blows me away. The New York
Yankees against winning teams. They have one win this year
against the winning They're one in eight. Now, part of
that is teams like the Red Sox, the Mets, the Astros,
(10:26):
the Blue Jays, they haven't been as good as we
thought they were going to be. So they're good teams
that are underachieving under five hundred. But the Yankees have
one win against winning teams. The Rays I have a
winning record thirteen and eleven. That's a lot of games
so far. They passed the smell test.
Speaker 2 (10:42):
No doubt. I mean, like you said, I watch them too,
And briefly back to the ballpark, and did they have
to go to Steinbrenner last year, the spring training home
of the Yankees, and it's just you know, it's a
nice it's a beautiful facility. It's great for spring training
or a nice Triple A ball club, but it's not
Major League. And you know, I have been difficult on
the trop in the past, and I don't deny that. However,
(11:04):
it is their home, and I think that really it's
definitely more of a big League atmosphere on a nightly
basis as opposed to playing outside, also in that heat
during the summer. There So all these things are conspiring
to make them better this year, and they have been
now specifically about bunts. You're right, it was taboo. I'm
telling you, man, I would have I would have, you know,
dudes coming down asking me questions after a game why
(11:26):
somebody bunted in a certain situation where I wanted to
have them bunt, and then you just said it bottom
of the order. I mean, you know, you know who's pitching,
you know you have it to play, you know what
the better options are. I'll take ninety feet. There's times
I'll just take ninety feet. Years ago, I wrote this
little thing on hitting, and one of the things that
are really respected was when you came back to the
(11:50):
dugout after making it out, if the runners runner or
runners advanced ninety feet, to me, that was a successful
at bat. And I know that'll get argued against constantly. However,
I do believe that. And then again for further like
I said, what part of the batting what are we
talking about? You should try to be creative with the
bottom of the batting order, especially like with the Rays.
If you got some guys that you know normally their
(12:11):
numbers are not very high, take them out and we're
gonna work on things that are going to really cause
the other teams pre series meetings to be a little
bit longer. Whether it's the safety squeezes I'm seeing you
what I'm seeing now, something I like to do towards
the end, or even runners on second and third, or
run around third only with a bottom batter hitting right
(12:32):
now in the first basement playing back, that's a perfect
time for a safety squeeze. Look if the first basement's
even even up with the bag, I shouldn't say playing back,
but with some lefties they do. They'll play back more deeply.
And why not just if you could teach your lefties
and that's a hard thing to do, I found a
lot of lefties have a hard time dragging the ball
with them on the first baseline because a big thing
(12:52):
about not pinch hitting for a lefty. During the course
of the game, I would talk to my lefties, the
guys are like fence guys, like platoon kind Listen, here's
the fifth inning and there's something going on. If you
could put down a good bunt against this lefty they
brought in the game at this particular moment, I'm good,
Let's let's do something like that. I always wanted the
lefties to work versus lefties on a skill that keeps
(13:15):
them in the game as opposed to being platooned because
you don't know how the game is going to turn
out later. I could go on and on about all
this stuff. So the bottom of the batting orders should
be flexible with the ability to do a lot of
different things. Bunts at the right time, right situation, right
circumstances are outstanding. And you saw what our safety squeeze
did the one game even in Saint Louis when we
(13:36):
went back to back and it kind of that's when
smoke came out of their ears and all of a sudden,
the series is are. It matters when you when you
I don't want to use the word embarrassed, but you
put pressure on the other team to execute. As a coach,
Morgan used to say in high school, if you make
the other team execute so that they may execute themselves,
(13:57):
that's what you're trying to get done.
Speaker 1 (13:59):
I love that line because, especially in today's game, the
bunt defense has been a lost art, right, and just
putting the ball on the ground you can create some chaos.
And I think Joe, especially the way pitching is these days.
We'll get into that in our next segment. But pitching
has changed drastically, and I want to say just in
the last three to four years. You don't have to
(14:20):
go back ten years, but you know, I do think
one of the things I want to talk about too,
Joe is watching the Rays and it was Richie Pelasios
had the big hit to break a tie against Baltimore
on Wednesday. It was a three and oho count. I
don't understand why more hitters don't swing on three to zero.
(14:42):
It is the last fastball count left in Major League Baseball.
I'll give you some numbers, Joe. Three to zero count,
you will see a fastball in the major leagues this year,
ninety percent of the time that is a free pitch.
This lugging percentage one guys do swing on three and
to oho is over eight. It's eight eighteen. And yet
(15:06):
I see these guys. A statue takes fastball down the middle.
Now the pitcher's back in the count. Guess what he's
throwing the next pitch. It's a cutter or a slider.
I don't understand why, say, a team like the New
York Yankees. I'm not picking on them, because there's lots
of teams that just don't swing three and oh. They
swung twice all year on three and ozer counts. I'm
(15:27):
more than one hundred and three and oh pitches. Why
don't more hitters swing the bat on three and oh?
I think it's the fear of failure. It's almost like
guys who don't want to challenge a pitch early in
the game because they're afraid they're going to be wrong.
And now you've quote unquote burned a challenge. Now the
manager might be med, you've only left the sis one
(15:48):
and we have to save that for the ninth inning. No,
if it's three and O, you to me Joe, you
leave the dugout looking for a fastball down the middle.
They're so hard to find in the game today. So
if you know you just sit on that, you keyhole
fastball down the middle, that's what you left the dug
out looking for. Why would you just concede that pitch
(16:09):
and let it go? I'm amazed how many guys statue
take three and oh give me your thoughts on that.
Speaker 2 (16:16):
Yeah, my line used to be, not all three zero
counts are created equally. For example, if you're leading off
an inning and you got like you at the top
of the batting or here comes some bangers behind you, Okay,
I'm okay with taking that three to zero count with
some real some real guys coming up behind you leading
off and inning kind of could be a different category,
different situation. Okay. Then you get runners in scoring position
(16:38):
with one of your better guys at place at the plate,
absolutely you're gonna turn them loose. Another big one for
me was two outs, nobody on two outs nobody on.
My thoughts to my hitters was doubles are better on
that three and zero count. Two outs nobody on base
or even two outs with a runner on first base
is a ball, double gap whatever, that's a run. That's
(16:58):
a point right there. So there's I would say, probably
the leadoff three to zero count with substantial folks behind him,
probably the one time I'm okay with it. However, as
the when things become more complicated with base runners or
even like I said, without and you got doubles. A
(17:19):
bet that was. This is something I taught myself in
Selena's California Swhere to God in what was that seventy
seven seventy eight. I really I would get to the
point with you know, three and three zero count runner
on first or nobody on which I really try to
drive the gap or better than I. Listen, I didn't
have that kind of power, but I did it some
home runs that year. But the point was, mentally, I
was looking for, Okay, I'm this three to ozer pitch man,
(17:40):
I'm going to try to go gap or more in
that situation. So I had this argument, brother, I'm telling
you Tommy with Andrew years ago, because I was permitting
the three and oh swing for the reasons I just
gave you, and I try to say, not all three
and o counts are created equally. You got to look
at them differently. You can't look at them all the same. See,
that's where analytics has a hard time because it's it's sterile.
(18:03):
You know, it doesn't have a nuance about it. It's
just flat black and white numbers one, two or zero. Whatever.
It's just that's all it is. So there is nuance.
There's different reasons to either take this pitch which are
more minimal compared to the reasons why you should go
after it.
Speaker 1 (18:20):
That's a great point with runners on base, and I
did ask Aaron Boone about that, and he did say, yeah,
even it doesn't matter where you are in the lineup
in that situation. Pelasios is batting with runners on first
and second in a TI game, eighth inning. Yeah, that's
no position to be just looking at a strike and
quote unquote working walk. And by the way, the Cubs
are a team that has swung the baut once this
(18:43):
year in more than one hundred pitches, one of three
to zero counts. So, as I said, it seems to
be the way the game is going. And I realized,
I love your point about situational. The situation matters during
these things. But again, I think hitting is so difficult
in today's game. I just when I see guys just
concede flat out three to zero. I'm not winging, it's
(19:06):
it's something that turns my stomach. Man, I think you're
gonna get You're not gonna get another fastball. The idea that, oh,
what he threw three to oho, you'm gonna get it
at three, three one, or what I see at three, Well,
I'm going to get three to two. Not in today's game.
If you've been paying attention, uh, and we're going to
talk about that next and how much pitching has changed.
I'd love to get Joe's taken on this because he's
seen it all. We'll do that right after this on
(19:28):
the Book of Joe. Welcome back to the Book of Joe. Hey, Joe,
I'm sure you've seen a lot of Christopher Sanchez this year.
How good is he right now?
Speaker 2 (19:46):
I love him, absolutely love him. That's David Price two
point zero whatever, I love him. I love him.
Speaker 1 (19:53):
I say he's old school because he's a three pitch pitcher.
Speaker 2 (19:57):
That's it.
Speaker 1 (19:58):
Yeah, he is analog. I mean I don't think he's
been in the lab trying to seven different pitches in
four different directions. It is old school. Here's my stuff,
I'm gonna stick with it. And he's one of only
three starting pitchers in the game that throw only three pitches.
And I looked at this, Joe, that eighty six percent
(20:19):
of starting pitchers in the major leagues today throw at
least five different pitches. That's where we're at. It's become
such a game of what can you cover as a
hitter because everybody is coming up with that three fastball
mix right, four seemer that rides cutter to glove side,
two seamer to arm side, and then you've got probably
(20:41):
two different breaking balls at least, and then you have
some kind of an off speed pitch. Lately, it's been
a lot of splits. This is what almost everybody in
the game is doing. It's fascinating to see. I just think, Joe,
that we're seeing a lot of great hitters struggle, and
I not understand that happens every year, but I think
(21:02):
hitting has changed so fast. I chalk it up to
the fact that a few years ago, pitchers were all
chasing for seeing velo and everybody was talking about vert
everyone was talking about velocity, getting behind the ball, running
at top rail. Hitters adjusted to that. Now it's about
giving hitters such a different menu that I think hitting
now you almost have to pick a side of the plate.
(21:24):
You just until you get two strikes. You just can't
cover as many places and spins as pitchers are going.
Speaker 2 (21:31):
Well, didn't we talk about this several years ago or
even then when I was with the Cubs. The one
thing we noticed when we got to the playoffs, there'd
be an increase of breaking ball stone during the playoffs
as opposed to the regular season, and that we thought
that was a big part of our decline offensively in
the postseason. You know, we win the World Series, but
we got we got really shut down versus the Mets,
(21:53):
and then twenty seventeen we had a wonderful game against
the Nationals in Washington and then got shut down versus
the Dodgers, and then it got worse after that. All
of it, a lot of it was you were saying,
the proliferation of the breaking ball, the fact that more
of them were thrown, and only see they're thrown if
there's really good velocity within this mix of the pitcher.
(22:16):
And you hear about tunneling a lot where the pitch
comes out of the same area, that makes it even
more difficult, So now you have to respect velocity because
he's got it. And then which caused you to commit
sooner because they'll look. Guys will look at the gun
in order to put the like they set their mental clock,
like when do I got to get started when it's
that they have an idea when to get started when
the numbers that high. So all of these things contribute
(22:38):
to make it more difficult at the plate. So I
think you're one hundred percent right. Always is the proliferation
of the breaking ball. I think the advent of that
was kind of like in the twenty fifteen, sixteen, seventy
and eighteen when in the postseason became more apparent that
breaking balls became more prominent, and that then why not
do that during the course of the season also, and
(23:00):
then here comes the pitching labs, shaping and all this
other kind of stuff, and we're we've arrived at the
point we have right now. And then you can compound
that with trying to lift the ball and guys just
going for the all or nothing approach and really not
having this ability. You know, you know the concept I
love that I don't hear enough is filling your filling
two strike foul balls. I'm not talking about the one
(23:22):
that's the one that you got to hit, because that's
that's the one that's got to be put in playing hard.
But there's a lot of these borderline well thrown pitches.
Foul balls with two strikes are good. I used to
tell my guys that all the time. Next pitch, next pitch,
next pitch. There's an art to that. Orlando pal Mary
used to practice it in batting practice. He used to
actually foul balls if you're standing off to the left
and he's a left handed hitter, so it's coming right
(23:43):
out your face. He let a ball get so deep
and he's hitting line drives into the net while you're
standing off to the left, not even anywhere near the
field of play, because that's what op practiced. So foul
balls are good with two strikes, except for the one
that you like. That's the one that's got to go fair. However,
that's that's what's happening. And if you have like this
one size fit, it's all mentality within your swing. Because
(24:06):
I've had it. I've had in meetings with the Angels
back when I was there, going over some hitting hitting concepts,
and I brought it to the table there that I
like two strike approach. I called it a b hack,
and I gave the reasons why. Then I was being
disagreed with by really young analytical people that have never
done it before, and they're purely going off of like
(24:27):
numbers or percentages or whatever it is, and they're not
in the batter's box. Against certain pitches that are really difficult,
they're not going to give you that pitch to go
deep with, especially on two strike. I ain't going to
see it. It ain't happening. So you have to have
another method of getting to the next pitch, Get to
the next pitch, get to the next pitch. That would
(24:47):
be the kind of rallying cry would give my guys.
So until the adjustments are made to a certain degree,
at least cut down on the strikeouts and move the
ball with two strikes and take your chances that way.
But if you have a one size fits all kind
of a mental approach and swing, it's not going to happen.
Speaker 1 (25:04):
As you were saying that, in my mind, I was
seeing Freddy Freeman doing exactly that. To me, he's the
modern master of Palmero in terms of just spoiling pitches
and getting to another one just literally, you know, almost
hitting the ball out of the catcher's glove to extend
the bet. So Sanchez is a sinker pitcher, sinker slider
(25:24):
change up. That's it, the four scene fastball. I find
this fascinating, Joe in the nineteen seasons of pitch tracking
four seam fastballs and when we know they're harder than ever. Right,
velocity's average v law at a four seamer now is
ninety four point six. Ten years ago it was ninety
three point two. And what's interesting to me too, they
(25:44):
look at perceived velocity, which basically means where the pitcher
is letting the ball go closer to the plate, the
faster the pitch is going to seem to the hitter.
It's kind of like, you know nowadays the rage is
not just giving you the temperature, but feels like temperature. Right, right,
we didn't have that as kids.
Speaker 2 (26:01):
Joe feels like we had one number.
Speaker 1 (26:03):
That's it, just to make you feel really bad. You know,
it's hot now it actually feels hotter than it actually is.
Speaker 2 (26:10):
What is that?
Speaker 1 (26:11):
So this is feels like temperature on four seemers where
because they do such a great job developing and teaching
these pictures and the extension they're getting. The perceived velocity
is actually higher than the actual velocity. That was not
true ten years ago. So anyway, it's a long way
of telling you that fastballs are better than ever, but
(26:32):
they're throwing them less than ever. Thirty percent. That's down
from thirty six percent ten years ago. So and I
looked at fastballs in the zone. That's down two percent
just since last year. Only sixteen percent of the time
a hitter is going to see a four seam fastball
in the strike zone. I do think this is not
(26:55):
a cop out for hitters because you look at the
Major league batting averages these days. You know, if you're
hitting like two forty, that's okay. I do think it's
harder to never to hit in the game today. There's
just way too much to cover.
Speaker 2 (27:06):
Do you have numbers regarding a forcing fastball? The numbers
are just versus forcing fastballs in his own Do you
have any numbers on that.
Speaker 1 (27:15):
At all, as far as what's in the zone and
what's not in the zone?
Speaker 2 (27:18):
Yeah? Or the result is the good result, because there's times, man,
I want the forcing fastball on his own the two
seamer is going to move and it's still gonna be
thrown pretty hard. But I think the hitter sees it
better just by the fact that it's gonna move a
little bit, and of course if it's in the right spot,
nobody hits it. But the forcing fastball gets on hitters
a lot, and their mind is like, it's hard to
(27:40):
just I've already discussed that they have this little thing
in their head about numbers velocity, but if they're if
in the back of their mind they're thinking soft, that
at all that forcing fastballs and the catchers met before
you know it. I mean, there are certain hitters man
that are good, and I watch a lot. I watch
my videos in the morning normally, and guys will hit
(28:00):
home runs or have a good night, and I want
to know what pitches did they hit. And I'm saying
I believe bad breaking balls in the zone that these
hitters like is the one that gets crushed more than
I don't normally see just a solid, forcing fastball just
getting ridden on like I see a poorly defined or
placed breaking ball, something soft that speeds somebody up. So
(28:22):
this goes in so many different directions, and it's something
I've always struggled with because I've always loved the well
located fastball. I've always loved the well located forcing fastball.
And off of that, I love the good arm speed
change up and then the two seamers great, and I
love it. And if you have a real one at
the balls on the ground, great. The hitters are going
(28:44):
to let you know how good it is by how
many balls are put on the ground. But when you
get those high sinkers going in gaps, that's not so cool.
So again I hear what you're saying. I understand what
you're saying. The other point of why I keep hearing
different things about different different guns and registering velocity. And
like when I was a kid doing the scouting, I
had the one gun the jugsn that registered out of
(29:05):
the hand, and then the ray gun gave you two
readings out of the hand at home plate. So when
they're talking about these big numbers with velocity, where exactly
is the number coming from out of the hand or
at home plate? To have any idea on.
Speaker 1 (29:17):
That, Yeah, as soon as it leaves the hand, So
that's that's actually the highest that can possibly be as
soon as you let it go it starts to slow down.
Obviously it's not breaking up speed, right, So that's yeah,
it started. It's been a while now, I want to
say at least a decade, maybe right around ten years
that that was the true measuring point. It used to
be slightly in front of the picture. So yeah, some
(29:38):
of the numbers are apples and oranges if you go
farther back.
Speaker 2 (29:41):
Yeah, right, as usual.
Speaker 1 (29:43):
Back in the day, the numbers used to differ by
a lot, right, depending on what gun.
Speaker 2 (29:47):
You're a lot man. Well, at the old Scouts, the
old Scouts, Gene Thompson especially, and Gino was the best.
He was one of the best. I had Christopher who
might have been the best. He's like these guys are
in the Hall of Fame, Scout in Hall of Fame.
He didn't use the gun. He did not want a gun.
He would watch from the side Angel Figueroa. He never
wanted the gun, but he'd always say, what you get
(30:07):
on that one? I love the Angel. But the you know,
the thing is Gino wanted the ray gun because Red
Gaskell was another one. My god, how do you bring
up Fred Gaskell? But it was the velocity. You get
two numbers they they I think you hold the trigger
down on the ray gun and the moment the release,
you would let the trigger go or vice versa, and
(30:28):
you'd get you get two numbers. You'd have to watch
the gun. You get the number out of the hand,
and we see the rollback and the number at home plate.
And it was really big for these guys to get
a better number. If you're looking at a guy, you know,
you had the deceptive pitchers, you had the lefties with deception.
You may have had, you know, a rity or two
with something an exceptional split whatever or a forkball back
in the day, So that's different. I mean, if if
(30:49):
I'm on a pitcher that didn't have premium velocity, but
he had another really good curveball. I love curveballs, real curveballs,
loved great changeups. And then of course handed this mattered
in that too, So that was all an exception. But
when you got when you got the velocity we're looking
for on that raygun, these old boys man, that guy
(31:11):
that picture got pushed really fast. So I'm just saying
just for the fans' perspective so that they know, because
we're hearing about all the great numbers today and they
are good, but that kind of diminishes some of what
you may think of the pictures of the past, because
these guys brought it to now. I don't know what
the numbers were exactly, because my gun, Charlie kerkfelt through
(31:34):
the highest number on my speed gun as a young
scout at Yabapai Junior College. You got Charlie at ninety seven,
ninety seven, ninety eight on my jugs gun. That was
the quicker gun. So it's out of his hand. And
I could not get Lloyd to like him at all.
Lloyd Christopher, he was my crosschecker. Lloyd did not like him.
For whatever reason. He did not like him, probably his
(31:54):
body type, whatever. And I eventually had to say to
Lloyd one day, Lloyd, you don't like anybody, anybody turning.
You don't like him. So who's going to be playing
in the big in five years if you're in charge
of that. Nobody plays in the big leagues in five years.
Speaker 1 (32:08):
Love that man, absolutely loved him, if I remember this correctly.
Wasn't it a coach at Michigan State who first thought
of the idea of using a radar gun to track
pitches and literally brought in like a police buddy and
his gun. The track pitches, and then it was somebody
that Earl Weaver knew. And Earl Weaver was the one
who introduced it on the major league level, and he
(32:28):
thought it was a great tool to keep track of
some of his starting pitchers who are losing their stuff
later in the game. Earl was ahead of his time.
Speaker 2 (32:36):
I agree with that. I agree with that because I
like it for that reason too. Like we're just these
there's like extemporary moments here. But Edwin Jackson pitching in Texas.
You know, Eddie was up and down. But God with
an athlete with a great arm. So we're playing in
Texas one, he's got it going on. The ninety ninth
pitch he threw was ninety nine miles an hour. I'm
not going to take him out.
Speaker 1 (32:57):
He was built like a horse too. That guy could throw.
Speaker 2 (32:59):
Oh my god. He was great guy too, wonderful you know.
Speaker 1 (33:02):
Now, speaking of pitching, I think Paul Schemes to me,
Joe is the epitome of where pitching has evolved. I
mean he does it at an exceptional level. I mean
it's elite, right, but he's got so many different pitches.
That's just a handful for a hitter to try to cover.
And I think sho Hey Otani is getting into this category.
We have to talk about show Hey again, Joe, because
(33:22):
it's just it continues to amaze me how good, great
he has become as a pitcher. Oh seven to three ERA.
He's made eight starts and given up four earned runs
with two strikes against him. The batting average is oh
ninety two, the three for thirty with runners in the
scoring position. He's not given up a home run with
(33:44):
runners on base. And I was talking to Dave Roberts
about this the other day, and yes, there's a lot
of talk about how sho he wants to win the
Cy Young Award, which is obviously a very cool thing.
I want my players to be the best, and that's
the best pitcher of the year. That's what he wants
to be. I get it. But as Dave Roberts said,
this is year two. Now where his stuff now? He said,
(34:04):
shoe Hey right now feels like he can do anything
that he wants with the baseball, and he could do
a lot of things with the baseball. You know, he
grew up wanting to be a pitcher, and the whole
two way thing came about when he was graduating high
school and was drafted by you cult and the manager
talked him into being a two way guy. But when
(34:24):
he sat down in high school wrote down all of
his life less life goals in terms of the game
of baseball. They were all about pitching. There was nothing
in there about hitting. I think this is in his heart.
You could disagree with me, Joe. You've had him as
a player, you know that. I think show Hey right
now is finding him his true self on the mound. Listen,
He's a two way player, don't get me wrong, but
(34:45):
I think he's enjoying the heck out of finding ways
to beat hitters.
Speaker 2 (34:49):
Two things stood out to me about his game yesterday.
He hit the leadoff hitter right.
Speaker 1 (34:54):
HiT's the first pitch for a home run?
Speaker 2 (34:56):
Right? Right? I mean, And again that goes back to
the refrain that he believes the team has a better
chance to win when he pitches and hits simultaneously. And
then the next one I might have been the fifth inning.
I think he only went five yesterday, eighty eight pitches
something like that. But when he was coming off the mound,
did you see the emotion of him coming off the mound.
I mean, that says it all. You'll see him be
(35:18):
emotional hitting wise, but I guess there's a pump there
when he's when he's pitching, there's an adrenaline surge there
that I think it exceeds anything he does offensively, and
he does a lot of stuff off fensively. But when
he's able to throw a pitch by a hitter in
a crucial moment, or get out of a tough jam,
or the WBC a couple years ago, when he strikes
(35:40):
out Trotty, that's like that really resonated to me because
I saw a part of him I had had Nazie,
he's got be reserved. He celebrates in a nice, calm,
show hey kind of way, but that's kind of gone.
He is absolutely more demonstrative in his feelings right now,
and like you're suggesting, and it might be how it
(36:00):
dovetails into what he loves to do, but it just
seems on the map there's a more of a visceral
reaction after he does something. Well, now, that's kind of
if you think about it, maybe you know as a
hitterot he's not going to want to show up the
other side. He might backflip a little bitter how he
comes on a basis, But on the mound, man, it
comes out. It's like a lion roaring out there. Man,
(36:21):
when he does something really well, you can see how
much he's into it.
Speaker 1 (36:25):
Dave Roberts, his manager, is seeing the same thing.
Speaker 2 (36:27):
Joe.
Speaker 1 (36:28):
He told me that right now on the mound, show
Hey looks like he is possessed. That's the word that
he used. It's just so fun to watch. And by
the way, I hope people never get used to this.
It's only the second time in history the starting pitcher
hit a lead off home run. The other was show
Hey in the playoffs against the Brewers. There's nobody else
(36:50):
like him, I mean at this stage in his career.
If you look at his number of games in which
he's batted and the number of games in which he
has pitched, he's in the top ten in both home
runs at this stage of a hitter's career and strikeouts
of a pitcher's career, and the ones closest to him
in both categories in terms of home runs Babe Ruth
(37:12):
and in terms of strikeouts, Roger Clemens. He's a combination
of Babe Ruth and Roger Clemens in the same player,
same player. It's crazy, and I hope people never get
used to it.
Speaker 2 (37:23):
I don't well the thing that also leads or blends
in with the arguments that have been cataloged over the
last couple of years. He should just be a hitter,
he should just be a pitcher. You're seeing something like
you just suggested, you're not. You have not seen before,
you're not going to see again, and you could understand
why he needs to do both. I mean, those arguments
(37:44):
have always been disturbing to me because originally he came
here for a specific reason that was to do both.
And to deny him the opportunity to do one or
the other I think is wrong. And I know he's
been hurt pitching wise, and he's had the surgeries and
there can be a detriment to that to the team
while he's recovering, no doubt about it. However, I don't know.
I think it's worth taking the chance that he may
(38:06):
get hurt again while we experience the demonstration of skills
that he's putting on right now. It's definitely worth it.
So I never want to see him get hurt again.
Nobody ever wants see him get hurt again, but his
ability to play the game as well as he does
on both sides. I'm here to tell you, man, if
they wanted to stick him on defense, I'll shock you
(38:27):
there too. He's that good.
Speaker 1 (38:28):
What is it you like to say? Never get in
the way of genius.
Speaker 2 (38:31):
That's right. Never get in a way of greatness, you know,
or genius is another way of putting it. Yeah, we
too many times we think we know and we don't know.
So for me it's as extent, never get in a
way of greatness. And I think sometimes leaders leadership in
a sense, those who were in charge maybe is a
better word, will try to manufacture reasons, and it's a
(38:53):
manufactured reason. It's not. There's no You could do all
the data research you want. You could come up with
all the different things that you choose rationalization process as
if to why this should not be so. But just enjoy,
folks like you just suggested, just enjoy it. Enjoy the show. Literally,
(39:14):
he's that good. I never want to see him get
hurt again, and with good health, hopefully he's going to
do things. He's already has done things. But by the
time this is all over with you're gonna be happy
that everybody's got out of the way of his greatness
and let him both pitch and hit well.
Speaker 1 (39:30):
Speaking of greatness and smart people, I know, Joe Madden,
you're a big fan of the Royal Observatory, Greenwich. Every kay,
they've issued a warning that all of us, I mean
all of us better pay attention to I'll let you
know what that is right.
Speaker 2 (39:47):
After this.
Speaker 1 (40:00):
Welcome back to the book with Joe. So I mentioned
the Royal Observatory Greenwich. It's a bunch of really smart
people and they've issued a warning here about artificial intelligence. Joe,
and I think, I think you're gonna You're gonna like
what they say, but at the same time be scared
by it. They pointed out that we as human beings,
we're paying a really heavy price for this incredible breakthrough
(40:26):
with artificial intelligence, and the price is dulling the human
mind and weakening human intelligence. It's basically instant gratification, and
that's that's what our society is about now. We are
infatuated with convenience. We want things as easily and as
quickly as possible, and we've lost the not the ability,
(40:52):
but the appreciation for things that are well earned, that
there's part of failure that brings you to arrival at intelligence,
skill and conclusion that is going away, and now AI
is making that go away really really fast. So one
of the people at the observatory is the director of
(41:13):
the Royal Museum's Greenwich over the UK, guy by the
name of Patti Rodgers, and he said, of reliance solely
on instant answers, which is what AI is, risks losing
the habits of questioning and evaluation that underpin knowledge, expertise
and innovation. Essentially, what we're doing is we're farming out
(41:36):
the ability to use our minds. That's what you're talking
about when you're talking about the habits of questioning and evaluation.
That is freethinking, and our love affair and our chase
of the easy answer is literally making us dumber. And
(41:56):
I know that's an overstatement to a lot of people,
but I think that's a warning AI is not going away.
Speaker 2 (42:01):
I get it.
Speaker 1 (42:02):
I'm not a ludite here. We have to learn how
to manage it and not just let it run and
take away our ability to reason, think and be creative.
Speaker 2 (42:15):
I could have written that maybe not that well, but
from the beginning. That was my concern too. I thought
big part of it was it should never be incorporated
into the arts because that's where creativity, imagination really needs
to be the human element right there. As an example,
I mean, okay, recently I got re rebranded my foundation
to two burned Feet from respect ninety, right, So all
(42:37):
of a sudden, we know we need a logo, and
then talking with some people that are helping me out,
and all of a sudden it comes back some logos
and sure enough, all these logos were done via artificial
intelligence AI. They just throw some words at it comes back,
and I didn't like any of them. They were very sterile.
There was obviously just it's like clip art was almost
(42:59):
like clip art done expediently without any a lot of
real thought to it, not whatever. So that's just an
example to the arts, you know, whether it's writing books
or creating music or acting whatever. The arts cannot be
infiltrated by this. It is so wrong on every level
to me, Like I said, I think from the beginning, medicine, yeah,
(43:20):
let's go baby. When it comes to defense, national defense, absolutely,
I think it's a big part of that. Also, there's
there's areas that you always want to there's certain areas
that we cannot We want as much help as we
possibly can get, right, because we can't see everything. For instance,
just trying to cure cancer, yes, apply as much to
(43:42):
it as you possibly can. But to write the next
greatest novel, no, no, not at all, not even a
little bit, to the next, to the next Da Vinci
or Michael Ancher, No, what you know, you'd never want
to be influenced or not influenced. You don't want to
be substituted in that way. It's it's a form of analytics. Sorry,
(44:03):
but it is. It is analytics, and it's it's on
steroids probably right. And the more we rely on data numbers,
et cetera, the less people are going to think. And
that will suggest that there and I totally agree with that.
And that's as a leader within a group of let's
just say a team, you want to empower your people
(44:24):
to think on their own, come up with their own thoughts,
and when they do, they become part of ownership and
then there's a total buying on their part. But anything's
in situations where you do not permit your people to
be heard and be totally invested ownership doesn't occur, and
thus you know when you lose, it's not that big
of a deal because, after all, I'm not being heard
(44:46):
here anyhow. I've always believed that I want it on
a daily basis. I want Tommy Berducci to feel as
though he can make an impact on my coaching staff.
I want to stay out every way. You make an
impact based on your years of experience, your knowledge, what
makes what makes you tick, What are you seeing right
now that I'm seeing or anybody else, That to me
is fascinating and good. But to rely on information coming
(45:10):
out of a machine to tell me all of that
and then then I'm going to buy into it. I'm
going to utilize that over Tommy's years of experience. That's
why I have a hard time with all of it.
That's again just just replace. Just like you're replacing managers
and dugouts, you're replacing human beings with this. It's it's
all interconnected, and it's wrong. It's wrong, and it's not cool,
(45:31):
and God blessed the Tampa Bay Rays in Milwaukee Brewers.
Speaker 1 (45:35):
Well, I love your analogy to analytics because there's a
lot of comparisons there and the one that jumps out
to me is AI is always going to give you
a polished answer. This is the truth, even though it
literally is making it up sometimes because it's based on
you know, whatever junk information went into the AI that
they scanned. And that's kind of sometimes the way analytics
(45:56):
gets that. There has to be a black and white,
you know, a number based answer to explain something. And
the danger here is that people accept what AI is
telling them as truth as fact, and it's not verifiable fact.
And I think that's why schools at a very early
age now, because as you said, we all know it's
not going away, it's only going to be more prevalent,
(46:19):
has to teach AI literacy to we have to question,
just as you as a baseball person, Joe, all of
us as baseball people have to use analytics as a tool,
but also don't put away your questions. Don't accept everything
as fact when in fact it's not really fact. It's interesting,
(46:40):
you know, Sam Altman from Open AI, he's described AI
going forward as it could be like a metered service
like information and intelligence would be sold like water or
electricity based on usage. That's based on a business model,
and that's where we're headed where AI. As you mentioned
in the medical world, Yeah, it's amazing and the things
(47:03):
we will learn and benefit from are amazing. But the
business model, at least in the US, seems to be
more business based without enough concern on the cultural impact
and how it literally is retraining our minds when it
comes to mental effort. I think there has to be
much more concern about that rather than just accepting this
(47:24):
as some kind of a business model that it's the
next great thing.
Speaker 2 (47:28):
Thousand percent and good, make me pay for it, because
if you're going to make me pay for it, I'll
do it on my own. That's what a lot of
people are going to do, because you know, there's okay,
I e I've just had to buy a tractor lawnmower
because I have this big piece of grass I got
to cut right. So this is where it was good.
I needed to know the difference between the simplicity tractor.
(47:49):
I think it was the Prestige versus a cub Cadet
and maybe a couple others the snap or whatever. So
I just qureed it in that way and it comes
down with you know, a list of pros and cons.
That's cool. That's cool. Because what else am I I mean,
I don't I'm not literate on tractors. I talked to
a buddy that knew something about him. He steered me
in the right direction. But god, it was great for that.
(48:11):
It was expedient. I got some quick answers. I was
able to make compare and contrast, and I finally figured
out which was the right one for me based on
some of these answers. There's that wrong with that. I
think that's actually a good usage of it. But it's
not me. It wasn't. Like another example, we have a
scholarship program from my pop's name on an annual basis
(48:32):
that we give out. It's a thousand bucks scholarship. So
we have kids write letters reasons why they deserve the scholarship, right,
and what I'm reading through them, and oh my god,
it was so obvious, like the kids that actually wrote it.
And then there was like two or three of them.
I said, oh my god, I mean, like you're saying
it was like perfect. The punctuation was perfect, the way
(48:54):
it was extrapolated to how it was drawn out, and
everything was written in so well. It was like no way,
no way, Like there was two or three of them
just like that. That's that's it. I mean, I think
that's recognizable to the trained die like say in a
college situation where you're gonna be you know, papers are
gonna be written via that tool. But for me, that
(49:15):
backed me off of these different ones regarding who should
win the prize, and I didn't have I wasn't one
hundred percent sure, but I was like ninety eight percent
sure based on how perfect this thing actually was. So
that I want, I want your thoughts, I want your feelings,
I want your experience, I want your knowledge, I want
your wisdom, your intuition. That's what I'm paying for. I
(49:35):
unless it's like I'm comping two tractors in a moment
because they got to make a decision because they got
to buy this thing very quick. I don't have time
to do all that research. Different world.
Speaker 1 (49:45):
Well, to me, Joe, the seed of innovation, discovery, breakthrough,
and in some ways genius is curiosity.
Speaker 2 (49:53):
Of course.
Speaker 1 (49:54):
I mean you know that the most creative people, it
all begins with curiosity. I say that to young reporters
who you want to be journalists, you better be curious.
And when you start losing in curiosity, you've lost the
essence of what it means to be a journalist because
it's about finding things out. And yes, it's presenting them
and you know, intelligent, understandable ways, but you have to
(50:16):
be curious. And I think great genius does begin with curiosity.
And I'm afraid that what we're doing here, and this
is the warning from the Royal Observatory, is that we're
kind of replacing that curiosity with the convenience of something
we think is genius. But if you think about AI
(50:37):
and the words, the first word is artificial, we have
to remember that, Yeah.
Speaker 2 (50:42):
It's artificial sweetener a little bit and my iced tea.
I'm okay with that, but I really try to stay
away from that word as much as I possibly can.
I cannot agree more with what the assessment is coming from.
We said it was Greenwich. Yes, yeah, I cannot agree
with that more. That's been you know, synopsis of my
(51:04):
thoughts from the moment this really became popular, and quite frankly,
I remember back like out even fifteen twenty years ago,
and it's weird. Somebody says, you know, like fifteen twenty
years from now, there's going to be your computer is
going to actually have not there's not going to be
components within. It's gonna be almost like fluid or liquid,
like a human brain. That's I remember that specifically being
told to me, and God has scared me back then.
(51:27):
I mean, we see enough science fiction movies. We know
what it could be and all these different things that
can get out of control. Why is that? Why is
that interesting? It's just a lazy way of being a
human being.
Speaker 1 (51:38):
Well, it's like you say, with analytics, you know they're
great and you want as much as you can, but
don't be afraid to question them as well. Right, that's right,
that's right. Absolutely, Sorry to get you off on that track,
but I do think it's really important that we continue
to ask these questions and not just blindly except that
on I don't even want to use the word faith,
but just because it's something new and especially convenient. We
(52:01):
are kings of convenience and we've got to get back
to just kind of questioning things and uh an analog baseball.
Speaker 2 (52:10):
Bring it on, big boy, bring it on. I love that.
Still working on the T shirt, folks, that's going to.
Speaker 1 (52:14):
Happen, So bring us home here, Joe, what do you
have to end this edition where We've talked a lot
about some of these analog baseball teams, Brewers, Rays, Guardians.
It's a fun time to see that kind of style
coming back.
Speaker 2 (52:27):
Yeah, and I think this fits actually, and it comes
from Anne Ran and Rand. She wrote Atlas Shrugged was
the other one, fountain fountain Head fountain Head right, introduced
to me by Ken Brett Memry Can Brett. Oh yeah, brother,
what a good.
Speaker 1 (52:43):
Guy he was in boy, he could have been a
two way player exactly.
Speaker 2 (52:47):
There you go. You're right. He was a broadcast with
the Angel when I first got up, but he was
He was a voracious reader too, so he always comped
different things. So he turned me on. Ann Ran. He
loved he loved Atlas Shrugged, Beret or did he loved it?
And from that this was my you know, I kind
of used the word earlier. We were talking about rationalization
and a lot of this is, you know, rationalization, and
(53:09):
this is a great definition. Rationalization is a process of
not perceiving reality, but of attempting to make reality fit
one's emotions or in this situation, you're going to hear
all these reasons why AI is good based on the
fact somebody stands to make a lot of money out
of it. I don't even know if that's emotion or not,
but I think it is. So rationalization is a process
(53:29):
of not perceiving reality. And I was reading today a
little bit about the Fulpy to shortstop or Cavaliro. What
are we going to do right there? And you know,
the part that they're making a case for Folpy was rationalization.
I thought, and listen, I want this kid to do
so well. I am. I always want to work with that,
(53:50):
first of all. But the point is Caballero deserves this
job back when he gets when he's well, So don't
start giving me all these different rationalizations because you're not
perceiving reality and you're trying to fit in emotion right here.
So that's that happens too often when you're dealing with
a grown up sport like baseball. You want black and white.
If I tell you the truth, you might not like
me for a week or ten days, but if I
(54:10):
lie to you gonna hate me forever. So that's what
got me on this thread today. And then you follow
it up with all this stuff that you researched today
for our show, and it was perfect. So the rationalization
process is not perceiving reality.
Speaker 1 (54:24):
Great stuff as always in great series coming up this
weekend Raising the Yankees. Lots of good series coming up,
but that one really stood out to me. So great stuff, Joe.
We will see you next time on.
Speaker 2 (54:34):
The Book of Joe. Thanks Tommy, well done.
Speaker 1 (54:44):
The Book of Joe podcast is a production of iHeartRadio.
For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts,
or wherever you get your podcasts.
The Book of Joe podcast is a production of iHeartRadio.
Hey There and welcome back. It's the Book of Joe
Podcast with me, Tom Berducci and Joe Madden. Joe, there's
so many things I want to get to during this
(00:25):
podcast here, including a word of warning from the Royal
Observatory Greenwich. Sounds like very smart people, right, I get
some words of wisdom for us. But first I want
to start out with the American League East, and we'd
like to talk here about analog baseball, right, Joe. I
(00:48):
can't think of a greater disparity, at least in terms
of how they play offensive baseball than the analog Tampa
Bay Rays and the digital New York Yankees. Yankees lead
the world and walks and home runs and the Rays
somehow have the best record of baseball and they are
twenty sixth in the major leagues in home runs. Joe,
(01:09):
it's I can the Rays keep this up? We're talking
about a team that right now has the best record
in baseball. They just swept the Baltimore Orioles big weekend
series coming up against those New York Yankees. Give me
your take on this East Division in the American League,
especially at the top and weather Tampa Bay. Maybe not
(01:31):
this good in terms of almost seven hundred baseball it's crazy,
But in terms of being a real threat for the
New York Yankees.
Speaker 2 (01:38):
Oh, I think they are an absolute threat. Seven hundred balls.
Tough to continue. What there's gonna They're gonna come back
a little bit. But yes, the analog component is fabulous.
I think we've been talking about this for years and
just this morning I'm reading up on what the Brewers
did to the Cubs again and I thought, wow, what
a great World series Brewers versus the Rays. Looking in
(02:00):
the mirror, I mean like looking in the mirror. They
have the Brewers have some really good pitching. They got
a bunch of swarmers on the field. I got a
bunch of know the the old phrase, the gamers, right
we analog uh, analog lee. We always talked about gamers.
I mean that's something that you've heard as a kid.
I heard growing up. That's what they are. I mean,
(02:20):
there's no man, there's just there's there's no fluff about him.
They come after you hard every night. I think if
you know, when they do lose, they just go in,
they take a shower, they dust off and go home
and come back and say when he gets you tomorrow.
Kind of a thing attitude ly, So, I you know,
and I know Cashi uh does does a wonderful job.
I've been around him, and I know Murph up there
(02:41):
in Milwaukee and they Murph. You know Murph twelve for
many years like he was, he was a lead singer,
then he became a backup singer profession then he became
a lead singer again. Think about Murph. He knows, he
knows what he knows, he knows what he's doing. He's
very intentional and in everything that he does. So I
don't think you could underestimate the benefit he's had on
(03:03):
that group. The influence he's had on that group is
obvious to me knowing him for a long time. He's
when he answers questions afterwards, the stoke nature, the little,
the grand not afraid to be playful, all the different
things that he does in the locker room. So I
mean I'm jumping over to them. I know that, But
I just my point is this morning that was my thing.
(03:26):
I mean, looking in the mirror, the Brewers and the rays.
Why not that would be such an interesting and refreshing
version of the World Series.
Speaker 1 (03:34):
Well, speaking of refreshing, if you look at the American
League standings, the division leaders are the Rays, the Guardians,
and the Athletics. The teams in each division with the
lowest payroll in those divisions are the Rays, the Guardians,
and the Athletics. And then you mentioned the Brewers in
the in the National League. It's remarkable that word a
(03:57):
period right now. And offenses down when you look at
home runs are down, hits per game are way down,
and the teams are just finding a way to put
the ball in play, take advantage of things on the basis.
And yes, bunting. I mean yesterday the Rays stole home
on the back end of a double steal. The Rays
are bunting. The team that used to just decry the
(04:21):
bunt as a weapon offensively giving up it out to
you only have twenty seven. The analytics crowd said, why
give it any up? But this is what's working for them.
They probably give up I want to say, three or
four positions offensively when you're talking about centerfield, shortstop, and catcher.
Very little offense out of those three positions, but they
all run the base as well, and they defend well,
(04:43):
and Joe, I watched them sweep Baltimore Orioles this week,
and they're playing with so much passion. I mean, they
look like they're in the College World Series and they
become a great comeback team. They're on a roll here.
They've won twenty in their last twenty four games. They're
nineteen and five at home. And I don't know if
(05:05):
you've been over there yet, Joe, but you know the
renovations they made to the place. I always thought the
place was actually a little bit overrated as a bad
place to play. I know you talked about it being
a home field advantage. People talked about how it was dark.
You don't want to be inside when you're in Florida.
But it's a much brighter place now. And you can
(05:26):
tell they love playing baseball in that ballpark. It's just
the enthusiasm they're playing with. They're a dangerous team that
now has the IT factor, which is the factor of
belief that they believe and they know that they're a
good team right now.
Speaker 2 (05:42):
Yeah, and I agree in all counts. I mean, I
love watching them keming Els and and Diaz and then
I'm a big Simpson fan. I mean, we need more
of those. This kid plays, which is just said, you
reat you to where passion and my phrase was going
to be they play with their hair on fire and
which you know that counts? How many home runs does
that count for during the course of a season, just
going out there with the passion and effort that they
(06:05):
demonstrate on a nightly basis. What does that mean? I mean,
how do you evaluate that that is something that's controllable,
that should never go in a slump? Really, the fact
that you go out and play a certain way on
a nightly basis. And they're athletically gifted too. I mean
that Kevin row Is at third base, that's a big man,
and I've seen him make some good plays and he's
got a fine arm, and I mean, I don't know
(06:27):
has better batspeed than him. I met him at our
event this past winter in Tampa Bay and Tampa of
a big guy, nice guy, and then I watched him
swing the bat and I go like, somebody hits the ball.
It's like, wow, that is like Dante Bichett batspeed in
my eyeballs. Just really he's all of that. So yeah,
they're they're not going away. No, No, they're not going away.
(06:48):
They're gonna They're definitely gonna hit a bad bumping road
at some point. Absolutely they are. But I think they
have the ingredients to overcome that, and part of that
is what they feature. Their strongest point about them is
something that is controllable daily and like you just had passed,
playing hard first to third, playing defense, et cetera, et cetera.
They have all of that. Just last point you talked about, Bunny.
(07:11):
I watched the replay of the Diamondbacks game last night.
Marte he goes deep, deep, deep, deep one at bat.
Then he comes up with runners on first and second
and drops down a bunt, beautiful bump. They go second
and third. He moves the runners up and he's safe. Also,
so those the bases. Then we I think we get
a sacrifice slide, then we get a double down right
(07:32):
field line. Tory Lavulo is just like smiling in a dugout,
like shaking his head. Of course, he wanted Marte to
swing the bat, but that's something that I think that
was like him saying to the rest of the team,
let's play as a team. And I know sometimes he
gets aggravating to a manager and the guy like that
who's so good at the plate does set the example. However,
(07:53):
it paid off absolutely. And last point, also, you're talking
about more contact, bulpam. You know he's uh, since he's
come back up much more patient's where he's looking over
things a lot better. And part of what I've been
reading Ralison had said something to the effect that getting
away from that real uppercut all or nothing kind of
a swing and he's just clearly trying to stay short
(08:13):
use the whole field. My god, what a revolutionary idea, right,
I really wish this kid well after everything he went
through last year. So anyway, as you started talking about that,
I just had to write three different things now because
they're all they're all pertinent, they all they all are
like we're talking about analog baseball. They are important, this
is this is how the game is intended to be played. Yeah,
(08:37):
we all love Homer's absolutely, they're a weaver world and
what he did. Of course we love Homers, but homers
don't show up all the time. What do you do
with the rest of those at bats? And that's what
I find really interesting.
Speaker 1 (08:48):
Yeah, great point about the bunts too, And I've talked
to Murph about this that sometimes it's just the idea
that you may be bunting that can have an effect, right,
And I think where the game is now, I don't
want to say the bunt is embraced, like you know,
it's John McGraw in nineteen oh eight again, but you know,
there was a point there where it was almost taboo
(09:11):
and guys wouldn't even show bunt and corner infielders would
always be back because they never have to worry about it.
Speaker 2 (09:18):
Now.
Speaker 1 (09:18):
Actually, you know, last night or Thursday Wednesday night, and
I'm doing a Yankees Blue Jays game and John Schneider
is bunting in the third inning with his number eight
hitter because it's a pitcher's duel any but it's twice
in that game. And you know what, sometimes you have
to roll the corner infielders in because the team has
shown that to you. So I think it's a it's
a really good play that now you're seeing guys now
(09:41):
actually can do it. First of all, because now it's
it's become an accepted part of the game again. And
I think it's a fun part of the game. It's
a strategic part of the game, and I think it
is part of winning baseball, And so we're looking at
the team like the Rays Joe against winning teams. You know,
sometimes these can be misleading, but I like to look
at that figure. I don't know if you did when
you were managing, but yeah, I did, of course, the
(10:02):
Raiser thirteen and eleven against winning teams. It's not like
they're just taking advantage of the schedule. In fact, that's
a lot of games this early in the season against
winning teams. And this blows me away. The New York
Yankees against winning teams. They have one win this year
against the winning They're one in eight. Now, part of
that is teams like the Red Sox, the Mets, the Astros,
(10:26):
the Blue Jays, they haven't been as good as we
thought they were going to be. So they're good teams
that are underachieving under five hundred. But the Yankees have
one win against winning teams. The Rays I have a
winning record thirteen and eleven. That's a lot of games
so far. They passed the smell test.
Speaker 2 (10:42):
No doubt. I mean, like you said, I watch them too,
And briefly back to the ballpark, and did they have
to go to Steinbrenner last year, the spring training home
of the Yankees, and it's just you know, it's a
nice it's a beautiful facility. It's great for spring training
or a nice Triple A ball club, but it's not
Major League. And you know, I have been difficult on
the trop in the past, and I don't deny that. However,
(11:04):
it is their home, and I think that really it's
definitely more of a big League atmosphere on a nightly
basis as opposed to playing outside, also in that heat
during the summer. There So all these things are conspiring
to make them better this year, and they have been
now specifically about bunts. You're right, it was taboo. I'm
telling you, man, I would have I would have, you know,
dudes coming down asking me questions after a game why
(11:26):
somebody bunted in a certain situation where I wanted to
have them bunt, and then you just said it bottom
of the order. I mean, you know, you know who's pitching,
you know you have it to play, you know what
the better options are. I'll take ninety feet. There's times
I'll just take ninety feet. Years ago, I wrote this
little thing on hitting, and one of the things that
are really respected was when you came back to the
(11:50):
dugout after making it out, if the runners runner or
runners advanced ninety feet, to me, that was a successful
at bat. And I know that'll get argued against constantly. However,
I do believe that. And then again for further like
I said, what part of the batting what are we
talking about? You should try to be creative with the
bottom of the batting order, especially like with the Rays.
If you got some guys that you know normally their
(12:11):
numbers are not very high, take them out and we're
gonna work on things that are going to really cause
the other teams pre series meetings to be a little
bit longer. Whether it's the safety squeezes I'm seeing you
what I'm seeing now, something I like to do towards
the end, or even runners on second and third, or
run around third only with a bottom batter hitting right
(12:32):
now in the first basement playing back, that's a perfect
time for a safety squeeze. Look if the first basement's
even even up with the bag, I shouldn't say playing back,
but with some lefties they do. They'll play back more deeply.
And why not just if you could teach your lefties
and that's a hard thing to do, I found a
lot of lefties have a hard time dragging the ball
with them on the first baseline because a big thing
(12:52):
about not pinch hitting for a lefty. During the course
of the game, I would talk to my lefties, the
guys are like fence guys, like platoon kind Listen, here's
the fifth inning and there's something going on. If you
could put down a good bunt against this lefty they
brought in the game at this particular moment, I'm good,
Let's let's do something like that. I always wanted the
lefties to work versus lefties on a skill that keeps
(13:15):
them in the game as opposed to being platooned because
you don't know how the game is going to turn
out later. I could go on and on about all
this stuff. So the bottom of the batting orders should
be flexible with the ability to do a lot of
different things. Bunts at the right time, right situation, right
circumstances are outstanding. And you saw what our safety squeeze
did the one game even in Saint Louis when we
(13:36):
went back to back and it kind of that's when
smoke came out of their ears and all of a sudden,
the series is are. It matters when you when you
I don't want to use the word embarrassed, but you
put pressure on the other team to execute. As a coach,
Morgan used to say in high school, if you make
the other team execute so that they may execute themselves,
(13:57):
that's what you're trying to get done.
Speaker 1 (13:59):
I love that line because, especially in today's game, the
bunt defense has been a lost art, right, and just
putting the ball on the ground you can create some chaos.
And I think Joe, especially the way pitching is these days.
We'll get into that in our next segment. But pitching
has changed drastically, and I want to say just in
the last three to four years. You don't have to
(14:20):
go back ten years, but you know, I do think
one of the things I want to talk about too,
Joe is watching the Rays and it was Richie Pelasios
had the big hit to break a tie against Baltimore
on Wednesday. It was a three and oho count. I
don't understand why more hitters don't swing on three to zero.
(14:42):
It is the last fastball count left in Major League Baseball.
I'll give you some numbers, Joe. Three to zero count,
you will see a fastball in the major leagues this year,
ninety percent of the time that is a free pitch.
This lugging percentage one guys do swing on three and
to oho is over eight. It's eight eighteen. And yet
(15:06):
I see these guys. A statue takes fastball down the middle.
Now the pitcher's back in the count. Guess what he's
throwing the next pitch. It's a cutter or a slider.
I don't understand why, say, a team like the New
York Yankees. I'm not picking on them, because there's lots
of teams that just don't swing three and oh. They
swung twice all year on three and ozer counts. I'm
(15:27):
more than one hundred and three and oh pitches. Why
don't more hitters swing the bat on three and oh?
I think it's the fear of failure. It's almost like
guys who don't want to challenge a pitch early in
the game because they're afraid they're going to be wrong.
And now you've quote unquote burned a challenge. Now the
manager might be med, you've only left the sis one
(15:48):
and we have to save that for the ninth inning. No,
if it's three and O, you to me Joe, you
leave the dugout looking for a fastball down the middle.
They're so hard to find in the game today. So
if you know you just sit on that, you keyhole
fastball down the middle, that's what you left the dug
out looking for. Why would you just concede that pitch
(16:09):
and let it go? I'm amazed how many guys statue
take three and oh give me your thoughts on that.
Speaker 2 (16:16):
Yeah, my line used to be, not all three zero
counts are created equally. For example, if you're leading off
an inning and you got like you at the top
of the batting or here comes some bangers behind you, Okay,
I'm okay with taking that three to zero count with
some real some real guys coming up behind you leading
off and inning kind of could be a different category,
different situation. Okay. Then you get runners in scoring position
(16:38):
with one of your better guys at place at the plate,
absolutely you're gonna turn them loose. Another big one for
me was two outs, nobody on two outs nobody on.
My thoughts to my hitters was doubles are better on
that three and zero count. Two outs nobody on base
or even two outs with a runner on first base
is a ball, double gap whatever, that's a run. That's
(16:58):
a point right there. So there's I would say, probably
the leadoff three to zero count with substantial folks behind him,
probably the one time I'm okay with it. However, as
the when things become more complicated with base runners or
even like I said, without and you got doubles. A
(17:19):
bet that was. This is something I taught myself in
Selena's California Swhere to God in what was that seventy
seven seventy eight. I really I would get to the
point with you know, three and three zero count runner
on first or nobody on which I really try to
drive the gap or better than I. Listen, I didn't
have that kind of power, but I did it some
home runs that year. But the point was, mentally, I
was looking for, Okay, I'm this three to ozer pitch man,
(17:40):
I'm going to try to go gap or more in
that situation. So I had this argument, brother, I'm telling
you Tommy with Andrew years ago, because I was permitting
the three and oh swing for the reasons I just
gave you, and I try to say, not all three
and o counts are created equally. You got to look
at them differently. You can't look at them all the same. See,
that's where analytics has a hard time because it's it's sterile.
(18:03):
You know, it doesn't have a nuance about it. It's
just flat black and white numbers one, two or zero. Whatever.
It's just that's all it is. So there is nuance.
There's different reasons to either take this pitch which are
more minimal compared to the reasons why you should go
after it.
Speaker 1 (18:20):
That's a great point with runners on base, and I
did ask Aaron Boone about that, and he did say, yeah,
even it doesn't matter where you are in the lineup
in that situation. Pelasios is batting with runners on first
and second in a TI game, eighth inning. Yeah, that's
no position to be just looking at a strike and
quote unquote working walk. And by the way, the Cubs
are a team that has swung the baut once this
(18:43):
year in more than one hundred pitches, one of three
to zero counts. So, as I said, it seems to
be the way the game is going. And I realized,
I love your point about situational. The situation matters during
these things. But again, I think hitting is so difficult
in today's game. I just when I see guys just
concede flat out three to zero. I'm not winging, it's
(19:06):
it's something that turns my stomach. Man, I think you're
gonna get You're not gonna get another fastball. The idea that, oh,
what he threw three to oho, you'm gonna get it
at three, three one, or what I see at three, Well,
I'm going to get three to two. Not in today's game.
If you've been paying attention, uh, and we're going to
talk about that next and how much pitching has changed.
I'd love to get Joe's taken on this because he's
seen it all. We'll do that right after this on
(19:28):
the Book of Joe. Welcome back to the Book of Joe. Hey, Joe,
I'm sure you've seen a lot of Christopher Sanchez this year.
How good is he right now?
Speaker 2 (19:46):
I love him, absolutely love him. That's David Price two
point zero whatever, I love him. I love him.
Speaker 1 (19:53):
I say he's old school because he's a three pitch pitcher.
Speaker 2 (19:57):
That's it.
Speaker 1 (19:58):
Yeah, he is analog. I mean I don't think he's
been in the lab trying to seven different pitches in
four different directions. It is old school. Here's my stuff,
I'm gonna stick with it. And he's one of only
three starting pitchers in the game that throw only three pitches.
And I looked at this, Joe, that eighty six percent
(20:19):
of starting pitchers in the major leagues today throw at
least five different pitches. That's where we're at. It's become
such a game of what can you cover as a
hitter because everybody is coming up with that three fastball
mix right, four seemer that rides cutter to glove side,
two seamer to arm side, and then you've got probably
(20:41):
two different breaking balls at least, and then you have
some kind of an off speed pitch. Lately, it's been
a lot of splits. This is what almost everybody in
the game is doing. It's fascinating to see. I just think, Joe,
that we're seeing a lot of great hitters struggle, and
I not understand that happens every year, but I think
(21:02):
hitting has changed so fast. I chalk it up to
the fact that a few years ago, pitchers were all
chasing for seeing velo and everybody was talking about vert
everyone was talking about velocity, getting behind the ball, running
at top rail. Hitters adjusted to that. Now it's about
giving hitters such a different menu that I think hitting
now you almost have to pick a side of the plate.
(21:24):
You just until you get two strikes. You just can't
cover as many places and spins as pitchers are going.
Speaker 2 (21:31):
Well, didn't we talk about this several years ago or
even then when I was with the Cubs. The one
thing we noticed when we got to the playoffs, there'd
be an increase of breaking ball stone during the playoffs
as opposed to the regular season, and that we thought
that was a big part of our decline offensively in
the postseason. You know, we win the World Series, but
we got we got really shut down versus the Mets,
(21:53):
and then twenty seventeen we had a wonderful game against
the Nationals in Washington and then got shut down versus
the Dodgers, and then it got worse after that. All
of it, a lot of it was you were saying,
the proliferation of the breaking ball, the fact that more
of them were thrown, and only see they're thrown if
there's really good velocity within this mix of the pitcher.
(22:16):
And you hear about tunneling a lot where the pitch
comes out of the same area, that makes it even
more difficult, So now you have to respect velocity because
he's got it. And then which caused you to commit
sooner because they'll look. Guys will look at the gun
in order to put the like they set their mental clock,
like when do I got to get started when it's
that they have an idea when to get started when
the numbers that high. So all of these things contribute
(22:38):
to make it more difficult at the plate. So I
think you're one hundred percent right. Always is the proliferation
of the breaking ball. I think the advent of that
was kind of like in the twenty fifteen, sixteen, seventy
and eighteen when in the postseason became more apparent that
breaking balls became more prominent, and that then why not
do that during the course of the season also, and
(23:00):
then here comes the pitching labs, shaping and all this
other kind of stuff, and we're we've arrived at the
point we have right now. And then you can compound
that with trying to lift the ball and guys just
going for the all or nothing approach and really not
having this ability. You know, you know the concept I
love that I don't hear enough is filling your filling
two strike foul balls. I'm not talking about the one
(23:22):
that's the one that you got to hit, because that's
that's the one that's got to be put in playing hard.
But there's a lot of these borderline well thrown pitches.
Foul balls with two strikes are good. I used to
tell my guys that all the time. Next pitch, next pitch,
next pitch. There's an art to that. Orlando pal Mary
used to practice it in batting practice. He used to
actually foul balls if you're standing off to the left
and he's a left handed hitter, so it's coming right
(23:43):
out your face. He let a ball get so deep
and he's hitting line drives into the net while you're
standing off to the left, not even anywhere near the
field of play, because that's what op practiced. So foul
balls are good with two strikes, except for the one
that you like. That's the one that's got to go fair. However,
that's that's what's happening. And if you have like this
one size fit, it's all mentality within your swing. Because
(24:06):
I've had it. I've had in meetings with the Angels
back when I was there, going over some hitting hitting concepts,
and I brought it to the table there that I
like two strike approach. I called it a b hack,
and I gave the reasons why. Then I was being
disagreed with by really young analytical people that have never
done it before, and they're purely going off of like
(24:27):
numbers or percentages or whatever it is, and they're not
in the batter's box. Against certain pitches that are really difficult,
they're not going to give you that pitch to go
deep with, especially on two strike. I ain't going to
see it. It ain't happening. So you have to have
another method of getting to the next pitch, Get to
the next pitch, get to the next pitch. That would
(24:47):
be the kind of rallying cry would give my guys.
So until the adjustments are made to a certain degree,
at least cut down on the strikeouts and move the
ball with two strikes and take your chances that way.
But if you have a one size fits all kind
of a mental approach and swing, it's not going to happen.
Speaker 1 (25:04):
As you were saying that, in my mind, I was
seeing Freddy Freeman doing exactly that. To me, he's the
modern master of Palmero in terms of just spoiling pitches
and getting to another one just literally, you know, almost
hitting the ball out of the catcher's glove to extend
the bet. So Sanchez is a sinker pitcher, sinker slider
(25:24):
change up. That's it, the four scene fastball. I find
this fascinating, Joe in the nineteen seasons of pitch tracking
four seam fastballs and when we know they're harder than ever. Right,
velocity's average v law at a four seamer now is
ninety four point six. Ten years ago it was ninety
three point two. And what's interesting to me too, they
(25:44):
look at perceived velocity, which basically means where the pitcher
is letting the ball go closer to the plate, the
faster the pitch is going to seem to the hitter.
It's kind of like, you know nowadays the rage is
not just giving you the temperature, but feels like temperature. Right, right,
we didn't have that as kids.
Speaker 2 (26:01):
Joe feels like we had one number.
Speaker 1 (26:03):
That's it, just to make you feel really bad. You know,
it's hot now it actually feels hotter than it actually is.
Speaker 2 (26:10):
What is that?
Speaker 1 (26:11):
So this is feels like temperature on four seemers where
because they do such a great job developing and teaching
these pictures and the extension they're getting. The perceived velocity
is actually higher than the actual velocity. That was not
true ten years ago. So anyway, it's a long way
of telling you that fastballs are better than ever, but
(26:32):
they're throwing them less than ever. Thirty percent. That's down
from thirty six percent ten years ago. So and I
looked at fastballs in the zone. That's down two percent
just since last year. Only sixteen percent of the time
a hitter is going to see a four seam fastball
in the strike zone. I do think this is not
(26:55):
a cop out for hitters because you look at the
Major league batting averages these days. You know, if you're
hitting like two forty, that's okay. I do think it's
harder to never to hit in the game today. There's
just way too much to cover.
Speaker 2 (27:06):
Do you have numbers regarding a forcing fastball? The numbers
are just versus forcing fastballs in his own Do you
have any numbers on that.
Speaker 1 (27:15):
At all, as far as what's in the zone and
what's not in the zone?
Speaker 2 (27:18):
Yeah? Or the result is the good result, because there's times, man,
I want the forcing fastball on his own the two
seamer is going to move and it's still gonna be
thrown pretty hard. But I think the hitter sees it
better just by the fact that it's gonna move a
little bit, and of course if it's in the right spot,
nobody hits it. But the forcing fastball gets on hitters
a lot, and their mind is like, it's hard to
(27:40):
just I've already discussed that they have this little thing
in their head about numbers velocity, but if they're if
in the back of their mind they're thinking soft, that
at all that forcing fastballs and the catchers met before
you know it. I mean, there are certain hitters man
that are good, and I watch a lot. I watch
my videos in the morning normally, and guys will hit
(28:00):
home runs or have a good night, and I want
to know what pitches did they hit. And I'm saying
I believe bad breaking balls in the zone that these
hitters like is the one that gets crushed more than
I don't normally see just a solid, forcing fastball just
getting ridden on like I see a poorly defined or
placed breaking ball, something soft that speeds somebody up. So
(28:22):
this goes in so many different directions, and it's something
I've always struggled with because I've always loved the well
located fastball. I've always loved the well located forcing fastball.
And off of that, I love the good arm speed
change up and then the two seamers great, and I
love it. And if you have a real one at
the balls on the ground, great. The hitters are going
(28:44):
to let you know how good it is by how
many balls are put on the ground. But when you
get those high sinkers going in gaps, that's not so cool.
So again I hear what you're saying. I understand what
you're saying. The other point of why I keep hearing
different things about different different guns and registering velocity. And
like when I was a kid doing the scouting, I
had the one gun the jugsn that registered out of
(29:05):
the hand, and then the ray gun gave you two
readings out of the hand at home plate. So when
they're talking about these big numbers with velocity, where exactly
is the number coming from out of the hand or
at home plate? To have any idea on.
Speaker 1 (29:17):
That, Yeah, as soon as it leaves the hand, So
that's that's actually the highest that can possibly be as
soon as you let it go it starts to slow down.
Obviously it's not breaking up speed, right, So that's yeah,
it started. It's been a while now, I want to
say at least a decade, maybe right around ten years
that that was the true measuring point. It used to
be slightly in front of the picture. So yeah, some
(29:38):
of the numbers are apples and oranges if you go
farther back.
Speaker 2 (29:41):
Yeah, right, as usual.
Speaker 1 (29:43):
Back in the day, the numbers used to differ by
a lot, right, depending on what gun.
Speaker 2 (29:47):
You're a lot man. Well, at the old Scouts, the
old Scouts, Gene Thompson especially, and Gino was the best.
He was one of the best. I had Christopher who
might have been the best. He's like these guys are
in the Hall of Fame, Scout in Hall of Fame.
He didn't use the gun. He did not want a gun.
He would watch from the side Angel Figueroa. He never
wanted the gun, but he'd always say, what you get
(30:07):
on that one? I love the Angel. But the you know,
the thing is Gino wanted the ray gun because Red
Gaskell was another one. My god, how do you bring
up Fred Gaskell? But it was the velocity. You get
two numbers they they I think you hold the trigger
down on the ray gun and the moment the release,
you would let the trigger go or vice versa, and
(30:28):
you'd get you get two numbers. You'd have to watch
the gun. You get the number out of the hand,
and we see the rollback and the number at home plate.
And it was really big for these guys to get
a better number. If you're looking at a guy, you know,
you had the deceptive pitchers, you had the lefties with deception.
You may have had, you know, a rity or two
with something an exceptional split whatever or a forkball back
in the day, So that's different. I mean, if if
(30:49):
I'm on a pitcher that didn't have premium velocity, but
he had another really good curveball. I love curveballs, real curveballs,
loved great changeups. And then of course handed this mattered
in that too, So that was all an exception. But
when you got when you got the velocity we're looking
for on that raygun, these old boys man, that guy
(31:11):
that picture got pushed really fast. So I'm just saying
just for the fans' perspective so that they know, because
we're hearing about all the great numbers today and they
are good, but that kind of diminishes some of what
you may think of the pictures of the past, because
these guys brought it to now. I don't know what
the numbers were exactly, because my gun, Charlie kerkfelt through
(31:34):
the highest number on my speed gun as a young
scout at Yabapai Junior College. You got Charlie at ninety seven,
ninety seven, ninety eight on my jugs gun. That was
the quicker gun. So it's out of his hand. And
I could not get Lloyd to like him at all.
Lloyd Christopher, he was my crosschecker. Lloyd did not like him.
For whatever reason. He did not like him, probably his
(31:54):
body type, whatever. And I eventually had to say to
Lloyd one day, Lloyd, you don't like anybody, anybody turning.
You don't like him. So who's going to be playing
in the big in five years if you're in charge
of that. Nobody plays in the big leagues in five years.
Speaker 1 (32:08):
Love that man, absolutely loved him, if I remember this correctly.
Wasn't it a coach at Michigan State who first thought
of the idea of using a radar gun to track
pitches and literally brought in like a police buddy and
his gun. The track pitches, and then it was somebody
that Earl Weaver knew. And Earl Weaver was the one
who introduced it on the major league level, and he
(32:28):
thought it was a great tool to keep track of
some of his starting pitchers who are losing their stuff
later in the game. Earl was ahead of his time.
Speaker 2 (32:36):
I agree with that. I agree with that because I
like it for that reason too. Like we're just these
there's like extemporary moments here. But Edwin Jackson pitching in Texas.
You know, Eddie was up and down. But God with
an athlete with a great arm. So we're playing in
Texas one, he's got it going on. The ninety ninth
pitch he threw was ninety nine miles an hour. I'm
not going to take him out.
Speaker 1 (32:57):
He was built like a horse too. That guy could throw.
Speaker 2 (32:59):
Oh my god. He was great guy too, wonderful you know.
Speaker 1 (33:02):
Now, speaking of pitching, I think Paul Schemes to me,
Joe is the epitome of where pitching has evolved. I
mean he does it at an exceptional level. I mean
it's elite, right, but he's got so many different pitches.
That's just a handful for a hitter to try to cover.
And I think sho Hey Otani is getting into this category.
We have to talk about show Hey again, Joe, because
(33:22):
it's just it continues to amaze me how good, great
he has become as a pitcher. Oh seven to three ERA.
He's made eight starts and given up four earned runs
with two strikes against him. The batting average is oh
ninety two, the three for thirty with runners in the
scoring position. He's not given up a home run with
(33:44):
runners on base. And I was talking to Dave Roberts
about this the other day, and yes, there's a lot
of talk about how sho he wants to win the
Cy Young Award, which is obviously a very cool thing.
I want my players to be the best, and that's
the best pitcher of the year. That's what he wants
to be. I get it. But as Dave Roberts said,
this is year two. Now where his stuff now? He said,
(34:04):
shoe Hey right now feels like he can do anything
that he wants with the baseball, and he could do
a lot of things with the baseball. You know, he
grew up wanting to be a pitcher, and the whole
two way thing came about when he was graduating high
school and was drafted by you cult and the manager
talked him into being a two way guy. But when
(34:24):
he sat down in high school wrote down all of
his life less life goals in terms of the game
of baseball. They were all about pitching. There was nothing
in there about hitting. I think this is in his heart.
You could disagree with me, Joe. You've had him as
a player, you know that. I think show Hey right
now is finding him his true self on the mound. Listen,
He's a two way player, don't get me wrong, but
(34:45):
I think he's enjoying the heck out of finding ways
to beat hitters.
Speaker 2 (34:49):
Two things stood out to me about his game yesterday.
He hit the leadoff hitter right.
Speaker 1 (34:54):
HiT's the first pitch for a home run?
Speaker 2 (34:56):
Right? Right? I mean, And again that goes back to
the refrain that he believes the team has a better
chance to win when he pitches and hits simultaneously. And
then the next one I might have been the fifth inning.
I think he only went five yesterday, eighty eight pitches
something like that. But when he was coming off the mound,
did you see the emotion of him coming off the mound.
I mean, that says it all. You'll see him be
(35:18):
emotional hitting wise, but I guess there's a pump there
when he's when he's pitching, there's an adrenaline surge there
that I think it exceeds anything he does offensively, and
he does a lot of stuff off fensively. But when
he's able to throw a pitch by a hitter in
a crucial moment, or get out of a tough jam,
or the WBC a couple years ago, when he strikes
(35:40):
out Trotty, that's like that really resonated to me because
I saw a part of him I had had Nazie,
he's got be reserved. He celebrates in a nice, calm,
show hey kind of way, but that's kind of gone.
He is absolutely more demonstrative in his feelings right now,
and like you're suggesting, and it might be how it
(36:00):
dovetails into what he loves to do, but it just
seems on the map there's a more of a visceral
reaction after he does something. Well, now, that's kind of
if you think about it, maybe you know as a
hitterot he's not going to want to show up the
other side. He might backflip a little bitter how he
comes on a basis, But on the mound, man, it
comes out. It's like a lion roaring out there. Man,
(36:21):
when he does something really well, you can see how
much he's into it.
Speaker 1 (36:25):
Dave Roberts, his manager, is seeing the same thing.
Speaker 2 (36:27):
Joe.
Speaker 1 (36:28):
He told me that right now on the mound, show
Hey looks like he is possessed. That's the word that
he used. It's just so fun to watch. And by
the way, I hope people never get used to this.
It's only the second time in history the starting pitcher
hit a lead off home run. The other was show
Hey in the playoffs against the Brewers. There's nobody else
(36:50):
like him, I mean at this stage in his career.
If you look at his number of games in which
he's batted and the number of games in which he
has pitched, he's in the top ten in both home
runs at this stage of a hitter's career and strikeouts
of a pitcher's career, and the ones closest to him
in both categories in terms of home runs Babe Ruth
(37:12):
and in terms of strikeouts, Roger Clemens. He's a combination
of Babe Ruth and Roger Clemens in the same player,
same player. It's crazy, and I hope people never get
used to it.
Speaker 2 (37:23):
I don't well the thing that also leads or blends
in with the arguments that have been cataloged over the
last couple of years. He should just be a hitter,
he should just be a pitcher. You're seeing something like
you just suggested, you're not. You have not seen before,
you're not going to see again, and you could understand
why he needs to do both. I mean, those arguments
(37:44):
have always been disturbing to me because originally he came
here for a specific reason that was to do both.
And to deny him the opportunity to do one or
the other I think is wrong. And I know he's
been hurt pitching wise, and he's had the surgeries and
there can be a detriment to that to the team
while he's recovering, no doubt about it. However, I don't know.
I think it's worth taking the chance that he may
(38:06):
get hurt again while we experience the demonstration of skills
that he's putting on right now. It's definitely worth it.
So I never want to see him get hurt again.
Nobody ever wants see him get hurt again, but his
ability to play the game as well as he does
on both sides. I'm here to tell you, man, if
they wanted to stick him on defense, I'll shock you
(38:27):
there too. He's that good.
Speaker 1 (38:28):
What is it you like to say? Never get in
the way of genius.
Speaker 2 (38:31):
That's right. Never get in a way of greatness, you know,
or genius is another way of putting it. Yeah, we
too many times we think we know and we don't know.
So for me it's as extent, never get in a
way of greatness. And I think sometimes leaders leadership in
a sense, those who were in charge maybe is a
better word, will try to manufacture reasons, and it's a
(38:53):
manufactured reason. It's not. There's no You could do all
the data research you want. You could come up with
all the different things that you choose rationalization process as
if to why this should not be so. But just enjoy,
folks like you just suggested, just enjoy it. Enjoy the show. Literally,
(39:14):
he's that good. I never want to see him get
hurt again, and with good health, hopefully he's going to
do things. He's already has done things. But by the
time this is all over with you're gonna be happy
that everybody's got out of the way of his greatness
and let him both pitch and hit well.
Speaker 1 (39:30):
Speaking of greatness and smart people, I know, Joe Madden,
you're a big fan of the Royal Observatory, Greenwich. Every kay,
they've issued a warning that all of us, I mean
all of us better pay attention to I'll let you
know what that is right.
Speaker 2 (39:47):
After this.
Speaker 1 (40:00):
Welcome back to the book with Joe. So I mentioned
the Royal Observatory Greenwich. It's a bunch of really smart
people and they've issued a warning here about artificial intelligence. Joe,
and I think, I think you're gonna You're gonna like
what they say, but at the same time be scared
by it. They pointed out that we as human beings,
we're paying a really heavy price for this incredible breakthrough
(40:26):
with artificial intelligence, and the price is dulling the human
mind and weakening human intelligence. It's basically instant gratification, and
that's that's what our society is about now. We are
infatuated with convenience. We want things as easily and as
quickly as possible, and we've lost the not the ability,
(40:52):
but the appreciation for things that are well earned, that
there's part of failure that brings you to arrival at intelligence,
skill and conclusion that is going away, and now AI
is making that go away really really fast. So one
of the people at the observatory is the director of
(41:13):
the Royal Museum's Greenwich over the UK, guy by the
name of Patti Rodgers, and he said, of reliance solely
on instant answers, which is what AI is, risks losing
the habits of questioning and evaluation that underpin knowledge, expertise
and innovation. Essentially, what we're doing is we're farming out
(41:36):
the ability to use our minds. That's what you're talking
about when you're talking about the habits of questioning and evaluation.
That is freethinking, and our love affair and our chase
of the easy answer is literally making us dumber. And
(41:56):
I know that's an overstatement to a lot of people,
but I think that's a warning AI is not going away.
Speaker 2 (42:01):
I get it.
Speaker 1 (42:02):
I'm not a ludite here. We have to learn how
to manage it and not just let it run and
take away our ability to reason, think and be creative.
Speaker 2 (42:15):
I could have written that maybe not that well, but
from the beginning. That was my concern too. I thought
big part of it was it should never be incorporated
into the arts because that's where creativity, imagination really needs
to be the human element right there. As an example,
I mean, okay, recently I got re rebranded my foundation
to two burned Feet from respect ninety, right, So all
(42:37):
of a sudden, we know we need a logo, and
then talking with some people that are helping me out,
and all of a sudden it comes back some logos
and sure enough, all these logos were done via artificial
intelligence AI. They just throw some words at it comes back,
and I didn't like any of them. They were very sterile.
There was obviously just it's like clip art was almost
(42:59):
like clip art done expediently without any a lot of
real thought to it, not whatever. So that's just an
example to the arts, you know, whether it's writing books
or creating music or acting whatever. The arts cannot be
infiltrated by this. It is so wrong on every level
to me, Like I said, I think from the beginning, medicine, yeah,
(43:20):
let's go baby. When it comes to defense, national defense, absolutely,
I think it's a big part of that. Also, there's
there's areas that you always want to there's certain areas
that we cannot We want as much help as we
possibly can get, right, because we can't see everything. For instance,
just trying to cure cancer, yes, apply as much to
(43:42):
it as you possibly can. But to write the next
greatest novel, no, no, not at all, not even a
little bit, to the next, to the next Da Vinci
or Michael Ancher, No, what you know, you'd never want
to be influenced or not influenced. You don't want to
be substituted in that way. It's it's a form of analytics. Sorry,
(44:03):
but it is. It is analytics, and it's it's on
steroids probably right. And the more we rely on data numbers,
et cetera, the less people are going to think. And
that will suggest that there and I totally agree with that.
And that's as a leader within a group of let's
just say a team, you want to empower your people
(44:24):
to think on their own, come up with their own thoughts,
and when they do, they become part of ownership and
then there's a total buying on their part. But anything's
in situations where you do not permit your people to
be heard and be totally invested ownership doesn't occur, and
thus you know when you lose, it's not that big
of a deal because, after all, I'm not being heard
(44:46):
here anyhow. I've always believed that I want it on
a daily basis. I want Tommy Berducci to feel as
though he can make an impact on my coaching staff.
I want to stay out every way. You make an
impact based on your years of experience, your knowledge, what
makes what makes you tick, What are you seeing right
now that I'm seeing or anybody else, That to me
is fascinating and good. But to rely on information coming
(45:10):
out of a machine to tell me all of that
and then then I'm going to buy into it. I'm
going to utilize that over Tommy's years of experience. That's
why I have a hard time with all of it.
That's again just just replace. Just like you're replacing managers
and dugouts, you're replacing human beings with this. It's it's
all interconnected, and it's wrong. It's wrong, and it's not cool,
(45:31):
and God blessed the Tampa Bay Rays in Milwaukee Brewers.
Speaker 1 (45:35):
Well, I love your analogy to analytics because there's a
lot of comparisons there and the one that jumps out
to me is AI is always going to give you
a polished answer. This is the truth, even though it
literally is making it up sometimes because it's based on
you know, whatever junk information went into the AI that
they scanned. And that's kind of sometimes the way analytics
(45:56):
gets that. There has to be a black and white,
you know, a number based answer to explain something. And
the danger here is that people accept what AI is
telling them as truth as fact, and it's not verifiable fact.
And I think that's why schools at a very early
age now, because as you said, we all know it's
not going away, it's only going to be more prevalent,
(46:19):
has to teach AI literacy to we have to question,
just as you as a baseball person, Joe, all of
us as baseball people have to use analytics as a tool,
but also don't put away your questions. Don't accept everything
as fact when in fact it's not really fact. It's interesting,
(46:40):
you know, Sam Altman from Open AI, he's described AI
going forward as it could be like a metered service
like information and intelligence would be sold like water or
electricity based on usage. That's based on a business model,
and that's where we're headed where AI. As you mentioned
in the medical world, Yeah, it's amazing and the things
(47:03):
we will learn and benefit from are amazing. But the
business model, at least in the US, seems to be
more business based without enough concern on the cultural impact
and how it literally is retraining our minds when it
comes to mental effort. I think there has to be
much more concern about that rather than just accepting this
(47:24):
as some kind of a business model that it's the
next great thing.
Speaker 2 (47:28):
Thousand percent and good, make me pay for it, because
if you're going to make me pay for it, I'll
do it on my own. That's what a lot of
people are going to do, because you know, there's okay,
I e I've just had to buy a tractor lawnmower
because I have this big piece of grass I got
to cut right. So this is where it was good.
I needed to know the difference between the simplicity tractor.
(47:49):
I think it was the Prestige versus a cub Cadet
and maybe a couple others the snap or whatever. So
I just qureed it in that way and it comes
down with you know, a list of pros and cons.
That's cool. That's cool. Because what else am I I mean,
I don't I'm not literate on tractors. I talked to
a buddy that knew something about him. He steered me
in the right direction. But god, it was great for that.
(48:11):
It was expedient. I got some quick answers. I was
able to make compare and contrast, and I finally figured
out which was the right one for me based on
some of these answers. There's that wrong with that. I
think that's actually a good usage of it. But it's
not me. It wasn't. Like another example, we have a
scholarship program from my pop's name on an annual basis
(48:32):
that we give out. It's a thousand bucks scholarship. So
we have kids write letters reasons why they deserve the scholarship, right,
and what I'm reading through them, and oh my god,
it was so obvious, like the kids that actually wrote it.
And then there was like two or three of them.
I said, oh my god, I mean, like you're saying
it was like perfect. The punctuation was perfect, the way
(48:54):
it was extrapolated to how it was drawn out, and
everything was written in so well. It was like no way,
no way, Like there was two or three of them
just like that. That's that's it. I mean, I think
that's recognizable to the trained die like say in a
college situation where you're gonna be you know, papers are
gonna be written via that tool. But for me, that
(49:15):
backed me off of these different ones regarding who should
win the prize, and I didn't have I wasn't one
hundred percent sure, but I was like ninety eight percent
sure based on how perfect this thing actually was. So
that I want, I want your thoughts, I want your feelings,
I want your experience, I want your knowledge, I want
your wisdom, your intuition. That's what I'm paying for. I
(49:35):
unless it's like I'm comping two tractors in a moment
because they got to make a decision because they got
to buy this thing very quick. I don't have time
to do all that research. Different world.
Speaker 1 (49:45):
Well, to me, Joe, the seed of innovation, discovery, breakthrough,
and in some ways genius is curiosity.
Speaker 2 (49:53):
Of course.
Speaker 1 (49:54):
I mean you know that the most creative people, it
all begins with curiosity. I say that to young reporters
who you want to be journalists, you better be curious.
And when you start losing in curiosity, you've lost the
essence of what it means to be a journalist because
it's about finding things out. And yes, it's presenting them
and you know, intelligent, understandable ways, but you have to
(50:16):
be curious. And I think great genius does begin with curiosity.
And I'm afraid that what we're doing here, and this
is the warning from the Royal Observatory, is that we're
kind of replacing that curiosity with the convenience of something
we think is genius. But if you think about AI
(50:37):
and the words, the first word is artificial, we have
to remember that, Yeah.
Speaker 2 (50:42):
It's artificial sweetener a little bit and my iced tea.
I'm okay with that, but I really try to stay
away from that word as much as I possibly can.
I cannot agree more with what the assessment is coming from.
We said it was Greenwich. Yes, yeah, I cannot agree
with that more. That's been you know, synopsis of my
(51:04):
thoughts from the moment this really became popular, and quite frankly,
I remember back like out even fifteen twenty years ago,
and it's weird. Somebody says, you know, like fifteen twenty
years from now, there's going to be your computer is
going to actually have not there's not going to be
components within. It's gonna be almost like fluid or liquid,
like a human brain. That's I remember that specifically being
told to me, and God has scared me back then.
(51:27):
I mean, we see enough science fiction movies. We know
what it could be and all these different things that
can get out of control. Why is that? Why is
that interesting? It's just a lazy way of being a
human being.
Speaker 1 (51:38):
Well, it's like you say, with analytics, you know they're
great and you want as much as you can, but
don't be afraid to question them as well. Right, that's right,
that's right. Absolutely, Sorry to get you off on that track,
but I do think it's really important that we continue
to ask these questions and not just blindly except that
on I don't even want to use the word faith,
but just because it's something new and especially convenient. We
(52:01):
are kings of convenience and we've got to get back
to just kind of questioning things and uh an analog baseball.
Speaker 2 (52:10):
Bring it on, big boy, bring it on. I love that.
Still working on the T shirt, folks, that's going to.
Speaker 1 (52:14):
Happen, So bring us home here, Joe, what do you
have to end this edition where We've talked a lot
about some of these analog baseball teams, Brewers, Rays, Guardians.
It's a fun time to see that kind of style
coming back.
Speaker 2 (52:27):
Yeah, and I think this fits actually, and it comes
from Anne Ran and Rand. She wrote Atlas Shrugged was
the other one, fountain fountain Head fountain Head right, introduced
to me by Ken Brett Memry Can Brett. Oh yeah, brother,
what a good.
Speaker 1 (52:43):
Guy he was in boy, he could have been a
two way player exactly.
Speaker 2 (52:47):
There you go. You're right. He was a broadcast with
the Angel when I first got up, but he was
He was a voracious reader too, so he always comped
different things. So he turned me on. Ann Ran. He
loved he loved Atlas Shrugged, Beret or did he loved it?
And from that this was my you know, I kind
of used the word earlier. We were talking about rationalization
and a lot of this is, you know, rationalization, and
(53:09):
this is a great definition. Rationalization is a process of
not perceiving reality, but of attempting to make reality fit
one's emotions or in this situation, you're going to hear
all these reasons why AI is good based on the
fact somebody stands to make a lot of money out
of it. I don't even know if that's emotion or not,
but I think it is. So rationalization is a process
(53:29):
of not perceiving reality. And I was reading today a
little bit about the Fulpy to shortstop or Cavaliro. What
are we going to do right there? And you know,
the part that they're making a case for Folpy was rationalization.
I thought, and listen, I want this kid to do
so well. I am. I always want to work with that,
(53:50):
first of all. But the point is Caballero deserves this
job back when he gets when he's well, So don't
start giving me all these different rationalizations because you're not
perceiving reality and you're trying to fit in emotion right here.
So that's that happens too often when you're dealing with
a grown up sport like baseball. You want black and white.
If I tell you the truth, you might not like
me for a week or ten days, but if I
(54:10):
lie to you gonna hate me forever. So that's what
got me on this thread today. And then you follow
it up with all this stuff that you researched today
for our show, and it was perfect. So the rationalization
process is not perceiving reality.
Speaker 1 (54:24):
Great stuff as always in great series coming up this
weekend Raising the Yankees. Lots of good series coming up,
but that one really stood out to me. So great stuff, Joe.
We will see you next time on.
Speaker 2 (54:34):
The Book of Joe. Thanks Tommy, well done.
Speaker 1 (54:44):
The Book of Joe podcast is a production of iHeartRadio.
For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts,
or wherever you get your podcasts.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Hey Jonas!
Hey Jonas! The official Jonas Brothers podcast. Hosted by Kevin, Joe, and Nick Jonas. It’s the Jonas Brothers you know... musicians, actors, and well, yes, brothers. Now, they’re sharing another side of themselves in the playful, intimate, and irreverent way only they can. Spend time with the Jonas Brothers here and stay a little bit longer for deep conversations like never before.
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.