Why all this talk about "super teams" is bogus

      There has been a lot of talk this season about the American League having "super teams" in the Boston Red Sox, New York Yankees, and the Houston Astros. All that talk is bogus. I believe many writers are trying to relate the MLB to other sports, specifically the NBA. There has been talk about "super teams" in the NBA over the last few years essentially beginning when Lebron decided to team up with Bosh and Wade in Miami. Everyone wants to say that it's drifting into Major League Baseball, but that's nonsense. Super teams are suppose to be teams that are locks for making it to the championship and likely winning it, but that doesn't exist in baseball. There is never a lock for a team making it to the World Series, much less winning it.

     Now don't get me wrong, there are teams that are very good and have been a lock for the playoffs since June, but to compare them to the "super teams" of the NBA is bad judgements and I don't believe is taking into account the full landscape of the league. This is also why so many writers and analyst are favoring the American League champion in the World Series. Let's take a deeper look into how the leagues and these super teams truly match up.

   Boston Red Sox: 101-46

         Currently the best record in baseball and likely the #1 seed in the American League.

       - Record vs .500 or better teams : 40-29   (NL teams .500 + 10-3)

       - Record vs .500 or worse teams: 61-17    (NL teams.500 - 4-0 play Mets this weekend)

     The Red Sox have played 82 games (more than half of their schedule) against teams with a .500 record or worse. They also have 6 more games against such teams in the final two weeks. I'm not saying that the Red Sox are not good, or that they aren't the best team in baseball right now because I believe they are. The issue I have is calling them a super team when the majority of their opponents are below .500 and they have not proven to be anything more than a very good team. They beat the teams they are supposed to beat, removing the interleague games they are competitive at 30-26 in games against .500 or better teams. There is still much to be proven from the 2018 Red Sox and by no means do I believe that they are a lock for a World Series this year.

   New York Yankees: 90-56

       

        Currently 3rd best record in baseball, likely in wild card game. 

  

       -Record vs. .500 or better teams: 36-28   (NL teams .500 + 6-4)

       -Record vs. .500 or worse teams: 54-28   (NL teams .500 - 5-5)

     The Yankees have also played 82 of their games against sub .500 teams with 6 more remaining against such teams. The Yankees have struggled with injuries and have definitely missed the bat of Aaron Judge over the last month plus and are desperately hoping he's ready to go for the playoffs. The Yankees even with Judge are not a team that is a lock for a World Series in fact, despite the fangraphs %100 chance that the Yankees will make the playoffs there is the slim chance the Rays could provide a miracle, though highly unlikely. The Yankees are however in a real risk of not hosting the wild card game with Oakland just 1.5 games behind them in the standings. The Yankees are a good team, but by no means a "super team". 

      Houston Astros: 92-54

        

          Currently have the 2nd best record in baseball, likely winning the West as #2 seed in AL.

       -Record vs. .500 or better teams: 39-35  (NL teams .500+ 5-5)

       -Record vs. .500 or worse teams: 54-19  (NL teams .500- 6-1)

     The Astros have played 73 games against sub .500 teams with 10 games remaining against such teams. The Astros being the World Series champions of 2017 and probably one of the most poised to repeat in the last 2 decades are a very good team. They have dealt with their fair share of injuries and some under performing from players, but have still managed to be a top team in the AL through it all. They are a lock for the playoffs, but again I do not believe a lock for repeating as champs. The toll that the playoffs take on a team is nothing to dismiss, pitchers arms and player's legs being extended an entire month beyond normal and all at max effort high intensity. They are a very good team, but a "super team"? I don't think I would pass out that label yet, repeat as champs and I'll be much more willing to let them stake that claim. The Astros have had the tougher of the American League schedules with their being 2 other teams in the West that have been competitive this year, and the NL West which are their interleague opponents also have 3 contenders in the race.  

    Teams in the American League with sub .500 records; Toronto, Baltimore, Minnesota, Detroit, Chicago, Kansas City, Los Angeles, and Texas. Seven of those 8 teams are guaranteed to finish under .500 with only the Angels still flirting the mark at 74-76. 

    In the American League there are 7 teams that are at least 10 games under and 5 of those 7 are at least 20 games under. There hasn't been 5 teams at least 20 games under since 2003, the year that Detroit lost 119 games. In that year only one other team was under .500, the Anaheim Angels were 77-85, the other 8 teams were all over .500. (Houston was not in the AL at the time, only 14 AL teams). 

    The point that is to be made is that while these teams are great, especially the Red Sox, they are not "super teams" They aren't doing things that are necessarily unprecedented. They are great teams that are taking advantage of a bad American League. There are basically two teams that aren't in the race that have a winning record, Seattle and Tampa. Seattle was in the race up until September, and Tampa is just playing out of their minds as of late. I believe that the Red Sox are the best team in baseball and don't doubt that Houston is probably number two, but unbeatable or "super teams", definitely not. 

   For the record the National League  has 10 teams .500 or better and 3 teams 20 games or more below .500. 

Why the last two weeks of the season still matter to Boston, Cleveland, and Houston.

         The American League playoff picture seemed to have been taken in mid-August. There has been little change since that time and with the exception of where the Wild Card game is going to be played there is little still in question. The other night with their 99th win the Red Sox clinched a post season appearance, and will likely clinch the division title this coming week. The Indians have not even seen a team in their rear view since late June while they are cruising to a Central division title that they could clinch this weekend. The Astros aren't as close to clinching the West, but now that they have their core group back in the line-up on a consistent basis they seem to be gaining steam again as they are 3.5 up on Oakland for the division.
       All of these teams and even the A's and Yankees have pretty much guaranteed their playoff births even if they haven't done so mathematically yet. The reason the last 10-15 days of the season still matter is those last weeks are what will propel you into the playoffs. As the standings currently are the Astros will host Cleveland, and the Red Sox will get the winner of the wild card game.
      Baseball is a game of streaks, players go on hot streaks and cold streaks especially offensively. The key to being a great player is limiting the cold streaks and extending the hot streaks. Teams are successful as multiple players get hot at the same time and others pick up the load when those guys get cold. That along with great pitching and defense are what make up the best teams in the league. You've seen that this year especially with the Astros. When they lost Correa, Altuve, and Springer, Bregman stepped up and carried the weight of the team until those guys could come back. All of the playoff teams have shown that they have deep lineups that can pick each other up, the questions is who's going to be on a hot streak going into October.
     The teams that have their best players seeing the ball the best in the last week of the season tend to be the ones that are putting up the big numbers in October. This is where Red Sox manager Alex Cora need to walk that line of resting his guys and keeping them sharp. You'll see the same thing going through Indian's manager Terry Francona as he tries to keep the Indians ready for the big stage when they haven't truly played a big game all year.
     One of the best examples in recent memory for a team that caught fire at the end of the year and just wouldn't lose was the 2007 Rockies. They won 13 of their last 14 regular season games, then a 1 game playoff against San Diego, and proceeded to sweep the Phillies and the Diamondbacks on their way to the National League Pennant. They then had to wait 10 days for the Red Sox to beat the Indians in 7 games and then start the World Series. That was long enough to cool them down and the Red Sox rode the momentum to the 2007 title.
    That is a big part of October baseball, momentum. "Momma Mo" as we use to call it is cruel when she is on the other side, but if you can get her to swing in your direction you can ride her to a title. All it takes is one play (2011 WS, David Freese triple in game 6, 1986 WS game 6 Mookie Wilson ground ball through Buckner,  2004 ALCS game 4 Dave Roberts steals 2nd, Ortiz walks off in 12). The momentum that these teams bring into the playoffs can carry them to the World Series. Yes anything can happen, but it helps to have the guys feeling confident going into October.

The Little League Classic, MLB got this one right! What's next?

      This past weekend was the 2nd annual Little League Classic. The Little League Classic takes place in Williamsport, PA during the Little League World Series and allows the major leaguers from 2 teams to interact with the little leaguers at the event. This year's teams, the Mets and Phillies, spent time in the stands at the little league games and got to spend the day remembering it's a kids game before playing a game of their own at the minor league stadium in Williamsport. This event has already been placed on the calendar for next year featuring the Pirates and the Cubs.
       I believe that Commissioner Rob Manfred is planning to implement more events like this one. We saw this year the Puerto Rico series where Cleveland and Minnesota played a two game series in San Juan that really rejuvenated the island's spirits after dealing with Hurricane Maria. It also gave the opportunity for many of the Puerto Rican born players to play in front of their friends and family. Francisco Lindor was the star of game one, the Puerto Rican native homered to give the Indians a 2-0 lead in the 5th and they would go on to win 6-1.
     The Commissioner has also already green lighted a game for next year in Omaha that will take place between the Royals and the Tigers two days before the College World Series is set to start. This is a game that will be played at TD Ameritrade, which is the same location the CWS is played. There is also talk about moving the MLB Draft to Omaha and have it take place before to During the CWS. This would make it quite the weekend to bring a MLB game and the draft to one of the best baseball events in the country already. The CWS is a fantastic event that features high level baseball talent and the joys of college tailgating. And the event always runs through the father's day weekend.
    There is also going to be a series next year where the Yankees and Red Sox will take their rivalry across the pond and play a two game series in London at London Stadium. This is part of a 2 year deal that will bring another pair of teams to London in 2020. This is the first time the MLB has crossed the Atlantic for a regular season contest, as teams have previously played in Japan, Mexico, Puerto Rico, and Australia. The Oakland A's and Seattle Mariners will also open their season in Japan next year, marking the 5th time MLB has opened the season in Japan (2000, 2004, 2008, 2012).
     All of these games are part of the goal for MLB to expand their fan base and grow the game both at home and internationally. I think that these are good for the game, so the questions is what's next and what else makes sense?
    Cooperstown during induction weekend: Having experienced induction weekend for the 1st time this year, I got a sense for the schedule and roughly what the town is like during the weekend as they estimated 50,000 people there for the ceremony. If they were to play the Sunday night game at Doubleday field I think it would draw a huge crowd. You're going to have tons of baseball fans there already, many legends that are already in attendance for the induction, and you have the Cooperstown Dreams Park tournament that features several hundred young players there every week in the summer. The logistics of making Doubleday field accommodating for the teams and fans would be the most difficult part, but I think everyone in upstate New York would love a Yankees vs Mets game in Cooperstown.
     Hawaii : Hawaii is not exactly known for being a baseball hotbed, but it has produced 43 major leaguers and has sent 3 little league teams to the LLWS, winning it all in 2008 and runner up in 2010 and are currently there this year. I'm sure all the players that get the opportunity to play in the game would love the trip, and you'd have your choice of all the west coast teams to send to the islands. The games I believe would be well attended as many islanders don't get the opportunity to see many big league games, especially in person.
   Caribbean Islands/ Northern South America: There are clearly many major leaguers from the Caribbean and countries like Venezuela and Columbia. To bring the big league game to the islands of the Caribbean and northern South America would be an amazing experience for the players. The people of the Caribbean love the game of baseball and have a lot of fun watching it as we saw in the Puerto Rico Series. There would have to be some political stuff to be worked out in order to get some of these games done, especially in Venezuela and Cuba, but if they could make it happen it would be great baseball to watch.
     South Africa: This one may take some time to really get a head of steam, but the first African born player did make the big leagues this year, Gift Ngoepe. It would be a very interesting game and a ton of research would need to be done if they could gain enough interest in the game to make it worth it, but to bring major league baseball to the African continent would be a sight to see. Something to think about for maybe the year 2025-2030.
     It is interesting to see where the Commissioner is thinking about taking the game. Does he want to make it more of a global game. Could he make it a true World Series, with winners from North America, Europe, Asia, Africa, South America, and Australia actually play in a world series? Who knows, but I do like the expansion ideas.
   
   

Umpires.....

        Wednesday night's game between the Braves and Nationals was a pretty good game, Harper hit his 28th HR, Charlie Culberson seems to just have a knack for doing big things, hitting a 3 run HR to give the Braves the lead, and Ronald Acuna Jr hit a HR and robbed a HR. The Braves won the game 8-3 and pulled within .5 of the Phillies for 1st in the east. Despite all of this, there is likely going to be a lot of talk the next day or two about umpires as rookie sensation Juan Soto was ejected in the 6th inning. Soto was getting in the box for this 3rd plate appearance after striking out on a borderline slider with men on in the 4th. Soto was cleaning the box with his spikes, said something to home plate umpire Greg Gibson, and you can see Gibson remove his mask and say "What". Soto then said something again and was promptly ejected from the game.
     The professional tweeters instantly jumped all over MLB and the umpires with the hashtag #umpshow. Of course everyone and their dog seem to also be professional lip readers, even when Soto's head was down. There didn't seem to be a camera angle that caught what Soto initially said, but it was clear he initiated the conversation. I think we are rushing to judgement here, I'm not defending Gibson's move to run Soto, but I'm not going to likewise defend Soto without knowing the context. What was clear is that he was bringing up an at bat from 2 innings back. After looking at the pitch it was registered as on the corner by the "K Zone", but nevertheless Soto thought it was a good idea to bring it up in his next plate appearance. There were definitely other pitches that Gibson missed, like a called 3rd strike to Harper that was clearly out of the zone. I bring that up to make the point that Gibson was inconsistent most of the night. This happens, every now and then you get an umpire who is probably just having an off night. These umpires are dissected and examined throughout the year, and there is a long line of younger guys waiting to take their place. If an umpire is consistently bad usually they don't hang around very long, usually.

     The other point that many people brought up was that Gibson ran Soto because he is a rookie. There may be something to that. It is somewhat of an unwritten rule that young guys, specifically rookies don't call out umpires, much less argue with them. Say what you want about baseball's unwritten rules, but there is something to telling these young guys to earn their stripes before they attempt to throw their weight around. If Joey Votto is arguing a strike zone it has more value than a rookie, no matter how talented he is. Even in that same game, you saw Harper get a longer leash on the argument than Soto did, Harper is established and he has somewhat earned his right to gripe. Also, I think because Soto brought up the argument in the next at bat, that really hurt his cause. If you're going to state your case, do it right after the call is made, what good does bringing up a pitch from 2 innings ago do for you as a hitter. 

     Bottom line for this case, I think Gibson had an itchy trigger finger maybe caused by some dugout chirping, but until we know exactly what was said we can't make a true decision on whether it was valid. 

     Umpires in general I think have gotten a bad rap. Now this is nothing new, because everyone has always yelled at the umpire. That tradition is just as old as the game it self. It's safe to say umpires in general have improved over the years, and if you don't think so go watch a game from the 70's or 80's and tell me what you think about their zones and calls. Or pull up video of the 1997 NLCS between the Braves and Marlins and look at the strike zone Livan Hernandez was given. The point is umpires are not perfect and I'm not sure if we really want that. 

     I believe with the surge in analytics and increase in technology has brought an expectation that nothing should ever go wrong in a baseball game. The game is broken down like code into numbers that predict all outcomes and tell the managers and players everything that is going to happen so they can be prepared, but then the umpires come in and "ruin it". The human element that the umpires bring allows for the human element of the players to show as well. When that shortstop makes the diving play in the hole and makes a strong throw across the infield and it's bang-bang at first, you want to see that umpire wind up and punch that guy out. If we reduce it to automated machines that signal it on scoreboard, it won't have that same feel. The called 3rd strike has been a real treat to watch some who do get a little animated. If you want to see robotic umpires go watch a fastpitch softball game. All umpires make the strike calls exactly the same, and it's BORING! The human element is what makes the game special from all aspects. 

     There is talk of an automated strike zone, I believe it is coming. I'm not excited about it, but it's hard to stand in the way of "progress". I think that the ultimate goal for some people is to eliminate the need for umpires, again to keep from anything going wrong. I saw a piece on MLB network the other day discussing whether they should get rid of the error, and just everything put in play is a hit. It seems ridiculous, but who knows where people will take things. That's a whole different conversation. 

Top 3 NL MVP contenders.

        The race for the NL MVP is about as wide open as the race for the 5 NL Playoff spots. Currently there are 11 of the 15 teams within 6 games of a playoff spot and 4 teams not including the leaders within 2 games. The race for the MVP is going to likely be decided by who can push their teams into the playoffs. A recent poll by MLB.com had the Freddie Freeman from Atlanta as the leading vote getter, with Nolan Arenado from Colorado 10 points behind. The poll also had Lorenzo Cain in the running receiving just 16 votes, but still in 3rd place in front of players like Javy Baez, Christian Yelich, and Matt Carpenter.
      There are of course many opinions on what qualifies as an MVP caliber season, do you look at offensive production, defensive capabilities, or all of it. Do you depend on WAR (Win above replacement), which I believe still doesn't tell the entire story. Does your team have to make the playoffs to be considered? All of these factors are widely debatable, and I would imagine voters take into account a little bit of all of them. What I want to see in the voting is that voters will watch the players, look at stats, but not rely on a computer to make a decision on something that needs that personal touch.
      If I'm voting for MVP I'm looking at offensive production as the 1st qualifier, you have to be producing offensively to be the most valuable player. The name of the game is to score more runs than the other team, so if you are responsible for producing runs for your team you are providing value to winning. When I look at that I want to see runs scored and runs batted in, because that shows me exactly how many runs this player has produced. If you aren't scoring a bunch of runs you should be driving them in. The next offensive category is going to be slash line; batting avg, on base percentage, and slugging. These stats show how often you're in position to produce runs, the more times you are on base, and how often you're getting yourself into scoring position. This also is why SB is something worth looking at. You don't steal 1st base, so if you are stealing a base you're moving yourself into scoring position so it's easier to be driven in.
     Defense is secondary for me, while I believe defense and pitching are more important in the team game it is secondary for the MVP case. In the big leagues the difference in defensive skills and abilities for the players that are going to be considered are relative. Of the players listed above, they are all great defenders at their respective positions. The separating factor for me is flexibility and consistency. If a player shows the ability to be an elite defender and can do that wherever you place him that brings value.
    #1 Candidate: Nolan Arenado
             Nolan Arenado is a huge reason the Colorado Rockies are in the race for the NL West. Nolan is tied for the league in HR's (29), is 3rd in RBI's (81), 4th in Runs (75),  7th in Avg (.306), is 6th in OBP (.389), and 3rd in Slugging (.588). He plays a gold glove 3rd base, of which he already has 5. He has played in 106 of his team's 112 games. Arenado is clearly the leader of this team and thanks to some quality pitching they are just 2 games out in the west. If you're into the WAR stat, Fangraphs has Arenado 2nd in the NL with a 4.6. If Arenado can continue his pace he would have over 40 HR, 100+ RBI, 100+ runs, and will likely win another gold glove. If the Rockies make the playoffs either in the Wild Card or the West I believe Arenado is the NL MVP.
     #2 Candidate: Javy Baez
            Javy Baez is definitely been the MVP for the Chicago Cubs this year as I'm sure Joe Maddon would agree. Baez who has been their primary 2nd baseman for the last 3 years, has been filling in for injured teammates at SS, 3rd, and even the outfield at times this season. Baez has improved his offense this year to go with that gold glove defense that he has shown over the past 4 seasons. Baez is leading the league in RBI's (88), 6th in runs scored (71), 6th in HR's (25), and 10th in avg (.302). The argument against Baez is his OBP (.335), which is because of his terrible BB/K ratio (17/105). Baez is a free swinger and that hasn't changed much, but he's making better contact this year which accounts for the higher avg. and the drastic increase in slugging from his former career high of .480 to this year's .594. Baez's versatility I believe makes up for the low OBP and if the season were to end today with the Rockies out of the playoffs I think Javy Baez is the NL MVP. He has truly been the most valuable player to a team that has the best record in the NL.
     #3 Candidate Freddie Freeman
          Freddie Freeman by many accounts has been one of the most underrated players of the last 3-4 years. Mainly due to the fact that the Atlanta Braves have been in the middle of a rebuild since their last playoff appearance in 2013. Freddie is not your typical 3 hole hitter when it comes to power numbers as he's 23rd in HR's (18), but is 6th in 2B's (28). Freeman is 8th in RBI's (69) and 12th in runs (66). He is 3rd in the league with a .316 Avg. and 2nd in OBP (.397). Freeman brings his value as not just a quality bat in the line-up, but plays an above avg 1B. Freeman has also played in all 109 of Atlanta's games. Freeman is seen as a leader for a very young Braves team that is vying for a playoff spot. As much as I like Freddie and believe he's having a great season based on where the numbers are I wouldn't award it to him. That being said, if things continue as they are and the Braves at least get the Wild Card, I am betting that he is awarded the NL MVP.
      There is still around 50 games left for most teams and the last two months of the season can be a big time separator when it comes to MVP. Who is going to lead their team to a playoff spot in the last month?

Position Player Pitching, funny or sad? Here are 3 possible fixes.

      On July 23rd the "Big Lefty" Anthony Rizzo made his pitching debut, and threw a perfect .1 of an inning leaving with a 0.00 ERA. The remainder of the Cubs faithful at Wrigley that night rose to their feet in a laughing approval. Most people around the league got a pretty good laugh at that, which most people do when they see a position player take the mound. It's unique, funny, and the game is always out of reach at that point so why waste more quality arms.
      The issue is that it's becoming less unique, there have already been a record 46 non-pitchers that have taken the mound this year. The Arizona diamondbacks threw positions guys for 4 2/3 innings while getting routed by the Rockies. In the game where Rizzo appeared he followed fellow position player Victor Caratini  who came in in the 8th with the Cubs down just 6 runs. Now who's to say what the exact number is as far as how many runs down and in what inning does it become "acceptable" to throw a position player on the mound. Down 6 in the 8th, or down 16 in the 4th, it's all relative.
     The questions is what do you do and is it necessary to do something. I think there are a few things that can be done.
      #1. Manage the bullpen better. Now nobody is saying it's easy to manage a bullpen, I mean it's basically the primary job of the manager. For most teams the line-up writes itself or close to it, the rotation is also a relatively easy thing to set on most teams. The bullpen is the tough part, how often do you use guys, which situation do you bring them in, how much rest does this guy need if he threw 30 pitches, 35 pitches? The other thing on the manager's mind is that the GM acquired the lefty in the pen to get out lefties, you've got a big spot and a lefty coming up, you will get second guessed by everyone if you don't bring in your guy.
     All of the matchups that teams do these days makes their 10-11 man bullpen seem small. If teams would manage their bullpens more conservatively I think it would not only avoid having too many position players on the mound, but will keep them fresher longer for both October and to extend their careers. It is not likely that these adjustments will be made anytime soon because teams are following numbers and match-ups more and more.
      #2. Something that I believe many general managers and organizations in general make a big mistake on is to eliminate the possibility of having a two way guy. Now of course I know about Shohei Ohtani, and I also know about his injury. What I am referring to are the 5 guys on the bench who are position players, who most likely had some experience on the mound at some point in their baseball career. Typically your middle infielders especially pitched in high school or sometimes college, and are athletic so they won't look like fools on the mound. Have 1 or 2 of them throw pens maybe once a week throughout the season so they can throw strikes maybe even have a change-up. These can be your true mop-up guys. You're not worried about them being in terrible shape the next day because they throw once a week, and they are not typically in your starting line-up anyway.
      Why not give them some practice so you don't have position guys coming in throwing 50 mph or throwing hard and hurting them selves. This super utility guy will probably be able to throw 80-85 and change some speed, but most importantly throw strikes and eat up innings. That's what a mop up guys is there for. I think this is probably the most reasonable thing for teams to implement, it save the pen and keeps the laugher of a game moving along.
     #3. The last fix would come from the commissioner's office with approval from the Player's Union, a Mercy Rule. A Mercy rule is something that most levels of baseball already have including some college conferences. I believe the number and inning are worth debating, but I would start the conversation at 12 run lead after 6 innings. I believe that this rule should not be implemented in postseason play. If you make the postseason and get blown out, you deserve to wear it.
      There are of course several counter arguments to the implementation of a mercy rule, the big ones being; the fan has paid for 9 innings and baseball is special because you can't run out the clock, you get 27 outs. I completely understand these points, but here is my response to them.
      The fan is paying for entertainment of watching baseball, they don't get a refund on a rain shortened game that goes 5 innings do they? They don't have to pay extra to watch extra innings do they? As far as time goes, I've never seen a 20 run game that lasted less than two and half hours, so they are definitely going to be there long enough to enjoy the game. They are going to see so much action in a game where there are enough runs for a mercy rule. Are they getting their money's worth by watching the back-up right fielder come in to throw 55mph in a 25-3 game? I think fans of both sides in a blow out would be happy for those types of games to end earlier. Watching those games on TV you see very few people left in the stands in those late innings.
    The 2nd argument of anything can happen in baseball and they need all 27 of their outs. I understand, and I'm sure you go back in to the dusty archives of the 150 years of professional baseball that you can fine multiple occasions of teams making great comebacks. The questions how many have happened in the live ball era, and what is the likelihood of it happening often in the current era with the bullpens these teams have. The number of games effected by this rule would probably be less than 30 of the 1890 games played each year in the majors. For example on August 2nd there were two games that would have been effected by the rule. The 17-8 game between the Rangers and the Orioles would have ended after the 8th with the Rangers winning 17-5. The Dodgers beat the Brewers 21-5 that same night, this game would have ended in the middle of the Dodger's 9 run 7th inning at 17-5. The impact on the league would be very minimal, and would save these arms that so many GM care so much about.
      It's worth discussion and I believe worth bringing to the forefront ahead of something like eliminating shifts, but that's a whole different conversation

Did the Dodgers make enough moves to bring a title to LA?

        The Los Angeles Dodgers made 3 big trades leading up to the deadline; acquiring Manny Machado, Brian Dozier, and John Axford. Machado was the blockbuster move of the summer as several teams were in the race throwing offers at the Orioles for their star shortstop. The Dodgers really pushed themselves to the front after learning their own young star shortstop Corey Seager would be out for the season with Tommy John. Seager joined a long list of Dodgers on the DL as it appears the short off season after losing game 7 of last year's World Series has taken a toll. Nearly the entire Dodgers rotation, Justin Turner, Yasiel Puig, and Chase Utley have all spent time on the disabled list this season. This is likely the cause for the slow start, but despite the injuries the Dodgers have rallied and are currently one game up on Arizona to lead the NL west.
     The additions of Machado and Dozier have led to manager Dave Roberts  having to adjust his defense and gives him options for his line-up. Dozier will take over for the fill in turned All-Star Max Muncy at 2nd, and now that Turner has returned from the DL Machado will move from 3rd to SS. Cody Bellinger's versatility really helps Roberts as Bellinger has the ability to play a high level 1B or CF which will give Roberts the ability to choose between Chris Taylor or Muncy depending on whether there is a righty or lefty on the mound for the opponent. The other options come in the corner outfield positions, Matt Kemp has been a pleasant surprise for the Dodgers as he had a resurgence of his past glory in LA, making the All-Star team for the first time since 2012. Kemp, Puig, and Joc Pederson will fill in the 2 spots left in the outfield depending on who's swinging the bat better at the time.
     While the offense appears to be in great shape as that put 21 runs up against the Brewers on Thursday, we all know that hitting is streaky no matter how deep the line-up. The thing that wins championships is pitching, do the Dodgers have enough? Their rotation when healthy is one of the better groups in baseball, obviously led by Clayton Kershaw who got over his post season hump last year throwing well in the World Series. Their rotation will be good enough to be competitive in the postseason. Roberts will have more decision when Hyun-Jin Ryu and Ross Stripling come back from injury. Ryu didn't throw in last year's postseason and hasn't pitched is May and Stripling has been used both as a starter and reliever this season. The Dodgers also have the young Julio Urias expected back in September. The worry with him is he is coming off shoulder surgery late in the year. The Dodgers are likely hopeful that they could use him out of the pen to get lefties out, but I wouldn't bank on it.
        The worry comes in the bullpen. As we saw from watching the post season last year, especially the World Series, Roberts likes to make a lot of pitching changes base on numbers. There isn't necessarily anything wrong with that, but that means you're running through 4-5 arms a night unless Kershaw gives you 8 strong. We saw last year where he pulled Rich Hill after just 4 innings in game 2 when he had given up 1 run on 3 hits and struck out 7, by all estimates on his way to a quality start. Roberts went on to use 8 more pitchers in the 11 inning loss to the Astros. Roberts did it again to Hill in game 6 after 4.2 again allowing just 1 run and he went on to use 4 more pitchers.
     The questions is does the addition of John Axford do enough for the bullpen? Will Roberts trust his starters past 2 times through the order? The Dodgers have 3 guys in their pen with 20 IP and less than a 3.0 ERA, closer Kenley Jansen, Josh Fields, and Caleb Ferguson.   If the offense isn't clicking on all cylinders in October the Dodgers may be in for another disappointing post season run.