When the Red Sox offered Jason Bay four years, $60 million, they offered more than enough for the defensive liability that is Jason Bay.  Bay quickly declined, and decided that his best interests are exploring the free agent market.

Fine.

Bay was given a very fair, make that more than fair contract offer, and he chose to see what else is out there.  Whether that be for location (he's from the northwest), or for financial reasons (another team may make the mistake of giving him too much).

Bay can hit, and he can hit anywhere.  We know that.  But we also know that his skill-set doesn't age particularly well.  He can't play defense, and is a corner outfielder that may need to be a DH to not hinder his teams chances down the road.  He walks back to the dugout often without putting the ball in play.  And he struggles with the breaking stuff.

Simply put, at age 35, Bay may be simply taking a roster spot that could be used more resourcefully, especially for the money he might be getting paid.

With that being said, the Red Sox have a need, and they have the ability to flex their financial muscles when needed, at least in most cases.  If Bay doesn't play left field, then who?

Matt Holliday?  Many questions lingering around him, and more money involved.

Josh Reddick?  After he performs consistently in the minors, then give me a call.

A platoon?  Talk to me AFTER Jeremy Hermida learns how to use his God-given skills.

They could take a chance on something, and if it works, then it works.  If it doesn't, then so be it.

Bay is the safest, for he is a known quantity, but he too brings much risk.

Reddick and whoever else is in the minors would be the most financially sensible plan, but they too have questions.

If Bay doesn't want this contract, the Red Sox should not budge at all.  They have more important things in mind.

And that is the future...

An exploration of the future...

Fangraphs had an article recently, describing both players' (Jay Bay and Mike Cameron) past impact.  And ultimately coming to the conclusion that Cameron has been more valuable than Bay in recent years.

Why you say?

Cameron is a defensive pleasure, and one that covers ground in center rather than at a corner.

Bay is a liability, disguised by the eyes that watch him, and a giant lingering wall that takes away some of the ground he wouldn't be able to handle to begin with.

By the "eyes that watch him?"  Yes, Bay doesn't look bad out in left, in fact he looks like a definite upgrade over what we used to watch out there.  Manny was notorious for taking funky looking paths to the ball, and making circus catches...or circus misplays, all while possessing terrible range.

Bay doesn't do that.  Bay breaks to the ball, wide-eyed, alert on making the play, and rarely does he not make the play on a ball within his range.  But what is within his range isn't exactly a lot.

His UZR is terrible.  And since UZR has to be taken in doses that are greater than a year, preferably three, then Bay has been the worst defensive left fielder in baseball, among qualifying defenders.

And my friends, the metrics don't lie.  They may not be omnipotent, but they definitely do not lie.

Anyway, over those same three years, Cameron has, according to UZR, been the second best defensive center fielder in the game, behind only BJ Upton.

Not too shabby.

Basically, Bay is a very good offensive player, but gives back a lot with his inability to be even an average defender.  Cameron however, plays very good defense, even as he is not the same force at the plate as Bay.

But what about now?  After all, that was the past.  Cameron is now 37.  Bay is 31.  Will Cameron still be "better" than Bay?  And what about if Cameron were signed by an AL East tea, such as, well, how about the Red Sox?

We know Bay can hit AL East pitching.  Even though he has a few holes in his swing, strikes out a ton, and struggles with the breaking stuff.  He still has the ability to work the count, draw walks, and hit for enormous power.  And he does that against any pitching in baseball.  Although naturally, struggles with the better arms in the game, just like everyone else does.

Would Cameron respond well with the bat in a return to the AL?  Or is his "success" due in large part to a weaker, inferior National League?

That is a legitimate question, as I am not just pounding the "league difference" argument into your head because it is such a hot topic nowadays.  Cameron would definitely see some decline with the stick, switching to the stronger league.  How would his defensive talents translate into his overall game if he hit for a lower average, reached base a little less, and slugged a few less over the fence?

The one thing, other than Cameron's good D, that is playing in his favor, is his "ability" to sign a one year deal, two at the most.  Sure, he is old.  But is one year at say, $10 million much more comforting to a front office than 4 years, $60-65 mill?

Sure sounds like it would be.

Cameron may or may not have been better than Jason Bay, it is fairly close.  And metrics aren't perfect.

But could we really blame a front office for choosing to bring in Cameron for one year, rather than Bay for multiple seasons?  Especially if they happen to have a left fielder waiting in the wings?

Although subjectively, trust me, I would want Jason Bay.

Please comment at my new site.

Please comment at my new site. Thanks.

Since Cliff Lee teamed up with Cole Hamels in Philly, the Phils now feature a great 1-2 punch at the top of their rotation. Two very good left-handed pitchers, both with great seasons behind them, and much greatness left in front of them. They make up what is easily one of the best in the game.  And come playoff time, that matters a lot.

So I decided to take it upon myself to rank the five best "1-2's" in the game. And there are plenty of good ones, so it was difficult to narrow it down to just the five. I could have gone ten deep with this post...

The five best 1-2's are:

Tim Lincecum/Matt Cain: Lincecum is arguably the best pitcher in the game. A great righty, short in stature, large at heart--and in the numbers. Lincecum has posted the highest 'WAR' in baseball the past two seasons with an awesome 14.8 (among pitchers). In addition to that, he also has the lowest FIP, and the lowest ERA.  Lincecum is definitely the better of the two, but his counterpart can hold his own, without a doubt.

Matt Cain, as mentioned, is the second best pitcher in the Bay area. But that is no knock on Cain. His FIP doesn't match up well with his ERA, meaning he may see a small jump in that eventually. But young pitchers are always learning how to pitch, and Cain will only get better, it seems. Cain's 'WAR' the past two years is only 6.6, which is really good. But it falls well, well short of Lincecum's.

Josh Beckett/Jon Lester: Josh Beckett, the every-other-year wonder. He makes it look so awesome, so prolific when he is on. And when he is on, I may want no other pitcher in baseball on the mound. With that being said, he hasn't been great the entire time, just most of the time he has spent in Boston, post-2006 of course. When things are going well, Beckett has command of two nasty breaking balls, the four-seamer, and what can be an unhittable two-seamer at times.

Lester is as good as ever. Even though his ERA may not indicate he was much better than last year, trust me he is. He has become a dominant strikeout pitcher who is a little less reliant on his porous defense. His 10.3 'WAR' is less than Beckett's 11, but Lester isn't much different in terms of results than Beckett. This season, Lester has over ten K's a game, to less than three walks.

Yea, the guy is good. I know.

Cole Hamels/Cliff Lee: The aforementioned left-handed duo. I can tell you what, no one wants to face this pair come playoff time. You know how you always feel uncomfortable when a lefty is on the mound? Yes, I do as well. Just imagine having to see these guys in a short series, both being left handed. But not only left-handed, also great.

Hamels has been somewhat unlucky, but isn't exactly having a year that tops last season either. His 'WAR,'
again, over the past two seasons is 6.6, actually tied with Cain. So while he hasn't been dominant of late, it is probably just because of luck, and possibly being worked hard in 2008.

Cliff Lee is a bonafide ace. He was the Cy Young winner of course last season, in the superior AL. And ever since his arrival to the weaker NL, he's been carving up the competition. His WAR is third only behind Lincecum's and Halladay's. Command is Lee's specialty, as he will not overpower you. And he "commands" very well...

CC Sabathia/AJ Burnett: CC Sabathia is one of the five best pitchers in all of baseball.  And his WAR helps prove that, finishing 4th in that category.  CC really broke out in 2007, having a Cy Young caliber season.  2006 was good too, but people really took notice in 07.'  The lefty is the real deal, and is showing everyone why the money was spent on him, rather than not.

AJ Burnett hasn't had many great seasons.  But his WAR is very good over the past couple of years.  I was never a supporter of Burnett being an "Ace,"  but he has pitched very well, under the lights in New York--something that not everyone can handle well.  CC is the main reason this tandem is so high, but Burnett is definitely a good pitcher.

Dan Haren/Brandon Webb: I know that Webb is hurt, but just last season these two were arguably the best 1-2 in the game.  Different styles, but both use an array of pitches to get batters out.  I guess with the injury to Webb, we can place Haren in the number one slot.  But in fairness to Webb, he was truly great.  And hopefully he can get back into form someday.

Haren is underrated, maybe the most underrated in the game.  His transition from a pitchers park in Oakland to a hitters park in Arizona has probably gone better than any scout could imagine.

Duo's that just missed:

Javier Vazquez/Jair Jurrjens

John Danks/Mark Beurhle

Chris Carpenter/Adam Wainwright

Zack Greinke/Gil Meche

Justin Verlander/Edwin Jackson

Please comment at my new site. Thanks.

Jarrod Washburn was having a heck of a season up in the northwest of Seattle.  An ERA+ of 164.  An FIP well under 4.00.  It was an unlikely occurrence, given his lack of greatness in recent seasons.  But it was a welcomed occurrence on his part, for who wouldn't want to have a good year?

Washburn was then moved to Detroit, a team in contention, for a return of a few young, semi-promising players.  And since that day, he has been struggling.

A 6.04 ERA.

But what is the reason?  Is Washburn finally regressing back to himself?  Or is it simply a guy adjusting to a new environment? After all, he is human right?  He is not the FIP-bot, or robo-ERA man.  He is a dude learning a new life, in a new city.  The sampling is much too small to begin with.  But the struggles have still been there.

Not sure of the reason, but Washburn seems to be having issues on a team that went out and acquired him based on the notion that he'd help them get over the hump in the AL Central.

And so far, he hasn't accomplished that, not even close.

Please comment at my new site. Thanks.

As you may have heard, Marco Scutaro is going to be a free agent after the season.  And he will be sought after by multiple teams looking to shore up the shortstop position.  But if a team decides to ink Scutaro to a multi-year deal, what exactly will they be getting?

If you follow baseball astutely, then you probably understand that this would be a career year for the Blue Jays shortstop.  A guy that has never posted an OPS+ greater than 96, all of a sudden posts one that is 118.  A hitter that was basically league-average in the category of getting on base, all of a sudden reaches base well over 38 percent of the time.  And a player, Scutaro, that has never Slugged over .400, now sits with a .442 Slugging percentage.

That would be defined as a career year, my friends.

And all this comes at age 33.  Meaning it is not likely to repeat itself, not to this degree anyway.

But hey, I am not getting on Scutaro.  Good for him.  I am glad to see someone experiencing success late in their career.  I just wonder whether or not it will be sustained, even for another year.

See, players at the age of 33 don't generally learn the game, and take their game to another level.  They don't typically become 5 'WAR' players, when they have never topped anything over 2.7.  So forgive me, I may end up being wrong.  But I just don't think Scutaro will ever come close to repeating this performance.

Here are hiw 'WAR' totals since 2002:

-0.1, 0.3, -0.3, 1.6, 1.0, 0.2, 2.7, 4.7

There is an outlier there.  And of course it is 2009.  Marco can probably be that player of 2008, the one with the 2.7 'WAR.'  But to ask him to be a star, as he has been this year, is simply asking too much.

One aspect of his 'WAR' that is much improved--along with his bat.  Is his defense.  He has been mediocre with the glove, according to UZR, his entire career while manning short.  But this season in 115 games, his UZR sits at a pretty 7.6.  Is it actually better?  Or is it a flaw in the metric?  I really don't know the answer to that, for I am not a scout, and I do not watch the Blue Jays enough to evaluate an individual defender.

If a team, say the Red Sox, is interested in Scutaro this off-season, then be aware.  Be aware of what he might revert to.  It wouldn't be a bad signing by any means, but the price and length have to be looked at long and hard.

Please comment at my new site. Thanks.

Since UZR has been looked at as "suspect" recently, with it's grade on Mark Teixeira.  Here are the top five at each position over the past three seasons.  And three seasons is much better than one...

1B:  Albert Pujols, Casey Kotchman, Kevin Youkilis, Todd Helton, Lyle Overbay.

Does anyone dispute that?  Pujols has been regarded as the best defensive 1B in the game for a few years now.  Kotchman is notorious for being a powerless wiz with the glove.  Youkilis is solid, albeit unspectacular, and really doesn't make many errors at all at first.  Helton and Overbay both have been known to flash the leather.  I do think Tex is of quality on the defensive side.  But I am no scout either.  He makes plays look great, but are they great plays?  I'm sure some of them are...

2B:  Chase Utley, Brandon Phillips, Mark Ellis, Dustin Pedroia, Placido Polanco.

Utley is going to go down as one of the best 2B ever, and his defense has a lot to do with it--whether the casual fan knows about it or not.  Phillips has the rep.  Ellis is kind of like a lesser Derek Jeter, that has always been the better defender with respect to position.  Pedroia is a good defender, and Polanco has that same reputation.  More sure handed, then rangy I've heard on Polanco.

3B:  Ryan Zimmerman, Pedro Feliz, Rolen, Inge, Beltre.

If there is evidence that UZR is legit over a three year sample, then this is the position that should be used as an example.  Zimmerman is probably the best of the bunch now, although it's very close, and disputable.  Feliz was the best just a few years ago.  Rolen may be the greatest of all time, if not, then top three.  Although I really cannot name anyone other than Schmidt that would be in that top three.  Inge, although qualifying as a catcher too, is a great defender who never hit much until this season.  And Beltre's greatest strength has been his glove.  Yes, hacking away wasn't Beltre's strength.

SS:  JJ Hardy, Jimmy Rollins, Jack Wilson, Troy Tulowitzki, Orlando Cabrera

Hardy being the best in UZR over a three year period kind of gives me the urge to acquire him to field SS with the Red Sox.  I knew he was capable, but did not know that he led the league in UZR over this stretch.  Rollins looks slick in the field, so the metric backs that up.  Jack Wilson is notorious for his glove-work.  Tulo, ditto.  And O-Cab was good before this year, when he has seemingly taken a decline on defense.

RF:  Randy Winn, Austin Kearns, Alex Rios, JD Drew, Jeff Francouer

Well, Winn apparently gets the job done.  Kearns doesn't look the part, but I have never heard anything bad about his defense.  Rios is a guy that could play center, as he will in Chicago, it seems.  Drew has the range, and gets good jumps.  But he doesn't seem to field ground balls well, something that doesn't apply much to an outfielder anyway.  And Drew definitely doesn't won't run through a wall for you, or even lay out very often.  Francouer has a cannon for an arm.  If he could learn to lay off a pitch, or two, then he would be a fine player--maybe.

CF:  BJ Upton, Coco Crisp, Carlos Beltran, Aaron Rowand, Mike Cameron

Upton likes to make his plays look good, but I never questioned his brilliant range.  Crisp is awesome when healthy out in center.  Beltran too.  Rowand will actually run through a wall for his team, and seems to be a great teammate.  He is actually higher than I might have thought thought, based on what I have heard recently.  Mike Cameron is known for his defensive prowess as well.

LF:  Matt Holliday, Carl Crawford, Alfonso Soriano, Josh Willingham, Carlos Lee.

This is simply a lack of fielders that qualify.  Holliday above Crawford though?  Maybe the Red Sox will look at Holliday to improve their sub-par defense, as Bay is not good out there.  But Holliday will probably command too much on the open market.  Crawford is great, and could probably play center if given another opportunity.  Soriano is surprising because he seems to make some blunders.  Both Willingham and Lee are pretty terrible, but only nine left fielders qualify.  They are both well into the negatives.  If I were to change the minimum innings requirements, then Eric Byrnes and Fred Lewis would take their spots.

So there you have it.  UZR for the past three seasons.  Much greater, and more reliable then simply looking at this season.  If you are wondering, Tex falls in 7th among 18 qualifying first baseman.  So yes, he is an above average defender at first, but he might not be great.

Please comment at my new site. Thanks.

I don't want to beat the subject down anymore, as Joe Posnanski does that on a daily basis.  But Joe Mauer hit two more homers, and had three more hits yesterday.  One homer to straight away center, and the other to left center.  He is batting .383, and he's a catcher.  Poz's message board is scattered with people saying that up until now, this is probably the greatest season by a catcher of all time.  An OPS+ north of 190, he's a catcher, Slugging over .600, he's a catcher.  Well, you must get my point by now.

After all those numbers suggesting he is easily the MVP, we find out that Joe Morgan is off base again.  In a chat yesterday, which I went back and read out of boredom, Joe Morgan said something I didn't agree with (what a surprise). I don't mean to bash the guy to simply bash him, but I felt that this was off base.  Here's what he said:

"I can't call him the best player, because it's hard for a catcher to be the best player. The reason I say that is that he's not the best defensive catcher in the game and he doesn't run as well as some of the other players. But he's definitely the best catcher in the game. And he's not better than Albert Pujols. However, Mauer is an unbelieveable talent. We've never had a catcher win a batting title before. Now he's on to his, what?, 2nd or 3rd batting title? He is by far the best hitter in the league. But as an MVP, the Twins might finish 3rd or 4th in their division."

So Joe can't call Mauer the best player because he is a "catcher?"  This is subjective once again.   See, Morgan was the best player on a great Reds team that one two World Series rings in the mid-70's.  Yes, he was better than Johnny Bench.  Joe was a great defender at an up-the-middle position, who stole a ton of bases, hit for power, got on base a bunch.  He could very well be the best second baseman of all time.

So anyway, Morgan was better than Bench.  He could do more on a baseball field, his career WARP1 is significantly higher.  I seriously would not be surprised if this is where this all comes from.  Morgan saw firsthand that he was better than his catcher.  Result:  This conclusion.

Maybe I am off base in this regard, but it wouldn't be entirely unlikely.

"He doesn't run as well as some of the other players."

Okay, but just last season he was 2oth in base-running according to BP.  Although this season, he isn't even in the top 100.  But he isn't a poor base-runner by any means.  He may not run as well as Jacoby Ellsbury, but that isn't really what Joe Mauer does that makes him so valuable.

"We've never had a catcher win a batting title before. Now he's on to his, what?, 2nd or 3rd batting title? He is by far the best hitter in the league. But as an MVP, the Twins might finish 3rd or 4th in their division."

So he is by far the best hitter in the league?  But he isn't the best player because he is a catcher?  Morgan doesn't understand positional adjustment whatsoever.  Joe Mauer is a catcher, he gets points for simply being able to be a catcher.  Kind of like how Jeter or Hanley get points for simply being ****.  They field the position well enough to play it--although it may not be quality defense, they aren't so horrendous that they absolutely must be moved off the position, like BJ Upton had to be.  But Joe Mauer, by all accounts, and all that has been said, is actually a really good defensive catcher.  He is a great athlete, and constantly has to work with young pitchers, and does pretty well at it, outside of this season.  But again, that may not be Mauer's fault at all.  It may be the actual pitchers simply not faring well.

As for the MVP part of that quote?  Well, that is Morgan's opinion.  I personally do not feel that a player should be excluded from an MVP award simply because the team around him is not supportive enough--at least in terms of performance.  If Joe Mauer doesn't have the supporting cast to make a playoff run, then how is that his fault?

It isn't.

But I also understand that people's definition of "value" differs.  Although I may not agree with this, I do keep an open mind.

However, just to reiterate, Mauer is my MVP.  So don't think that I do not understand how little one player can impact a team, and how much is needed in order to surround said player.

"And he's not better than Albert Pujols."

Joe Morgan, you've done good.  Although Mauer might very well be having the better season (It's close),  he may not be better than Albert.  For Albert has been the best player in the game for years now, and knocking him off isn't as simple as putting up a .383 batting average in less than a season.  As great as Mauer is and has been, I will accept Pujols as the best player in baseball.

So Joe Morgan, Joe Mauer is the MVP.  That is firm within my mind.  Entrenched, one might say.  There is still some season left to play, and what will happen is unknown.  But a "catcher" is in fact the best player in the American League.  And it isn't far fetched to say that he's the best in the game.

Please comment at my new site. Thanks.

Is Ryan Zimmerman now the best defensive 3B in baseball?

His UZR this season is 16, which is tops in baseball at the hot corner.  And his 35.5 UZR over the past three seasons is also best at the position.  And unlike some stat guys, I will admit I haven't seen a whole lot of Zimmerman's play.  But I have seen him play.  And his defense is not just statistical gibberish.  Zim's definitely the real deal on the defensive side of the ball.

But just for good measure, his Plus/Minus from 2006-2008 was sixth, which is still really good.  But he was still evolving as a baseball player.

I think that Zimmerman has grabbed the torch from the Inge's and Feliz's of the world.  But I may be underestimating their greatness...

If there was one guy I needed to defend third, how could I go against Zim?

Please comment at my new site. Thanks.

Tony Masserotti via Boston.com:

"And before anyone suggests that Damon has benefited solely from the laughable right field at Yankee Stadium, let's remember that his game-tying home run last night was a laser that landed in the Yankees bullpen, just to the right of the 385-foot mark. Even fireballing young righthander Daniel Bard couldn't get his fastball by Damon. Over the last three years of a contract during which Red Sox officials believed Damon would be grossly overpaid, Damon has more hits (424 to 311), runs scored (267 to 222), home runs (50 to 42) and RBIs (199 to 171) than J.D. Drew, who makes an average of $1 million more per season (edge Drew, $14 million to $13 million) and is signed for two more years. Damon, by the way, will be a free agent in the fall.

Oh, and did we mention that the Red Sox rank 13th among the 14 American League teams in on-base percentage from the leadoff spot since Damon departed? Damon might not be hitting leadoff for the Yankees anymore -- he bats second -- but he certainly could do it for the Red Sox."

Johnny Damon has played much better, on the wrong side of 30, then most would have expected.  In fact, he has been a better player the past two seasons, than he was the previous two.  But how could anyone have foreseen that?  How could anyone have known that he would age so well?

The Red Sox made a choice to let Damon walk, they let him accept more money.  And that is the other part of this equation; the Yankees offered him more money and an extra year if I recall.  So naturally, Damon went elsewhere.

But comparing him straight up to Drew isn't necessarily fair.  Coco Crisp was Damon's successor, not Drew.  Crisp was brought in, and the results were mixed.  Sure, he couldn't hit much at all.  But Crisp was arguably the most valuable defender in all of baseball during a 2007 World Series run that resulted in a bunch of rings.  Crisp was then moved to give the role to Ellsbury of course.  So let us just say that it could be much worse in center field.  Ellsbury is still learning the game, and should be a solid all-around player, eventually.

Drew was brought in to replace Trot Nixon, and a declining Nixon too.  At age 32 Nixon was a sub-par player, so Drew gave them a player on par with the average player, if not a little better than that.  Nixon disappeared off the face of the baseball planet, while Drew actually played some decent baseball.

Now, I have never defended that Drew contract.  Not the length of it, not for a player that misses time each and every season.  But I understand the reasoning.  They wanted to get better, plain and simple.  Nixon was the hometown favorite, but he was finished.  And the front office knew that, much more than most of the fans did.

Masserotti also states that Drew is having a "disappointing" year.  Disappointing how?  Is it disappointing because people still feel like he is all of a sudden going to become a great player?  He isn't.  He is a pretty good player, and that is all he will ever be.  The guy has had one truly great season, and I would be very surprised if he had another. 

But to the stat archive...

Drew and Damon have been remarkably similiar in terms of overall value over the 2+ seasons that Drew has been in Boston.  Damon leads in total 'WAR' 8.4-8.1.  In terms of dollars, according to Fangraphs, Damon has been worth $37.1-$35.8. 

Drew has the higher OPS of .867-.821. 

Drew also has a significantly better UZR at 6.6 to Damon's -2.1.  Drew is clearly the better defender.  But Damon leads all the counting stats because he plays more often, and his overall 'WAR' is slighty better.  If one were to compare th past three years, the players could almost be interchangeable.  So I guess, comparatively, since Damon is paid a small margin less, that he is the better baragain.  But the difference is marginal.  

Anyway, Drew was brought in to play right field.  Not center field as Damon was playing when his contract expired with the Red Sox.  I guess the Red Sox could have projected that Damon would need to shift to a corner outfield spot a year or two down the road.  But who in their right mind would have felt that his bat could have also "projected" for a corner outfield spot?  At age 34 and 35 nonetheless?

And let us not forget those home/road splits.  On the road this season, Damon has an OPS of .788, compared to .979 in new Yankees stadium.  Maybe that stadium IS freakishly helping these players numbers.  Damon isn't failing much at home.  But on the road he is average at best.  In past seasons, his splits have been similiar.  But not this season.

According to that pesky 'WAR' metric, both Damon and Drew are having about the same year, with Drew actually having a better number.  But again, the difference is marginal. 

So Tony Masserotti, the difference between the two players isn't much.  And the positions aren't the same anyway.  Damon would have been resigned to play center field and would have had to shift to a corner slot eventually.  So in theory, he could have played right, I guess, if they wanted an arm that wouldn't thrown any base-runners out.  And he couldn't have played left, because that spot was locked up, and has been locked up during Damon's current contract. 

The Yankees valued Damon more, they got him.  Are we really getting to get on the Red Sox organization for not wanting to pay Johnny Damon?  His play at this age has been somewhat of a surprise to anyone around baseball, I'm sure.