Gavin M

@joshjaco98 Is this real?

@bthompson48 loving the wombat discussion. In middle school, my tournament basketball team was named the Winning Wombats. At the time I didn’t even know they were a real thing.

@AdamAkbani I think the fairly clear approach is to change nothing about Herrera’s usage, and swap out Pages for Crooks. Then you get Crooks and Herrera.

He's been a -2 fielding run overall It's also about the opportunity cost of continuing to trot out a fringy defender instead of having a defensive stalwart with Crooks Sure, you may not get the same offensive production as Iván, but that's why you slide him to DH That way, you can have your cake and eat it too

@STL_Stats_Facts @d16_mike What’s the reasoning for that claim? There’s not really anything he does above average. I get most backup catchers don’t do anything above average, so maybe that’s just it. Herrera/Crooks at C, and Pozo in his role. That makes Pages AAA depth. Won’t happen, though.

@d16_mike He's an above average backup catcher for sure

The Cardinals are in an awkward position at catcher. Herrera can hit but hasnt thrown out a runner since 2024. Pages is very respected in the clubhouse and is a great to have as a backup catcher. Pozo fills the emergency role and is clutch as a pinch-hitter. Crooks has 13 HRs and a 1.039 OPS in Memphis. I'm not really sure what the answer is currently. But it will be interesting to see how it works out.

@KareemSSN @The_Ryan_Shull Against RHPs only, it’s about 27%. In May it is 23%.

@The_Ryan_Shull Also, it’s not a 38.7% K%. It’s 30.9%.

38.7% K rate… Until he gets that down we’re locked in with Pages & Pozo.

@Boltjolt @inhoclupo @TalkinBaseball_ Which means that they can’t overturn it. By that angle, it very much appears the glove hits him before he gets to the base. The call on the field was Out, so that’s why it stood.

@inhoclupo @TalkinBaseball_ That doesn't show the glove touching him. Shows it might be

Fernando Tatis Jr. was called out even after review

@LovelandSZN @Zhoops44 Your team is the one that underperformed. Your take lacks all reason and logic. It would appear that you’re the one “coping.” Iowa exceeded all expectations. What do we have to cope about? Sounds like you’re projecting a bit. But, troll away 🫡

@Zhoops44 Keep coping lil guy

Lol. One of these players was a major part of an elite 8 team and the other two haven't played a minute yet. What are you talking about? If you're gonna talk at least have a little bit of knowledge about things.

@DustyBottoms04 The Natural

What movie do you think of first when you see/hear this intro

@turnstylerock @STLSprtsCntrl I don’t think you’re saying what you’re trying to say.

@STLCardsFan95 @STLSprtsCntrl Now do that same thing with every team

#STLCards catchers in 2026: - 1st in MLB in OBP (.374) - 5th in OPS (.822) - 4th in wRC+ (135) -Tied for 2nd in fWAR Bernie: what exactly is broken here?

@Padreshub @HopeSpringsATL @Teddymac44 @balkwhisperer I get that. I’m wrong. I’m not sure how, though, considering I’m quoting the rule book.

@STLCardsFan95 @HopeSpringsATL @Teddymac44 @balkwhisperer LOL It shows you guys just want to be right no matter what. Argue with MLB who clearly are saying you're wrong.

When the ball is in front of the base it is fair if any part of the ball is on or OVER the line.

@Padreshub @HopeSpringsATL @Teddymac44 @balkwhisperer “Or that, while on or over fair territory touches the person of an umpire or player…” Straight from the rule book.

@HopeSpringsATL @STLCardsFan95 @Teddymac44 @balkwhisperer Your interpretation of the rule is wrong

@andyharry819 @RayKrocsGhost @J_Rueb15 @balkwhisperer The second paragraph is in regards to a fly ball, not meant to immediately backtrack what was just said in the previous paragraph. That would be a very strange way to write anything, especially a rule book.

@STLCardsFan95 @RayKrocsGhost @J_Rueb15 @balkwhisperer Yes, and then it’s clarified in the second paragraph that a ball in contact with the ground has to be on fair territory, not over to be considered fair. Thus, it was a foul ball when the player picked it up.

@andyharry819 @RayKrocsGhost @J_Rueb15 @balkwhisperer There are half a dozen “or” options. No, it doesn’t qualify for all of them, but it qualifies for one, which is all it needs.

@STLCardsFan95 @RayKrocsGhost @J_Rueb15 @balkwhisperer Did this ball settle ON fair territory like the very first part of the rule says?

@andyharry819 @RayKrocsGhost @J_Rueb15 @balkwhisperer Your previous comment, prior to asking the question, was about fair balls. Most of the comments in this thread focus on fair balls. “Obviously” you know what you’re thinking and what you mean, but it is silly to assume that others can read your mind. As to your question; foul.

@STLCardsFan95 @RayKrocsGhost @J_Rueb15 @balkwhisperer You seemed good at interpreting the intent of things based on wording and context. Apologies for assuming. Is it a fair or foul ball if it lands on the foul side of the line but doesn’t touch the line?

@andyharry819 @RayKrocsGhost @J_Rueb15 @balkwhisperer Not sure why that would be obvious. We are discussing fair vs foul. Distinctions are incredibly important here.

@STLCardsFan95 @RayKrocsGhost @J_Rueb15 @balkwhisperer Obviously I’m talking about a ball that lands on the foul side of the line but doesn’t touch the line.

@the1who_schafes @dancingbearfeat @Cappin_Commie @Ecnerwal23 The problem here is that two things can be true. What matters is what takes priority. If a ball is even by a fraction of an inch in fair territory, it’s fair. Foul is only if it is entirely foul.

@STLCardsFan95 @dancingbearfeat @Cappin_Commie @Ecnerwal23 Here is the definition of foul ball. If you apply only this definition, is this not a foul ball? It was touched while (partly) over foul territory. As far as I can tell, nothing in the rule book defines a foul ball as it should: “a batted ball that isn’t a fair ball.”

Just saw the absolute worst fair/foul call in the history of the game Not hyperbole Padres got jobbed I’m not sure why the umpire called it a fair ball And it is not reviewable Horrible

@RayKrocsGhost @andyharry819 @J_Rueb15 @balkwhisperer So you believe all sentences stand on their own and are not connected or linked to the sentences that are around them?

@STLCardsFan95 @andyharry819 @J_Rueb15 @balkwhisperer I’m not linking it to either paragraph because you shouldn’t have to assume a new sentence is linked to either. It’s very easy to make it clear. So, it either stands on its own or its lazy writing.

@andyharry819 @RayKrocsGhost @J_Rueb15 @balkwhisperer Depends on which side of the line it lands

@STLCardsFan95 @RayKrocsGhost @J_Rueb15 @balkwhisperer Yes I understand that’s the way you interpret it. I think it’s just as valid to interpret it the way I described. If a fly ball lands next to the foul line in the outfield, is the ball fair or foul?

@andyharry819 @RayKrocsGhost @J_Rueb15 @balkwhisperer That whole second paragraph is in reference to the “fair fly.”

@STLCardsFan95 @RayKrocsGhost @J_Rueb15 @balkwhisperer You could also look at it like the first paragraph defines fair ball, and the second paragraph contains two qualifiers, one for fly balls and one for ground balls. If they meant the last sentence to be about fly balls, why not write “once in contact with the ground, a fly ball…”