Otto von Ballpark

Still not many details, but the reports all say the MLB teams will be doing it, which makes sense.

I think it is just clumsily worded, and "home" and "hometown" in the article just mean "local" (as in local team). MLB.TV blackouts have never made any distinction between home and away games, and I doubt that would change. The idea sounds like an in-market streaming service, separate from MLB.TV (which is an out-of-market service). Which makes sense, as they are two separate audiences, just as MLB.TV subscribers and pay-TV customers are today. In-market fans may not want to pay for out-of-market games, and out-of-market fans vice-versa. Of course, it says it wouldn't happen until 2023 which makes me think a lot of negotiations are still involved -- they could just be trying to drive up the cost of the streaming rights for someone else to buy them (or buy into this service as a partner?).

MLB in talks to launch nationwide streaming service for home games without cable TV

Per the AP via the Star Tribune, it's the first time: "Boston became the first team to slug two grand slams in a postseason game"

Atlanta NLCS roster Featuring ex-Twins Eddie Rosario and Ehire Adrianza Also ex-Twins minor leaguer Huascar Ynoa

Tonight's ALCS game 1 is actually on regular ol' broadcast FOX, not cable FS1. Free to watch if you have an antenna and a signal! Saturday's game 2 is listed as both FOX and FS1, whatever that means. After that, the rest of the series will likely be on FS1, before the World Series shifts back to FOX as usual.

Red Sox ALCS roster Ex-Twins still included are Hansel Robles, Martín Pérez, and Danny Santana.

Wow, the Astros ALCS roster doesn't include Lance McCullers Jr, after he exited his game 4 ALDS start with forearm discomfort. Astros ALCS roster I guess that opened a spot for Odorizzi, to join former Twins Pressly and Castro.

I wonder if they could automate check swing calls, along with the automated zone? Just detect if the bat is ever fully parallel to the front of the plate? Worth remembering that Flores helped put himself in that 0-2 hole (took strike 1 right down the middle, then fouled off strike 2 in the zone too). Likewise, in the previous at-bat, I know Wade is known for his patience, but you can't take a 2-2 strike 3 looking in that situation either. Crawford put his 0-2 pitch in play to start the inning -- a soft liner that hung up for the LF -- and Bryant swung at the first pitch and put it in play down the 3B line.

EXPLAINER: What exactly is a check-swing?

Only one game today but it should be fun! Logan Webb really emerged as a nice starter for San Fran this year. For the 2nd half, he was tied for 2nd among MLB pitchers in fWAR, and tied for 7th in RA9-WAR. Was a big reason the Giants didn't fade after their hot start.

I have to admit, I lost track of Rosario this year after he really scuffled in Cleveland, only 7 HR and a 86 OPS+ before hitting the IL on July 10. And he remained on the IL even after his deadline trade to Atlanta, ignominiously in exchange for Pablo Sandoval. But after Atlanta finally activated him on August 27, he a nice final month-plus: 7 HR and a 131 OPS+ (in only about one-third of his Cleveland PAs).

Sounds like Bally/Sinclair may not be able to do this (direct to consumer streaming)? Manfred critical of Sinclair Note that "Diamond" is Diamond Sports Group, the Sinclair subsidiary that actually operates the 21 Bally Sports networks including Bally Sports North. A recent report suggested that "Diamond Sports Group... could be headed into bankruptcy."

Not a prospect, but couldn't it also be argued that, given where the Twins were at the time, trading Gomez for two seasons of JJ Hardy was the right move? Span had been fantastic (and we signed him to a cheap extension that same offseason), and as you note, Gomez hadn't done anything yet at the plate (and we had already burned through his pre-arb seasons). We just gave away Hardy a year later for nothing, then cratered...

In terms of innings, Jax was quite limited in his first full pro season (2017), but I think he's caught up pretty well since then compared to other Twins SP draftees. 2016 draftees, career pro innings: Poppen 483 Jax 398 Balazovic 325 Wells 313 2017 draftees, career pro innings: Barnes 412 Sammons 390 Enlow 240

Danny Santana scored the ALDS winning run for Boston.

I was just about to say how today is the last day of the year with four Major League Baseball games. But now, that is no longer true! Although now today has 3 games, and tomorrow has 3 games, so that's pretty good too.

I know that wasn't the appropriate ruling for last night's play, sorry if I wasn't clear. I was just sharing that as an example of where the rules already allow for a different outcome, under slightly different circumstances. It seems like it would be trivial, going forward, to simply amend the rule to treat last night's play (a fair ball, not in flight, striking an outfielder before going out of play) just like a wild throw, and letting runners advance 2 bases from their current position at the time it goes out of play.

The rule in question is 5.06(b)(4) apparently -- and while umpires didn't have discretion to place runners in that specific situation last night, there are already similar rules about letting runners advance 2 bases from their position when the ball goes out of play, which would have allowed the Rays to score (rather than 2 bases from when the ball was pitched, which held the Rays lead runner at 3rd). So the rule governing last night's situation could easily be modified to include the same, without opening up any kind of Pandora's box. No umpire discretion is involved, really. Should be easier to administer now than ever before, with synchronized replay cameras (like they use for runners tagging from third on fly balls) -- if a team doesn't agree with an umpire's placement of runners, it could be reviewed. Rule Book (PDF) From page 28, in the circumstance of a wild throw by a fielder (emphasis mine). EDIT TO ADD: Just to be clear, this should not have been the ruling last night -- it wasn't a wild throw, and the umpires got it right, according to the current rule book -- but this is an example of how the rule could be modified going forward.

White Sox representing the AL Central appropriately so far...

Thanks for sharing! This is a fun thought exercise. You mean, the 1st wild card just has to win 1, while the 2nd wild card has to win 2 to advance? That would lessen the penalty for finishing 2nd in your division, but increase the penalty for finishing 2nd in the wild card. Personally, I don't think I would make that trade, especially considering that schedules among division competitors are the most similar -- I think that's the race that should have the greater consequences. Re-seeding also reduces the consequences of finishing 2nd, because you can still get home field beyond the WC game/round. Re-seeing may allow a top seed to avoid a great wild card team -- but that's offset by a great wild card team potentially avoiding the top seed too. Top seed may actually prefer to face the great wild card team in the shorter DS round, rather than potentially in the longer CS round, depending on roster construction and other factors (Dodger depth might help them in a longer series?). As a fan watching at home, I certainly don't mind that we're getting Giants-Dodgers in the DS round, rather than seeing them in the CS round or seeing an upset of the Giants or Dodgers in the DS round -- they all seem like reasonably equal entertainment options to me. FWIW, ticket-holding fans, stadium staff, and the league in general all probably prefer not to re-seed, so they know earlier what their home game assignments are. In the absence of a compelling benefit otherwise, I might default to that too -- seeding just isn't that important in baseball (which is part of the reason the WC game was introduced).

It's not a traditional tie for sure, but they are the two best non-division winners. Personally, I think that's a valid form of tie in the modern system, to encourage the most regular season competition and minimize coasting among upcoming playoff participants. And limiting it to 2 teams in a single-game playoff is an exciting way to resolve it without spending too much extra time sorting non-division winners. (Especially considering additional tiebreakers may still be necessary, like in 2018 and 2013.) What's your preferred specific alternative? You've stated your perceived problem, but I don't think you've offered your solution yet.

Single-game tiebreakers have been part of the MLB play since the advent of divisions and expansion. The Bucky Dent game, or the 2009 Twins-Tigers game 163, or the 2007 Rockies-Padres game 163, are hardly akin to a HR derby. To me, it seems like a good balance right now. The playoff field isn't overly large as to seem diluted. The regular season is about division races. And the postseason is a tournament for regular season division champs plus a tiebreaker between the two best non-division winners.

Any team can put in a claim on a player during the waiver period, and at the end of the period, the league awards the player to the claiming team with the highest waiver priority. So we don’t know who else may have put in a claim after Texas, but yes, being awarded to the 3rd team suggests some interest. Compared to, say, JT Chargois who went to the Dodgers when they were second-to-last in waiver priority!

A season where two AL Central teams won 106+ games, with serious consequences for not finishing on top, would be epic! So fun, like 2006 only better, even if the Twins were the ones that came up short. And of course, the Twins could just as likely prevail and win 107 and relegate a 106 win top rival to the wild card game.