WEBVTT - Mets and Reds team checkups

0:00:04.440 --> 0:00:07.160
<v Speaker 1>Hey, Will Salmon is back on foul territory. You can

0:00:07.200 --> 0:00:10.640
<v Speaker 1>follow him and his coverage in The Athletic, and right

0:00:10.640 --> 0:00:14.120
<v Speaker 1>now it's getting very interesting his coverage. Senior writer for

0:00:14.160 --> 0:00:16.799
<v Speaker 1>The Athletic, joining us covering the Mets all year. Well, Will,

0:00:16.920 --> 0:00:21.200
<v Speaker 1>here comes the roller coaster back down your thoughts on

0:00:21.239 --> 0:00:23.080
<v Speaker 1>what you're seeing lately from the Mets. But I want

0:00:23.120 --> 0:00:26.000
<v Speaker 1>to make sure we include the big picture here. The

0:00:26.040 --> 0:00:30.200
<v Speaker 1>Reds are two games back, which is really what like

0:00:30.320 --> 0:00:33.320
<v Speaker 1>one game back because if they're tied, the Reds actually

0:00:33.320 --> 0:00:35.440
<v Speaker 1>have the tiebreaker and would take them down for a

0:00:35.440 --> 0:00:38.000
<v Speaker 1>playoff spot no game one sixty three these days.

0:00:39.120 --> 0:00:41.560
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, you were very gracious, Scott with calling the coverage

0:00:41.640 --> 0:00:43.839
<v Speaker 2>interesting because it feels like it's kind of been like

0:00:43.920 --> 0:00:46.199
<v Speaker 2>the same story every day for a little while. And

0:00:46.240 --> 0:00:48.280
<v Speaker 2>it's been that way for a little while for the Mets,

0:00:48.520 --> 0:00:51.640
<v Speaker 2>even beyond this five game losing streak, because it keeps happening,

0:00:51.680 --> 0:00:55.720
<v Speaker 2>these streaks, and so it's very concerning when you're almost

0:00:55.760 --> 0:01:00.000
<v Speaker 2>at what midway point through a season, it's like seventy

0:01:00.200 --> 0:01:02.320
<v Speaker 2>seventies and the amount of games where they played fifteen

0:01:02.360 --> 0:01:05.520
<v Speaker 2>games below five hundred at this point, So that's highly

0:01:05.600 --> 0:01:06.880
<v Speaker 2>unusual for a team.

0:01:06.680 --> 0:01:08.840
<v Speaker 3>That's should be headed for the playoffs.

0:01:08.920 --> 0:01:11.760
<v Speaker 2>We think is headed for the playoffs, but that's all

0:01:11.800 --> 0:01:15.560
<v Speaker 2>but guaranteed at this point, obviously with just not only

0:01:15.600 --> 0:01:18.720
<v Speaker 2>the Reds, it's also the Giants too, and the Mets

0:01:18.800 --> 0:01:23.240
<v Speaker 2>own the tiebreaker over them, but like you said, it's

0:01:24.200 --> 0:01:26.640
<v Speaker 2>more than them. It's a three team race at this

0:01:26.720 --> 0:01:30.559
<v Speaker 2>point because of what the Mets have failed to accomplish,

0:01:30.560 --> 0:01:34.280
<v Speaker 2>and that's increased the distance between those teams. That really,

0:01:34.280 --> 0:01:36.360
<v Speaker 2>I don't know if you look at those teams and say, Okay,

0:01:36.400 --> 0:01:39.280
<v Speaker 2>those are playoff teams, I don't. I'm not really convinced

0:01:39.280 --> 0:01:41.760
<v Speaker 2>of that. But at this point, I'm not convinced of

0:01:41.760 --> 0:01:45.399
<v Speaker 2>the Mets either. Every day they tell us that they're

0:01:45.520 --> 0:01:49.840
<v Speaker 2>not good enough to be in the spot, especially lately,

0:01:49.920 --> 0:01:51.760
<v Speaker 2>and it's been that case for the past couple of months.

0:01:51.800 --> 0:01:55.080
<v Speaker 4>Really, who's the stopper. I'm not even just talking about

0:01:55.080 --> 0:01:59.040
<v Speaker 4>the rotation. I'm talking about like this team, Every good

0:01:59.120 --> 0:02:01.800
<v Speaker 4>team needs some But it says, okay, we've lost five

0:02:01.840 --> 0:02:04.760
<v Speaker 4>in a row, we're playing a division opponent that you

0:02:04.840 --> 0:02:09.520
<v Speaker 4>know what, we've annihilated him at home. I'm stepping up

0:02:09.560 --> 0:02:12.600
<v Speaker 4>to be the stopper. Sometimes some teams, it's like a

0:02:12.680 --> 0:02:15.760
<v Speaker 4>Terrek Scooble. It's an ax. Clearly this team doesn't have it.

0:02:15.840 --> 0:02:17.360
<v Speaker 4>And I know you're gonna point to like a Nolan

0:02:17.440 --> 0:02:20.480
<v Speaker 4>McClain and all that stuff, But is there somebody in

0:02:20.560 --> 0:02:24.600
<v Speaker 4>the offense, in the in the bullpen, somebody that can say,

0:02:24.639 --> 0:02:27.560
<v Speaker 4>you know what, this is the end, We're not losing today.

0:02:28.600 --> 0:02:29.679
<v Speaker 3>I'm not sure they have that guy.

0:02:30.120 --> 0:02:32.640
<v Speaker 2>I'm really not I think it should be somebody like

0:02:32.639 --> 0:02:35.760
<v Speaker 2>a Francisco Lindora or a mon Soto or somebody like that,

0:02:35.960 --> 0:02:39.840
<v Speaker 2>but I'm not convinced that that person in that specific

0:02:39.919 --> 0:02:43.600
<v Speaker 2>role exists. I think that they have players that exhibit

0:02:43.680 --> 0:02:47.000
<v Speaker 2>good leadership qualities in other ways. I think Lindor checks

0:02:47.040 --> 0:02:49.359
<v Speaker 2>a lot of boxes in that way, but I'm not

0:02:49.400 --> 0:02:52.519
<v Speaker 2>sure if he's the guy that is raw, raw, hey,

0:02:52.560 --> 0:02:54.640
<v Speaker 2>we're going to win this game today type of guy,

0:02:55.280 --> 0:02:58.680
<v Speaker 2>and he's that guy that sort of brings that edge

0:02:59.000 --> 0:03:01.919
<v Speaker 2>to the roster or to the clubhouse, I'm not sure.

0:03:02.280 --> 0:03:04.560
<v Speaker 2>And to be fair to the Mets, I'm not sure

0:03:04.560 --> 0:03:07.200
<v Speaker 2>if there are more than say five or six guys

0:03:07.240 --> 0:03:11.440
<v Speaker 2>in baseball who qualify for that sort of moniker'. That's

0:03:11.480 --> 0:03:12.880
<v Speaker 2>just not the way it is these days. I don't

0:03:12.880 --> 0:03:14.520
<v Speaker 2>think that there are too many guys who are very

0:03:14.560 --> 0:03:18.320
<v Speaker 2>vocal in that way. Unfortunately in a lot of cases.

0:03:18.680 --> 0:03:22.000
<v Speaker 2>And as far as the talent goes, yeah, they have

0:03:22.080 --> 0:03:25.280
<v Speaker 2>guys who will theoretically step up in those situations you

0:03:25.360 --> 0:03:28.359
<v Speaker 2>mentioned McLain. He could be that guy from a starting

0:03:28.400 --> 0:03:31.720
<v Speaker 2>pitching perspective, But the other day he threw a fairly

0:03:31.840 --> 0:03:34.519
<v Speaker 2>solid game and they lost, and they really can't afford

0:03:34.560 --> 0:03:38.360
<v Speaker 2>to be doing that anymore, and so it's not guaranteed there.

0:03:38.560 --> 0:03:43.240
<v Speaker 2>And mon Soto too has performed fairly well or exceptionally

0:03:43.240 --> 0:03:46.320
<v Speaker 2>well in some cases over the last few weeks, and

0:03:46.360 --> 0:03:49.720
<v Speaker 2>they've still suffered through this, and so I think it

0:03:49.720 --> 0:03:50.600
<v Speaker 2>goes beyond that.

0:03:51.120 --> 0:03:51.880
<v Speaker 3>But that's part of it.

0:03:51.920 --> 0:03:53.400
<v Speaker 2>I think that that is kind of part of it,

0:03:53.480 --> 0:03:55.640
<v Speaker 2>that in that clubhouse there may not be a guy

0:03:55.720 --> 0:03:58.320
<v Speaker 2>that rises to the occasion.

0:03:57.920 --> 0:03:58.720
<v Speaker 3>In that way.

0:03:58.840 --> 0:04:01.040
<v Speaker 2>And again, like Lindora is a great leader in some

0:04:01.080 --> 0:04:03.520
<v Speaker 2>ways and then some facets, but that may not be

0:04:04.440 --> 0:04:07.040
<v Speaker 2>one of the boxes that he checks off definitively.

0:04:08.120 --> 0:04:10.000
<v Speaker 5>Well, it's got to be a picture, though what picture

0:04:10.040 --> 0:04:12.400
<v Speaker 5>you mentioned, McClain. It's got to be a picture that

0:04:12.440 --> 0:04:15.240
<v Speaker 5>stuffs his guys I'm throwing a shutout tonight. Score me

0:04:15.320 --> 0:04:17.440
<v Speaker 5>one run. Do the Mets have that guy? Because I

0:04:17.480 --> 0:04:20.080
<v Speaker 5>don't see that. Even McLain, you mentioned he pitched pretty well,

0:04:20.320 --> 0:04:23.239
<v Speaker 5>he gave up one run and lost. They lost one nothing,

0:04:23.800 --> 0:04:27.080
<v Speaker 5>So Manaiah hasn't been at that guy. Peterson's been their best,

0:04:27.080 --> 0:04:29.920
<v Speaker 5>but he struggled lately. Senga's in triple A tong?

0:04:30.080 --> 0:04:30.600
<v Speaker 3>Is it tong?

0:04:30.880 --> 0:04:33.880
<v Speaker 5>He's too young, right, I mean, is it sprout? I mean,

0:04:34.279 --> 0:04:35.839
<v Speaker 5>who can it be? Because it has to be a picture,

0:04:36.000 --> 0:04:37.680
<v Speaker 5>Like you can say, oh, the lineup has to do this,

0:04:37.720 --> 0:04:40.599
<v Speaker 5>but their lineup doesn't always come around to Lindor Soto

0:04:40.600 --> 0:04:43.880
<v Speaker 5>Alonso in big situations. So who's the picture that they

0:04:43.880 --> 0:04:45.440
<v Speaker 5>can count on to say, all right, guys, I'm gonna

0:04:45.440 --> 0:04:47.520
<v Speaker 5>give you six shutty, go score once so we can

0:04:47.560 --> 0:04:49.440
<v Speaker 5>get the ball to Diaz in the ninth and we

0:04:49.440 --> 0:04:51.039
<v Speaker 5>can finish this game off and get a win and

0:04:51.040 --> 0:04:52.040
<v Speaker 5>get get straightened out.

0:04:53.040 --> 0:04:54.440
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, for me, it's going to be McLain.

0:04:54.680 --> 0:04:57.360
<v Speaker 2>He's to me, he has exemplified and he has exhibited

0:04:58.040 --> 0:05:00.280
<v Speaker 2>the marks of a quality pitcher, if not even a

0:05:00.360 --> 0:05:02.400
<v Speaker 2>number one type of guy. For me, he would be

0:05:02.440 --> 0:05:04.200
<v Speaker 2>their Game one pitcher. And it's kind of a shame

0:05:04.279 --> 0:05:06.760
<v Speaker 2>because in him, I do think that they have a

0:05:06.800 --> 0:05:09.039
<v Speaker 2>game one pitcher. It's just will they have a Game

0:05:09.080 --> 0:05:11.760
<v Speaker 2>one to play? I don't know, maybe, but.

0:05:11.960 --> 0:05:13.360
<v Speaker 3>I feel like McLain is that guy.

0:05:13.520 --> 0:05:16.760
<v Speaker 2>And yes, you pointed rightfully so to that game recently

0:05:16.800 --> 0:05:19.240
<v Speaker 2>where he did throw a fairly good game and they

0:05:19.279 --> 0:05:21.479
<v Speaker 2>ended up losing, But that's not on him. I think

0:05:21.480 --> 0:05:23.800
<v Speaker 2>that he has done everything throughout his five starts to

0:05:23.800 --> 0:05:26.440
<v Speaker 2>put them in a position to win each of those games,

0:05:26.480 --> 0:05:28.080
<v Speaker 2>and then four of them they have, and then that

0:05:28.120 --> 0:05:31.520
<v Speaker 2>one they didn't because they're just not clicking on the

0:05:31.520 --> 0:05:32.600
<v Speaker 2>other facets of the game.

0:05:33.000 --> 0:05:36.480
<v Speaker 3>So McLain I like a lot of what he has shown.

0:05:36.520 --> 0:05:38.680
<v Speaker 3>I think everybody has. He is that guy.

0:05:38.800 --> 0:05:41.599
<v Speaker 2>For me, it's just a shame because they don't have

0:05:41.680 --> 0:05:44.919
<v Speaker 2>anybody who is really coming close to being that otherwise, because,

0:05:44.960 --> 0:05:48.280
<v Speaker 2>like you mentioned, Peterson had been that guy for a while.

0:05:48.400 --> 0:05:50.640
<v Speaker 2>He has lately stumbled, and I think that's going to

0:05:50.720 --> 0:05:52.560
<v Speaker 2>come with the territory a little bit. With just the

0:05:52.560 --> 0:05:55.119
<v Speaker 2>style of pitcher that he is, you have more balls

0:05:55.160 --> 0:05:58.240
<v Speaker 2>in play with him. He's not somebody that racks up strikeouts,

0:05:58.320 --> 0:06:00.000
<v Speaker 2>so the ball will be there and if your defense

0:06:00.120 --> 0:06:02.120
<v Speaker 2>is not on par, which a lot of times for

0:06:02.160 --> 0:06:04.960
<v Speaker 2>the Mets it has not been, sometimes it's not going

0:06:05.040 --> 0:06:07.440
<v Speaker 2>to look that as good as it otherwise would. So

0:06:07.880 --> 0:06:09.840
<v Speaker 2>that's been the issue there. And then, like you mentioned,

0:06:09.880 --> 0:06:12.360
<v Speaker 2>you went through the list. Aj Manaya has not been

0:06:12.400 --> 0:06:15.320
<v Speaker 2>that guy. Saga's in triple A, Clay Holmes has not

0:06:15.400 --> 0:06:17.720
<v Speaker 2>been that guy. So that and then the other two

0:06:17.760 --> 0:06:19.680
<v Speaker 2>rookies that you mentioned have a combined what two or

0:06:19.680 --> 0:06:22.839
<v Speaker 2>three starts between them, so they're not going to be

0:06:22.920 --> 0:06:25.960
<v Speaker 2>that guy quite yet. So that's the situation that they're in.

0:06:26.000 --> 0:06:30.280
<v Speaker 2>They're just not getting quality or length from their veterans

0:06:30.279 --> 0:06:32.040
<v Speaker 2>in that rotation, and it's really put them in a

0:06:32.040 --> 0:06:35.240
<v Speaker 2>bind because you're asking a lot of the bullpen, and

0:06:35.320 --> 0:06:37.120
<v Speaker 2>the bullpen has not been as good as it should be,

0:06:37.600 --> 0:06:39.960
<v Speaker 2>and then you're relying on the offense, which has been

0:06:40.160 --> 0:06:41.200
<v Speaker 2>widely inconsistent.

0:06:43.279 --> 0:06:46.560
<v Speaker 1>We are longtime fans of Omaha Steaks and I am

0:06:46.680 --> 0:06:50.480
<v Speaker 1>drooling looking at the website right now featuring USDA certified

0:06:50.520 --> 0:06:53.400
<v Speaker 1>Tender Steaks and also during their red Hot sale event

0:06:53.560 --> 0:06:55.800
<v Speaker 1>going on right now this fall, fifty percent off site

0:06:55.839 --> 0:06:58.760
<v Speaker 1>wide at Omaha steaks dot com. Plus for the ftfam

0:06:58.760 --> 0:07:01.920
<v Speaker 1>an extra thirty five dollars off with promo code epoul

0:07:02.000 --> 0:07:04.440
<v Speaker 1>at checkout. You've been a big fan of Omaha Steaks

0:07:04.480 --> 0:07:05.600
<v Speaker 1>since your early days as a pro.

0:07:06.320 --> 0:07:08.000
<v Speaker 5>Brings me back to my A ball low a ball

0:07:08.120 --> 0:07:09.960
<v Speaker 5>days because we used to survive on this. We get

0:07:09.960 --> 0:07:11.840
<v Speaker 5>a big order at the beginning of the year, cook

0:07:11.880 --> 0:07:15.240
<v Speaker 5>him on our little electra grill canapeas so mac and cheese.

0:07:15.240 --> 0:07:18.200
<v Speaker 5>That was dinner for four. We survived off Omaha Steaks

0:07:18.200 --> 0:07:19.880
<v Speaker 5>and still has a special place in my heart.

0:07:19.960 --> 0:07:23.880
<v Speaker 1>You thrived well, you guys ate like kings. Yeah, that's special.

0:07:23.960 --> 0:07:26.440
<v Speaker 1>Get fired up for Paul grilling with Omaha Steaks. Visit

0:07:26.520 --> 0:07:28.880
<v Speaker 1>Omaha Steaks dot com for fifty percent off site wide

0:07:28.960 --> 0:07:31.000
<v Speaker 1>during the red Hot Sale event and for an extra

0:07:31.040 --> 0:07:34.760
<v Speaker 1>thirty five bucks off promo code foul a checkout fifty

0:07:34.800 --> 0:07:37.400
<v Speaker 1>percent off at Omaha Steaks dot Com and an extra

0:07:37.440 --> 0:07:40.720
<v Speaker 1>thirty five dollars off with promo code epoul at checkout

0:07:41.000 --> 0:07:44.480
<v Speaker 1>see site for details. Dig in, what.

0:07:44.800 --> 0:07:49.080
<v Speaker 4>Is the reason that a thirty to thirty season from

0:07:49.160 --> 0:07:52.440
<v Speaker 4>Juan Soto just kind of got glossed over? Was it

0:07:52.480 --> 0:07:55.480
<v Speaker 4>the fact that he stole third down by five and

0:07:55.520 --> 0:07:57.760
<v Speaker 4>it was kind of a look at me, I'm gonna

0:07:57.760 --> 0:08:00.360
<v Speaker 4>get my stats with two outs and get that. Or

0:08:00.480 --> 0:08:03.280
<v Speaker 4>is it the fact that when you sign a seven

0:08:03.360 --> 0:08:08.840
<v Speaker 4>hundred million dollar contract that fans and even some media

0:08:09.040 --> 0:08:12.400
<v Speaker 4>kind of expect great things like thirty thirty and we

0:08:12.560 --> 0:08:13.560
<v Speaker 4>just gloss over it.

0:08:16.720 --> 0:08:21.280
<v Speaker 2>He's the highest paid player ever we and he's paid

0:08:21.280 --> 0:08:23.520
<v Speaker 2>that much because of what he does as a hitter,

0:08:23.760 --> 0:08:26.640
<v Speaker 2>right Like that's he is in the top one percent

0:08:26.680 --> 0:08:29.200
<v Speaker 2>of hitters. That's why he is paid. He is not

0:08:29.280 --> 0:08:32.800
<v Speaker 2>in the top one percent of base running or defense

0:08:33.160 --> 0:08:36.040
<v Speaker 2>things like that. He is a hitter and he is very,

0:08:36.160 --> 0:08:39.439
<v Speaker 2>very very good generational talent at that, and so that's

0:08:39.440 --> 0:08:42.440
<v Speaker 2>why he's getting paid that amount of money. And I

0:08:42.440 --> 0:08:44.680
<v Speaker 2>think when that happens, we look at his numbers and

0:08:44.679 --> 0:08:46.720
<v Speaker 2>we say, Okay, he should also be doing this, that

0:08:46.960 --> 0:08:49.120
<v Speaker 2>and the other thing, and that's just never been the

0:08:49.160 --> 0:08:52.480
<v Speaker 2>case for him. So and with the stole mass, yes,

0:08:52.960 --> 0:08:55.520
<v Speaker 2>it's some of that has happened where he has been

0:08:55.559 --> 0:08:58.679
<v Speaker 2>a little bit too aggressive with it and it almost

0:08:58.679 --> 0:09:01.960
<v Speaker 2>feels like he's just kind of doing it in weird spots.

0:09:02.040 --> 0:09:04.920
<v Speaker 2>And you pointed, rightfully so to the last slow base

0:09:04.960 --> 0:09:07.480
<v Speaker 2>where it was they were down five late in the game,

0:09:07.520 --> 0:09:10.199
<v Speaker 2>and it was it was irrelevant and it just was

0:09:10.320 --> 0:09:13.080
<v Speaker 2>not a team kind of first played because it didn't

0:09:13.080 --> 0:09:14.040
<v Speaker 2>really change anything.

0:09:14.080 --> 0:09:15.560
<v Speaker 3>It wasn't going to change anything.

0:09:16.200 --> 0:09:17.960
<v Speaker 2>They were still going to have a lot of work

0:09:17.960 --> 0:09:19.840
<v Speaker 2>ahead of them to win that game, whether he steals

0:09:19.840 --> 0:09:23.040
<v Speaker 2>third base or not in that situation. So when that

0:09:23.120 --> 0:09:26.240
<v Speaker 2>starts to happen, it loses its luster a little bit.

0:09:27.240 --> 0:09:30.079
<v Speaker 2>And a lot of his stolen bases, frankly, have happened

0:09:30.840 --> 0:09:32.719
<v Speaker 2>since August, and so I think the number kind of

0:09:32.720 --> 0:09:35.120
<v Speaker 2>crept up on a lot of people where yes, he

0:09:35.360 --> 0:09:38.280
<v Speaker 2>was showing signs of like being a threat on the

0:09:38.280 --> 0:09:41.320
<v Speaker 2>basis for a little while, even though he is not fast,

0:09:42.040 --> 0:09:44.240
<v Speaker 2>he has been doing it in other ways, getting big jumps,

0:09:44.240 --> 0:09:46.679
<v Speaker 2>that kind of thing. But it all kind of picked

0:09:46.760 --> 0:09:49.520
<v Speaker 2>up the pace in August, and I think he set

0:09:49.520 --> 0:09:52.000
<v Speaker 2>his sights on thirty stolen bases, and now he may

0:09:52.080 --> 0:09:54.760
<v Speaker 2>set his sights on forty. I think that that's it's

0:09:54.760 --> 0:09:56.720
<v Speaker 2>in the realm of possibility. Even though we're down to

0:09:57.240 --> 0:09:59.760
<v Speaker 2>sixteen games left in the season for the Mets. The

0:09:59.800 --> 0:10:02.280
<v Speaker 2>way that he is running, I think it's all on

0:10:02.400 --> 0:10:06.120
<v Speaker 2>the list of possibilities for Soda.

0:10:06.280 --> 0:10:08.840
<v Speaker 5>Well, the main question is are the Mets fans happy

0:10:08.880 --> 0:10:11.200
<v Speaker 5>with Wan Soda his first year. I mean, look at

0:10:11.200 --> 0:10:13.319
<v Speaker 5>the numbers. The numbers are nine to twenty one ops,

0:10:13.400 --> 0:10:17.120
<v Speaker 5>nine to twenty ops around there are the Mets fans happy?

0:10:17.200 --> 0:10:19.520
<v Speaker 5>And is this maybe the better way to put it?

0:10:19.559 --> 0:10:21.880
<v Speaker 5>Is this a hollow thirty thirty especially if the Mets

0:10:22.360 --> 0:10:24.840
<v Speaker 5>don't make the postseason? Because you mentioned the stolen bases?

0:10:24.840 --> 0:10:27.440
<v Speaker 5>He had a home run down eleven to two last night.

0:10:27.880 --> 0:10:30.960
<v Speaker 5>But is this what the Mets fans expected or do

0:10:31.040 --> 0:10:32.680
<v Speaker 5>they want more? Has this been a good year for

0:10:32.720 --> 0:10:35.800
<v Speaker 5>Wan Soda? Not numbers wise, but according to Mets fans,

0:10:35.840 --> 0:10:37.480
<v Speaker 5>which is as we know in New York, it's all

0:10:37.480 --> 0:10:38.400
<v Speaker 5>that really matters.

0:10:38.960 --> 0:10:41.520
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and the context is everything right Again, he's the

0:10:41.559 --> 0:10:44.560
<v Speaker 2>highest paid player in baseball history, and we have these

0:10:44.600 --> 0:10:45.720
<v Speaker 2>huge expectations.

0:10:45.800 --> 0:10:48.439
<v Speaker 3>So yeah, I think he's having a great season, even

0:10:48.480 --> 0:10:49.640
<v Speaker 3>by Mets fans measures.

0:10:50.000 --> 0:10:53.439
<v Speaker 2>And that may not have been my cake maybe a

0:10:53.480 --> 0:10:56.920
<v Speaker 2>month ago, but since say August, he has really really

0:10:56.960 --> 0:10:59.960
<v Speaker 2>turned it on. And yeah, the last couple of games

0:11:00.080 --> 0:11:02.600
<v Speaker 2>it's been like the equivalent of racking up some style

0:11:02.679 --> 0:11:05.640
<v Speaker 2>points in garbage time. But I would not pin that

0:11:05.760 --> 0:11:08.440
<v Speaker 2>on mon Soto. I mean, that's the Mets problem as

0:11:08.440 --> 0:11:10.120
<v Speaker 2>a team, and I think a lot of fans now

0:11:10.200 --> 0:11:13.960
<v Speaker 2>have seen that Juan Soto has sort of he has

0:11:14.200 --> 0:11:16.719
<v Speaker 2>risen to the occasion here late in the season, and

0:11:16.760 --> 0:11:17.280
<v Speaker 2>I don't think you.

0:11:17.240 --> 0:11:17.960
<v Speaker 3>Could take that away.

0:11:18.400 --> 0:11:20.679
<v Speaker 2>There was a game against Detroit where they don't win

0:11:20.720 --> 0:11:24.000
<v Speaker 2>that game unless Wansda performs the way that Wansta performs,

0:11:24.440 --> 0:11:27.400
<v Speaker 2>where he had the Grand Slam and the triple. You know,

0:11:27.440 --> 0:11:30.320
<v Speaker 2>he just he won them that game, and that's been happening.

0:11:30.400 --> 0:11:32.840
<v Speaker 2>So my answer would have been different a month ago,

0:11:32.880 --> 0:11:36.760
<v Speaker 2>because that was not happening. He was failing in critical spots.

0:11:36.800 --> 0:11:39.160
<v Speaker 2>His numbers with runners and scoring position were not good.

0:11:39.880 --> 0:11:43.440
<v Speaker 2>But that has changed lately. And so I know some

0:11:43.480 --> 0:11:46.760
<v Speaker 2>of the instances and examples that you cited are not

0:11:47.000 --> 0:11:49.400
<v Speaker 2>great for this conversation, But that's also a little bit

0:11:49.440 --> 0:11:52.200
<v Speaker 2>of like recency there with just the past couple of games.

0:11:52.240 --> 0:11:54.520
<v Speaker 2>But when you look at just since August, I think

0:11:54.520 --> 0:11:56.960
<v Speaker 2>he's redeemed himself in a lot of Mets fans' eyes,

0:11:57.080 --> 0:12:00.160
<v Speaker 2>and they look at this, I think, at least as

0:12:00.480 --> 0:12:03.719
<v Speaker 2>the team is sort of is crumbling, whereas he's been

0:12:03.760 --> 0:12:06.280
<v Speaker 2>like one of the only guys who have steadily performed

0:12:06.640 --> 0:12:09.679
<v Speaker 2>since August and into September, and I think that he

0:12:09.760 --> 0:12:10.880
<v Speaker 2>deserves some credit for that.

0:12:10.960 --> 0:12:14.880
<v Speaker 4>Actually, Okay, were you at the You're at the home

0:12:14.960 --> 0:12:18.200
<v Speaker 4>series for the Mets against the Phillies, and you've been

0:12:18.200 --> 0:12:22.280
<v Speaker 4>at this series in Philly. What on earth is the

0:12:22.400 --> 0:12:27.160
<v Speaker 4>difference in the Phillies. We've kind of hit on the

0:12:27.200 --> 0:12:29.079
<v Speaker 4>Mets a lot, but what do you see different from

0:12:29.120 --> 0:12:31.160
<v Speaker 4>the Phillies. I get it, you know who lined up

0:12:31.440 --> 0:12:34.760
<v Speaker 4>in the starting rotation did matter, and who's thrown for them,

0:12:34.760 --> 0:12:37.920
<v Speaker 4>But what do you see different? Because when we get

0:12:37.960 --> 0:12:39.760
<v Speaker 4>to the playoffs, and I think the Mets will most

0:12:39.800 --> 0:12:41.960
<v Speaker 4>likely make the playoffs, there's a good chance and the

0:12:41.960 --> 0:12:44.640
<v Speaker 4>Mets play the Phillies at City Field at some time

0:12:45.360 --> 0:12:47.040
<v Speaker 4>and then also at Citizen Bank.

0:12:47.960 --> 0:12:51.320
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, at this point, yes, the only difference is the venue.

0:12:51.520 --> 0:12:54.319
<v Speaker 2>It's the setting, right, Like, for whatever reason, the Phillies

0:12:54.400 --> 0:12:55.720
<v Speaker 2>just cannot win at City Field.

0:12:55.720 --> 0:12:56.280
<v Speaker 3>It's crazy.

0:12:56.760 --> 0:12:59.839
<v Speaker 2>And I think that everybody wanted to say, like when

0:12:59.880 --> 0:13:04.040
<v Speaker 2>that started to happen and the Mets played exceptionally well

0:13:04.040 --> 0:13:07.760
<v Speaker 2>against the Phillies at City Field, people want to say, like, oh,

0:13:07.800 --> 0:13:10.240
<v Speaker 2>the Mets have their number. That's not the case, and

0:13:10.480 --> 0:13:12.600
<v Speaker 2>that wasn't really the case, even dating back to last

0:13:12.679 --> 0:13:15.120
<v Speaker 2>year where the Mets had a hard time in Philadelphia,

0:13:15.240 --> 0:13:16.960
<v Speaker 2>and then they had a hard time in Philadelphia in

0:13:16.960 --> 0:13:20.200
<v Speaker 2>Philadelphia earlier in the season too, and that was the

0:13:20.240 --> 0:13:23.800
<v Speaker 2>site of another bad stretch of games for the Mets earlier.

0:13:24.120 --> 0:13:26.800
<v Speaker 3>So it's for I can't really explain it.

0:13:26.800 --> 0:13:28.559
<v Speaker 2>I think it's a little bit baffling, to be honest

0:13:28.600 --> 0:13:31.920
<v Speaker 2>with you, I will say that the difference that I've

0:13:31.960 --> 0:13:36.360
<v Speaker 2>noticed in this particular series has been really the trade

0:13:36.360 --> 0:13:39.080
<v Speaker 2>deadline acquisitions on both sides. I think for the Phillies

0:13:39.120 --> 0:13:42.040
<v Speaker 2>they've hit on those guys, whereas the Mets, and I

0:13:42.160 --> 0:13:45.040
<v Speaker 2>like their moves, to be completely honest, I like their offseason,

0:13:45.080 --> 0:13:47.800
<v Speaker 2>I like their trade deadline, but the results haven't worked out,

0:13:48.080 --> 0:13:50.559
<v Speaker 2>and I think that's been the biggest difference lately when

0:13:50.559 --> 0:13:52.800
<v Speaker 2>you look at both those teams, in addition to just

0:13:52.880 --> 0:13:55.840
<v Speaker 2>also you know, you're getting fifty home runs from Shorebur

0:13:56.040 --> 0:13:59.320
<v Speaker 2>the difference of the lineup. But when you subtract the

0:13:59.480 --> 0:14:02.520
<v Speaker 2>entire let side of the infield from the Phillies at

0:14:02.520 --> 0:14:04.560
<v Speaker 2>the start of the series and they still take the

0:14:04.600 --> 0:14:08.600
<v Speaker 2>first three games and they do so rather easily, that's

0:14:08.760 --> 0:14:11.720
<v Speaker 2>problematic and it just speaks to a lot more issues

0:14:12.280 --> 0:14:14.199
<v Speaker 2>other than the venue and other than just one or

0:14:14.240 --> 0:14:16.960
<v Speaker 2>two things. It's just two teams in totally different directions

0:14:17.040 --> 0:14:17.400
<v Speaker 2>right now.

0:14:18.840 --> 0:14:21.040
<v Speaker 5>Well, two things, how worded are you about Ryan Helsley?

0:14:21.120 --> 0:14:23.880
<v Speaker 5>Is he tipping? We keep hearing this, but everyone I

0:14:23.920 --> 0:14:26.680
<v Speaker 5>know that Sluke hasn't seen anything. And then two have

0:14:26.680 --> 0:14:28.280
<v Speaker 5>to answer that. I have a quick follow up and

0:14:28.320 --> 0:14:29.440
<v Speaker 5>a yes or no question for you.

0:14:30.320 --> 0:14:34.240
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I'm worried about Hellsley because he hasn't had even

0:14:34.320 --> 0:14:36.800
<v Speaker 2>consecutive outings with the Mets yet where he hasn't given

0:14:36.880 --> 0:14:40.080
<v Speaker 2>up a run. He's had some outings that he's been okay.

0:14:40.520 --> 0:14:42.560
<v Speaker 2>The other day he had a clean inning and a

0:14:42.600 --> 0:14:45.840
<v Speaker 2>lot of people within the Mets were pretty confident and

0:14:45.920 --> 0:14:48.680
<v Speaker 2>happy about that, and they were optimistic that maybe he

0:14:48.720 --> 0:14:51.480
<v Speaker 2>had turned the corner. But then yesterday last night, he

0:14:51.520 --> 0:14:53.520
<v Speaker 2>again had a bad inning and it just didn't look good.

0:14:53.560 --> 0:14:55.600
<v Speaker 2>And whether he's tipping or not, he said that he

0:14:55.600 --> 0:14:58.480
<v Speaker 2>has corrected the issue he thinks that he was. And

0:14:58.560 --> 0:15:02.479
<v Speaker 2>sometimes even if like maybe that's a little bit overblown,

0:15:03.000 --> 0:15:05.040
<v Speaker 2>you guys know, as former players, like that can get

0:15:05.040 --> 0:15:07.480
<v Speaker 2>in guys heads a little bit or a lot, depending

0:15:07.480 --> 0:15:10.720
<v Speaker 2>on the guy, and once that happens, it's problematic because

0:15:10.720 --> 0:15:12.000
<v Speaker 2>then you're trying to figure things out.

0:15:12.040 --> 0:15:14.080
<v Speaker 3>Maybe it messes with your mechanics, It could be a

0:15:14.120 --> 0:15:16.280
<v Speaker 3>lot of things. He has said that he had.

0:15:16.160 --> 0:15:19.640
<v Speaker 2>Figured it out, But if he's figured it out and

0:15:19.680 --> 0:15:22.400
<v Speaker 2>he's still having innings like he had yesterday, that's also

0:15:22.480 --> 0:15:25.960
<v Speaker 2>concerning because it's problematic either way. So it's a concern,

0:15:26.080 --> 0:15:28.920
<v Speaker 2>and it's troubling because the Mets obviously didn't think this

0:15:28.960 --> 0:15:31.760
<v Speaker 2>would happen. They gave up real value in that trade

0:15:31.760 --> 0:15:34.480
<v Speaker 2>with the Cardinals. They expected a lot from this guy,

0:15:34.720 --> 0:15:38.520
<v Speaker 2>and he's somebody now that if the Mets were to

0:15:38.520 --> 0:15:41.120
<v Speaker 2>make a playoff roster right now, would he even be

0:15:41.240 --> 0:15:41.480
<v Speaker 2>on it.

0:15:41.520 --> 0:15:42.160
<v Speaker 3>I'm not sure.

0:15:42.800 --> 0:15:45.440
<v Speaker 2>It's because you can't really feel good about pitching him

0:15:45.440 --> 0:15:46.800
<v Speaker 2>in key situations right now?

0:15:47.760 --> 0:15:50.240
<v Speaker 5>All right? That's making Do the Mets make it? Yes

0:15:50.320 --> 0:15:52.480
<v Speaker 5>or no? Do the Mets make it with the way

0:15:52.480 --> 0:15:55.480
<v Speaker 5>they're playing with the Giants reds ere going on their heels,

0:15:55.480 --> 0:15:56.400
<v Speaker 5>Do they make it yes or no?

0:15:57.360 --> 0:15:59.440
<v Speaker 2>I go yes. I still go yes. I just think

0:15:59.480 --> 0:16:02.080
<v Speaker 2>that the two games plus the tiebreaker in one of

0:16:02.080 --> 0:16:04.880
<v Speaker 2>those situations, it matters a lot. Still, it's still just

0:16:05.040 --> 0:16:07.840
<v Speaker 2>enough and A lot of My answer is because I

0:16:07.920 --> 0:16:09.840
<v Speaker 2>just don't think the Reds and the Giants are good

0:16:09.920 --> 0:16:12.240
<v Speaker 2>enough to do it either. And that may be irrelevant

0:16:12.240 --> 0:16:14.160
<v Speaker 2>because if the Mets continue to lose, it does matter.

0:16:14.320 --> 0:16:17.960
<v Speaker 2>But I think that the Mets do enough, barely enough

0:16:18.000 --> 0:16:18.960
<v Speaker 2>to hold on here.

0:16:20.000 --> 0:16:24.880
<v Speaker 1>Okay, yeah, one more against the Phillies then tex here

0:16:24.920 --> 0:16:27.120
<v Speaker 1>we go. That's Dodgers.

0:16:27.200 --> 0:16:28.120
<v Speaker 5>Yeah, that's what it would be.

0:16:28.160 --> 0:16:30.920
<v Speaker 1>They got to get through Yeah, Philly, then Texas, San Diego,

0:16:31.080 --> 0:16:34.440
<v Speaker 1>Washington Cubs, and they finish with the Milins who love

0:16:34.760 --> 0:16:37.480
<v Speaker 1>playing spoiler against the Mets. All right, so you got

0:16:37.520 --> 0:16:40.480
<v Speaker 1>some basically playoff games that you're covering the next couple weeks. Well,

0:16:40.800 --> 0:16:41.760
<v Speaker 1>thanks for joining us.

0:16:41.760 --> 0:16:42.800
<v Speaker 3>Appreciate it. Everyone.

0:16:42.880 --> 0:16:44.440
<v Speaker 1>Check out what Will is bringing to the table on

0:16:44.480 --> 0:16:46.120
<v Speaker 1>the Athletic every Day cover in the Mets.

0:16:46.360 --> 0:16:47.160
<v Speaker 6>Appreciate you will.

0:16:47.920 --> 0:16:48.880
<v Speaker 3>Of course, thanks for having me on.

0:16:48.920 --> 0:16:52.760
<v Speaker 1>Guys, we spend a lot of time on the road.

0:16:52.960 --> 0:16:56.640
<v Speaker 1>We are often concerned about our online security when you're

0:16:56.760 --> 0:17:00.280
<v Speaker 1>logging in from all over the globe. Really, so you

0:17:00.320 --> 0:17:01.960
<v Speaker 1>should maybe look into a VPN.

0:17:02.000 --> 0:17:02.800
<v Speaker 6>What does that stand for?

0:17:02.880 --> 0:17:05.560
<v Speaker 3>Crafts Virtual Private network?

0:17:06.200 --> 0:17:09.240
<v Speaker 1>Boom nailed it and that virtual private network that you

0:17:09.280 --> 0:17:12.360
<v Speaker 1>should look into is called surf Shark. It is time

0:17:12.440 --> 0:17:15.119
<v Speaker 1>to take control of your online security and try surf

0:17:15.119 --> 0:17:17.880
<v Speaker 1>Shark today. You can enjoy their thirty day money back

0:17:17.920 --> 0:17:21.240
<v Speaker 1>guarantee and secure your digital world right now by visiting

0:17:21.240 --> 0:17:23.240
<v Speaker 1>the link that we'll post there for you and start

0:17:23.280 --> 0:17:27.520
<v Speaker 1>surfing securely surfshark dot com slash foule or the code

0:17:27.560 --> 0:17:30.439
<v Speaker 1>fall at checkout, we'll get you four extra months of

0:17:30.560 --> 0:17:35.440
<v Speaker 1>surf Shark VPN aka Virtual Private Network. It's a risk free,

0:17:35.480 --> 0:17:39.640
<v Speaker 1>thirty day money back guarantee. Surf sharks unique VPN benefits

0:17:39.680 --> 0:17:43.080
<v Speaker 1>include use on unlimited devices in one hundred countries and

0:17:43.200 --> 0:17:47.400
<v Speaker 1>twenty four to seven support at surfshark dot com slash

0:17:47.600 --> 0:17:51.120
<v Speaker 1>foul This has been your tech update. Keep your data safe.

0:17:51.720 --> 0:17:54.000
<v Speaker 1>We have Andy Sabo joining us right now on FT.

0:17:54.200 --> 0:17:58.040
<v Speaker 1>She covers the Reds on TV Reporter host and now

0:17:58.040 --> 0:18:00.440
<v Speaker 1>with us. Hey Annie, great to have you on here.

0:18:00.520 --> 0:18:03.840
<v Speaker 1>We appreciate the time. Are you surprised that the Reds

0:18:03.880 --> 0:18:05.160
<v Speaker 1>are where they are right now?

0:18:06.720 --> 0:18:08.879
<v Speaker 6>Yes, I'm completely surprised, guys.

0:18:09.400 --> 0:18:12.040
<v Speaker 7>I feel like there have been several times this season

0:18:12.160 --> 0:18:15.600
<v Speaker 7>where I feel like not only US local reporters, but

0:18:15.640 --> 0:18:18.400
<v Speaker 7>the national media has completely counted the Reds out right

0:18:18.440 --> 0:18:22.600
<v Speaker 7>and myself included, But every single time that I feel

0:18:22.640 --> 0:18:26.760
<v Speaker 7>that way, they have scratched and clawed and fought their

0:18:26.800 --> 0:18:30.360
<v Speaker 7>way back into the playoff picture, which is where they

0:18:30.359 --> 0:18:35.520
<v Speaker 7>stand right now. So surprised I was earlier in the season,

0:18:35.640 --> 0:18:38.560
<v Speaker 7>but I think now we're just kind of accustomed to

0:18:38.760 --> 0:18:42.640
<v Speaker 7>the Reds being you know, everyone thinks they're completely out

0:18:42.680 --> 0:18:44.920
<v Speaker 7>of it, and then they go on to win four

0:18:45.000 --> 0:18:47.880
<v Speaker 7>of their last five and right now they're back in

0:18:47.920 --> 0:18:48.600
<v Speaker 7>it again.

0:18:49.880 --> 0:18:51.840
<v Speaker 4>Are they back in it because of the Reds or

0:18:51.840 --> 0:18:55.000
<v Speaker 4>are they back in it because of the Mets?

0:18:57.280 --> 0:19:01.240
<v Speaker 7>I think after Friday's loss to the Mets, right to

0:19:01.359 --> 0:19:04.159
<v Speaker 7>go and win four of your last five, maybe a

0:19:04.160 --> 0:19:07.080
<v Speaker 7>combination of both. I can't say I saw the Mets

0:19:07.119 --> 0:19:10.920
<v Speaker 7>playing as poorly as they are right now a couple

0:19:11.000 --> 0:19:13.480
<v Speaker 7>of months ago. I didn't necessarily see that coming. How well,

0:19:13.560 --> 0:19:19.080
<v Speaker 7>for Cincinnati fans everywhere, we're everywhere will take it. But no,

0:19:19.200 --> 0:19:21.159
<v Speaker 7>I think the Reds. I mean, in the clubhouse all

0:19:21.200 --> 0:19:26.080
<v Speaker 7>season long, despite some skids, especially offensively throughout this season,

0:19:26.119 --> 0:19:29.919
<v Speaker 7>there's a belief in the clubhouse that they can and

0:19:30.080 --> 0:19:32.680
<v Speaker 7>will make the postseason. And I mean, here we are

0:19:32.720 --> 0:19:34.520
<v Speaker 7>with sixteen games left to play.

0:19:36.240 --> 0:19:39.080
<v Speaker 5>Any good question for you? How good has this rotation

0:19:39.160 --> 0:19:43.119
<v Speaker 5>been this team? Lodolo, Abbott, Singer, all these guys the

0:19:43.160 --> 0:19:46.040
<v Speaker 5>last few times too, has been really good. How good

0:19:46.119 --> 0:19:48.480
<v Speaker 5>have they been? And can they finish this month off

0:19:48.960 --> 0:19:50.720
<v Speaker 5>as strong as they have been for the last couple

0:19:50.760 --> 0:19:51.520
<v Speaker 5>of times through.

0:19:52.359 --> 0:19:53.760
<v Speaker 6>Yeah, I think so. I think.

0:19:54.000 --> 0:19:57.160
<v Speaker 7>As I mentioned just a moment ago, the offense has

0:19:57.200 --> 0:20:02.800
<v Speaker 7>been two inconsider for my liking at times. However, the

0:20:02.840 --> 0:20:05.520
<v Speaker 7>starting rotation has been the strength of this team all

0:20:05.560 --> 0:20:06.200
<v Speaker 7>season long.

0:20:06.280 --> 0:20:07.399
<v Speaker 6>I mean, it was a.

0:20:07.440 --> 0:20:09.840
<v Speaker 7>Huge blow when Hunter Green went on the il, but

0:20:09.960 --> 0:20:12.920
<v Speaker 7>he's back in the bullpen. We're getting some arms back.

0:20:13.240 --> 0:20:17.080
<v Speaker 7>Chase Burns and Graham Ashcraft were just recently activated. They're

0:20:17.080 --> 0:20:19.960
<v Speaker 7>gonna be with the team in Oakland ready to go.

0:20:20.040 --> 0:20:22.479
<v Speaker 7>But I mean the starting rotation, I mean, even you know,

0:20:22.680 --> 0:20:24.959
<v Speaker 7>Brady Singer, who kind of started off the year a

0:20:24.960 --> 0:20:27.080
<v Speaker 7>little bit slower. I mean, he's had a great month

0:20:27.200 --> 0:20:31.080
<v Speaker 7>of August to you know, add to the overall excellence

0:20:31.119 --> 0:20:33.680
<v Speaker 7>that we've seen day in day out from this Red

0:20:33.680 --> 0:20:37.439
<v Speaker 7>starting rotation, and yeah, I mean, if everyone stays healthy,

0:20:37.480 --> 0:20:41.399
<v Speaker 7>which is always year to year, if he for the

0:20:41.440 --> 0:20:44.760
<v Speaker 7>Red starting rotation, if they can stay healthy and finish

0:20:44.840 --> 0:20:47.359
<v Speaker 7>this year out strong. I mean we have Brady Singer,

0:20:47.400 --> 0:20:50.520
<v Speaker 7>Hunter Green, and Nicolodolo going you know, Oakland coming up.

0:20:50.560 --> 0:20:53.600
<v Speaker 7>Then Yeah, I mean I think they've been excellent and

0:20:53.640 --> 0:20:57.160
<v Speaker 7>that's a unit that I count on when the offense

0:20:57.240 --> 0:20:59.760
<v Speaker 7>isn't necessarily there. And yeah, I mean the Red starting rotation,

0:20:59.800 --> 0:21:01.960
<v Speaker 7>not only this season but for years to come, has

0:21:02.000 --> 0:21:04.480
<v Speaker 7>been a highlight and just so consistent.

0:21:05.880 --> 0:21:08.320
<v Speaker 4>What about the bullpen. Let's say, let's say this happens.

0:21:08.359 --> 0:21:12.359
<v Speaker 4>Let's say the Mets continue to drop like they're dropping,

0:21:12.400 --> 0:21:14.719
<v Speaker 4>and the Reds win enough to get in because they

0:21:14.760 --> 0:21:17.960
<v Speaker 4>have the easiest path, not schedule wise, but with the

0:21:18.040 --> 0:21:22.360
<v Speaker 4>tiebreaker and everything. Is this bullpen built with Emelio Pegan

0:21:22.600 --> 0:21:26.040
<v Speaker 4>and the boys to succeed in the playoffs?

0:21:27.680 --> 0:21:30.119
<v Speaker 7>I do. I think that something that's been talked about

0:21:30.119 --> 0:21:33.360
<v Speaker 7>this season in the clubhouse is that this clubhouse has

0:21:33.400 --> 0:21:36.840
<v Speaker 7>a bunch of dogs in there. And I think, you know,

0:21:36.960 --> 0:21:41.479
<v Speaker 7>despite some recent struggles from Amelio Pegan, I mean, he is,

0:21:42.640 --> 0:21:46.080
<v Speaker 7>in my personal opinion, the best clubhouse leader there is

0:21:46.119 --> 0:21:48.400
<v Speaker 7>in this locker room. Granted he's one of the oldest

0:21:48.440 --> 0:21:51.560
<v Speaker 7>in there right now, but yes, I believe getting you know,

0:21:51.640 --> 0:21:53.720
<v Speaker 7>I mean Chase Burns as a starter, I mean, he

0:21:53.800 --> 0:21:54.399
<v Speaker 7>is a rookie.

0:21:54.440 --> 0:21:56.600
<v Speaker 6>I mean, I do think he'll help bolster the bullpen.

0:21:56.640 --> 0:21:59.639
<v Speaker 7>But having Graham Ashpath coming back to start the series

0:21:59.680 --> 0:22:02.680
<v Speaker 7>in oak will be huge. Yes, I do think they

0:22:02.720 --> 0:22:07.280
<v Speaker 7>have the strength to withstand these last sixteen games or so.

0:22:07.400 --> 0:22:10.080
<v Speaker 7>And you know, I think it's nice that today the

0:22:10.119 --> 0:22:12.119
<v Speaker 7>Reds have.

0:22:11.320 --> 0:22:13.640
<v Speaker 6>Have an off day before the series, you.

0:22:13.600 --> 0:22:17.720
<v Speaker 7>Know, Oakland begins, or with the A's begins, to maybe

0:22:17.720 --> 0:22:18.960
<v Speaker 7>have a team meeting.

0:22:19.359 --> 0:22:21.240
<v Speaker 6>If needed at all. But yeah, I mean I.

0:22:21.240 --> 0:22:24.359
<v Speaker 7>Think the bullpen, I mean, I think the Reds have

0:22:25.320 --> 0:22:29.199
<v Speaker 7>had their leads given up leads far too easily this season.

0:22:29.240 --> 0:22:31.720
<v Speaker 7>But I think right now it's kind of do or

0:22:31.760 --> 0:22:34.200
<v Speaker 7>die for the Reds and for you know, the starting

0:22:34.280 --> 0:22:37.720
<v Speaker 7>rotation to the bullpen. And I think the bullpen, led

0:22:37.760 --> 0:22:41.919
<v Speaker 7>by closer Emilie Opegan, will be able to get the

0:22:42.000 --> 0:22:45.240
<v Speaker 7>job done and hopefully the Mets continue to crumble.

0:22:45.480 --> 0:22:49.639
<v Speaker 4>We'll take that, all right, Well, nothing happens for the

0:22:49.680 --> 0:22:51.880
<v Speaker 4>Reds if they don't get one guy going. And he's

0:22:51.920 --> 0:22:55.880
<v Speaker 4>got four names, Ellie da La Cruz. His power has

0:22:55.960 --> 0:22:59.640
<v Speaker 4>been absent. His star power is always there and he's

0:22:59.680 --> 0:23:02.960
<v Speaker 4>always looming to me when I watch games now though,

0:23:03.160 --> 0:23:05.160
<v Speaker 4>and I don't watch every Reds game, but when I do,

0:23:05.240 --> 0:23:07.119
<v Speaker 4>I turn to Ellie's at bats because I'm like, this

0:23:07.160 --> 0:23:09.720
<v Speaker 4>is way he's gonna turn it around. Some of us

0:23:09.760 --> 0:23:12.160
<v Speaker 4>at bats, even from the left side where he's stronger,

0:23:13.040 --> 0:23:16.720
<v Speaker 4>look like they're non competitive. Like it's like he's waiting

0:23:16.920 --> 0:23:19.760
<v Speaker 4>for this certain pitch and he's not hitting it, and

0:23:19.800 --> 0:23:23.280
<v Speaker 4>he's still striking out the same rate, and now the

0:23:23.359 --> 0:23:25.320
<v Speaker 4>power's gone. Is there something we're missing?

0:23:26.960 --> 0:23:28.720
<v Speaker 7>No, I don't think so, just kind of, I feel

0:23:28.720 --> 0:23:30.639
<v Speaker 7>like the ebbs and flows for Ellie. I mean, I

0:23:30.640 --> 0:23:34.720
<v Speaker 7>feel like we're yes, he has superstar ability at the

0:23:34.760 --> 0:23:37.320
<v Speaker 7>plate and defensively, but at the same time, I think

0:23:37.359 --> 0:23:40.639
<v Speaker 7>we forget that, you know, he's still a young kid

0:23:40.680 --> 0:23:45.320
<v Speaker 7>and still learning. I feel like, especially this season, yes,

0:23:45.400 --> 0:23:48.640
<v Speaker 7>he's had some slumps that have lasted a little bit

0:23:48.680 --> 0:23:52.520
<v Speaker 7>longer in comparison to seasons past. However, it seems like

0:23:53.200 --> 0:23:56.280
<v Speaker 7>whenever there is a moment for Ellie to show up,

0:23:56.640 --> 0:23:59.520
<v Speaker 7>when situations get dire, I mean, looking ahead to the

0:23:59.560 --> 0:24:03.159
<v Speaker 7>next six team games, it seems like, for whatever reason,

0:24:03.359 --> 0:24:09.119
<v Speaker 7>he is able to turn things around. So I fully

0:24:09.200 --> 0:24:12.800
<v Speaker 7>anticipate Ellie turning things around sooner rather than later.

0:24:12.960 --> 0:24:15.960
<v Speaker 6>However, I do understand what you're saying.

0:24:16.000 --> 0:24:19.320
<v Speaker 7>Some of his at bats this season, for longer periods

0:24:19.359 --> 0:24:21.400
<v Speaker 7>of time, have been have looked to.

0:24:21.359 --> 0:24:24.040
<v Speaker 6>Be more non competitive.

0:24:24.320 --> 0:24:27.760
<v Speaker 7>However, I just that's a guy that you don't necessarily

0:24:27.840 --> 0:24:32.040
<v Speaker 7>lose faith in ever throughout the season, despite him going

0:24:32.080 --> 0:24:34.160
<v Speaker 7>through a longer slump like he is right now.

0:24:35.760 --> 0:24:40.000
<v Speaker 1>Annie, Terry Francona has a highly decorated career. What's it

0:24:40.040 --> 0:24:43.800
<v Speaker 1>been like for him taking over this team, especially right

0:24:43.880 --> 0:24:46.800
<v Speaker 1>now where the team has kind of thrust themselves back

0:24:46.800 --> 0:24:49.920
<v Speaker 1>into the postseason conversation? What's he like running the team

0:24:49.960 --> 0:24:51.320
<v Speaker 1>over the last couple of weeks.

0:24:52.240 --> 0:24:54.119
<v Speaker 7>Yeah, well, I think at first and foremost before I

0:24:54.119 --> 0:24:56.840
<v Speaker 7>even get to that, I mean, having covered the Rents

0:24:56.840 --> 0:24:58.960
<v Speaker 7>for several seasons, I mean, you hear all these stories

0:24:59.000 --> 0:25:02.440
<v Speaker 7>about Terry Francona, and he comes as advertised. I mean,

0:25:02.480 --> 0:25:04.600
<v Speaker 7>he's a breath of fresh air. He's hilarious and pre

0:25:04.680 --> 0:25:09.400
<v Speaker 7>and postgame press conferences, and the players truly respect him

0:25:09.480 --> 0:25:12.440
<v Speaker 7>and appreciate all of the experience that he brings into

0:25:12.480 --> 0:25:17.600
<v Speaker 7>this clubhouse. He's really big on holding the players accountable,

0:25:17.800 --> 0:25:21.679
<v Speaker 7>and you know, being accountable and not necessarily you know,

0:25:22.200 --> 0:25:23.760
<v Speaker 7>yelling at players things like that.

0:25:23.840 --> 0:25:25.200
<v Speaker 6>But I think that this year.

0:25:25.080 --> 0:25:30.080
<v Speaker 7>There's just a new level of what's expected from the

0:25:30.160 --> 0:25:34.080
<v Speaker 7>players because Terry Francona is here, and I think that's

0:25:34.119 --> 0:25:35.480
<v Speaker 7>helped the team a whole lot.

0:25:35.560 --> 0:25:37.960
<v Speaker 6>And I think that, I mean.

0:25:38.200 --> 0:25:41.880
<v Speaker 7>Terry hasn't changed from game one to now. I mean

0:25:42.240 --> 0:25:45.280
<v Speaker 7>even in pre impressed game post conferences, he doesn't look

0:25:45.840 --> 0:25:49.960
<v Speaker 7>beyond one single game ahead or even you.

0:25:49.840 --> 0:25:52.000
<v Speaker 6>Know, behind in the schedule.

0:25:52.160 --> 0:25:56.800
<v Speaker 7>So I think that maybe his experience level and being

0:25:56.800 --> 0:26:00.359
<v Speaker 7>able to deal with teams that are on on the

0:26:00.359 --> 0:26:04.480
<v Speaker 7>brink of making you know, the postseason, could help this team,

0:26:04.560 --> 0:26:06.919
<v Speaker 7>maybe the intangible side of things.

0:26:07.320 --> 0:26:08.960
<v Speaker 6>But no, I mean he hasn't changed. I mean over

0:26:09.000 --> 0:26:09.920
<v Speaker 6>the last couple of weeks.

0:26:09.960 --> 0:26:12.400
<v Speaker 7>I mean, he's the same old guy looking at one

0:26:12.480 --> 0:26:14.560
<v Speaker 7>game at a time. Task at hand is to win

0:26:14.640 --> 0:26:17.320
<v Speaker 7>the game, and that's pretty much who he is. But

0:26:17.440 --> 0:26:21.520
<v Speaker 7>I definitely do think, you know, this last stretch of games,

0:26:21.560 --> 0:26:26.120
<v Speaker 7>just having his experience level and what he expects out

0:26:26.119 --> 0:26:29.840
<v Speaker 7>of this team with sixteen games left, will be a

0:26:29.960 --> 0:26:30.560
<v Speaker 7>huge help.

0:26:32.680 --> 0:26:36.680
<v Speaker 5>Anny, I have your game next Thursday against the Cubby Bears.

0:26:37.400 --> 0:26:41.600
<v Speaker 5>I'll be there, actually, thank god. I mean, if you

0:26:41.600 --> 0:26:44.000
<v Speaker 5>weren't there, you guys, you can tell the rest of

0:26:44.040 --> 0:26:45.800
<v Speaker 5>their one that they can take the night off. Okay, So,

0:26:46.400 --> 0:26:49.040
<v Speaker 5>but what I want to know is, well, this is

0:26:49.080 --> 0:26:51.320
<v Speaker 5>the fans. Are the fans behind this Reds team? Are

0:26:51.320 --> 0:26:53.760
<v Speaker 5>they showing up and showing out? So when I when

0:26:53.800 --> 0:26:58.000
<v Speaker 5>I walk into the small Park next weekend or next Thursday,

0:26:58.040 --> 0:27:00.360
<v Speaker 5>a week from tonight, will there be a pack Red

0:27:00.600 --> 0:27:02.440
<v Speaker 5>pro Red's crowded? Well, I have to listen to the

0:27:02.960 --> 0:27:05.440
<v Speaker 5>Cubby Bear fans come down to sits now each year.

0:27:06.840 --> 0:27:09.080
<v Speaker 7>Mixed bag because last time there were a lot of

0:27:09.359 --> 0:27:12.680
<v Speaker 7>Cubs fans there. However, I do think I think it's

0:27:12.680 --> 0:27:16.200
<v Speaker 7>dependent on you know, this series against the A's. However,

0:27:16.280 --> 0:27:19.480
<v Speaker 7>I would hope that fans show up. The last four

0:27:19.560 --> 0:27:25.439
<v Speaker 7>series or so are against division opponents mixed back based

0:27:25.440 --> 0:27:28.360
<v Speaker 7>on the last series against the Cubs they played at

0:27:28.359 --> 0:27:33.439
<v Speaker 7>Great American Ballpark, however, yes, I would expect this last

0:27:34.119 --> 0:27:37.280
<v Speaker 7>sixteen games or so Great American Ballpark to be to

0:27:37.320 --> 0:27:39.359
<v Speaker 7>be pretty packed. I mean, that's what it was like

0:27:39.480 --> 0:27:42.119
<v Speaker 7>in twenty twenty three when the Reds were in the

0:27:42.160 --> 0:27:45.800
<v Speaker 7>wild card hunt until the very final week of the season.

0:27:45.840 --> 0:27:47.720
<v Speaker 6>I mean it was in twenty twenty three.

0:27:47.800 --> 0:27:50.479
<v Speaker 7>That was one of my favorite moments of my entire career,

0:27:50.600 --> 0:27:55.080
<v Speaker 7>just seeing Great American Ballpark so packed during the month

0:27:55.080 --> 0:27:57.199
<v Speaker 7>of September until you know, the last week where they

0:27:57.200 --> 0:28:00.639
<v Speaker 7>were finally, finally not in contention anyone. So yes, I

0:28:00.640 --> 0:28:04.000
<v Speaker 7>would assume that that Reds fans should would be there.

0:28:04.440 --> 0:28:06.840
<v Speaker 7>If not, if any Reds fans are listening to this podcast,

0:28:06.920 --> 0:28:09.600
<v Speaker 7>I suggest that you show up for the entirety of

0:28:09.640 --> 0:28:10.920
<v Speaker 7>this Red season right now.

0:28:12.359 --> 0:28:14.639
<v Speaker 5>Agreed? Agreed? All right, Well then I'll lead you to

0:28:14.680 --> 0:28:17.160
<v Speaker 5>our next question. Since you have all of the putters

0:28:17.160 --> 0:28:18.760
<v Speaker 5>behind you, are you going to take me golfing on

0:28:18.840 --> 0:28:20.520
<v Speaker 5>Thursday morning? That's a better question.

0:28:22.000 --> 0:28:24.480
<v Speaker 6>Well, I am not the golfer. My husband is. He

0:28:24.760 --> 0:28:26.080
<v Speaker 6>plays on the Page Tours.

0:28:26.320 --> 0:28:29.320
<v Speaker 7>He's in Napa Valley right now playing in the Pro

0:28:29.440 --> 0:28:33.399
<v Speaker 7>Corps Championship, so he this is his project behind me.

0:28:33.880 --> 0:28:36.399
<v Speaker 6>I am, I am. I can play golf.

0:28:36.760 --> 0:28:41.240
<v Speaker 7>I still have some athleticism left, but no, he is

0:28:41.280 --> 0:28:43.320
<v Speaker 7>the golfer in the family, and we have way too

0:28:43.400 --> 0:28:45.960
<v Speaker 7>many golf clubs. However, I can tell you places to

0:28:46.200 --> 0:28:50.000
<v Speaker 7>golf in Cincinnati, and I have people there who could

0:28:50.080 --> 0:28:51.040
<v Speaker 7>get you at tea time.

0:28:51.560 --> 0:28:52.040
<v Speaker 3>Just let me know.

0:28:53.000 --> 0:28:55.400
<v Speaker 5>Okay, thank you, because you have way too many putters,

0:28:55.440 --> 0:28:57.320
<v Speaker 5>you have way too much money invested in your putters.

0:28:57.760 --> 0:29:00.760
<v Speaker 6>Oh, don't don't even get me started about it. We

0:29:00.800 --> 0:29:02.240
<v Speaker 6>have more in the garage. Don't worry.

0:29:02.760 --> 0:29:04.880
<v Speaker 5>If your husband needs some lefties, though, let me know.

0:29:04.920 --> 0:29:05.920
<v Speaker 5>I'm happy to sell them some.

0:29:09.040 --> 0:29:12.000
<v Speaker 1>That's good, well, a j it's his job, so I mean,

0:29:12.360 --> 0:29:15.000
<v Speaker 1>not spending too much money on it. That's that's his career.

0:29:15.800 --> 0:29:18.160
<v Speaker 5>No, I agree. But still, usually you don't see putter

0:29:18.200 --> 0:29:20.560
<v Speaker 5>covers hanging on the walls and put usual let me,

0:29:20.680 --> 0:29:22.240
<v Speaker 5>let me change it. This is gonna sound really bad.

0:29:22.280 --> 0:29:24.880
<v Speaker 5>You usually don't see women sitting in front of putters

0:29:24.880 --> 0:29:27.480
<v Speaker 5>and putter covers on their wall. Usually guys. Yes, I

0:29:27.480 --> 0:29:29.720
<v Speaker 5>know friends that have like hundreds of putters, which makes

0:29:29.720 --> 0:29:31.920
<v Speaker 5>no sense to me. But you usually don't see women

0:29:32.000 --> 0:29:32.320
<v Speaker 5>doing that.

0:29:33.280 --> 0:29:33.480
<v Speaker 4>Yeah.

0:29:33.520 --> 0:29:34.440
<v Speaker 6>No, none of this is mine.

0:29:34.480 --> 0:29:36.719
<v Speaker 7>I usually pick out the colors or like the different

0:29:37.200 --> 0:29:39.880
<v Speaker 7>head covers prior to each tournament, which which I do

0:29:39.880 --> 0:29:42.680
<v Speaker 7>do because I like certain colors and he usually takes

0:29:42.680 --> 0:29:43.800
<v Speaker 7>those with him.

0:29:44.440 --> 0:29:46.120
<v Speaker 6>But no, I mean I'll go out and to the

0:29:46.200 --> 0:29:48.920
<v Speaker 6>driving range and hit balls and.

0:29:48.960 --> 0:29:51.040
<v Speaker 7>If my two year old daughter eventually wants to get

0:29:51.040 --> 0:29:54.520
<v Speaker 7>into it, then sure, I'll take lessons and start to

0:29:54.520 --> 0:29:55.160
<v Speaker 7>really practice.

0:29:55.200 --> 0:29:58.600
<v Speaker 6>But that's all him and he that was his project.

0:29:58.880 --> 0:30:01.000
<v Speaker 5>The only the only golf course they're played in Cincinnati's

0:30:01.000 --> 0:30:03.120
<v Speaker 5>Cold Stream, So that's the only one that I know

0:30:03.200 --> 0:30:03.920
<v Speaker 5>in Cincinnati.

0:30:04.360 --> 0:30:06.800
<v Speaker 6>That's a really good one. But I have others.

0:30:07.000 --> 0:30:10.080
<v Speaker 1>If you're in Okay, you're gonna get the top secret list.

0:30:10.120 --> 0:30:12.480
<v Speaker 1>AJ it's coming here right right.

0:30:13.000 --> 0:30:13.320
<v Speaker 3>Yeah.

0:30:13.360 --> 0:30:15.680
<v Speaker 1>Well, Annie, thank you so much for stopping by and

0:30:15.760 --> 0:30:18.920
<v Speaker 1>lightening us on the Reds, and we appreciate the time

0:30:19.520 --> 0:30:19.960
<v Speaker 1>of course.

0:30:20.000 --> 0:30:20.480
<v Speaker 6>Thanks guys,