AustinCountyAg said:

---

Wouldn't all batters be trusted to use it? I thought each hitter in the lineup was given two chances per game depending on the result of the first challenge?

---

To circle back on this for everyone, including me:

How many challenges does each team receive?
Each team will start the game with two challenges apiece.
Do teams get an extra challenge in extra innings?
Yes, because teams are initially managing their challenges under the assumption that the game will be nine innings, not longer.
If a game goes into extra innings, any team that starts the extra inning out of challenges will get one challenge for the 10th inning. If they exhaust that challenge, they will then get another challenge for the 11th, and so on.
If a team has challenges remaining at the start of the 10th inning, they will not get an additional challenge for that inning, though they will for any subsequent inning if they are out of challenges at the start of the inning.
Are successful challenges retained?
Yes. A team only loses its challenge if the umpire's call is confirmed.


Here's an interesting wrinkle in the rules:

Can an umpire disallow a challenge?
Yes, if the umpire determines that the players' decision to challenge was aided by other defenders, runners or the dugout, the request will be denied (with the team retaining its challenge). Same goes if the challenge was not requested in a timely manner.


Everything you need to know about the new ABS Challenge System

TarponChaser said:

---

MLB's TV and streaming situation is so FUBAR.

It feels like baseball has had a very real post-covid resurgence but Manfred and his merry band of idiots are intent on pissing it away and turning off fans by making it difficult to watch on TV.

---

And it's likely to get worse. The NBA's national rights deals were up after last season, TNT didn't bid and the geniuses at NBA allowed multiple packages to be spread across NBC, Amazon and Peacock in addition to the regionals.

Importantly, previous deals had minimum game thresholds - meaning the RSN was guaranteed 75 regular season games and thus, no more than 7 regular season games from any one team could be selected for national broadcast, and those national broadcasters were on the cable or satellite platforms.

That minimum threshold got blown up and now to watch a full season of Rockets, for example, I have to sign up for peacock and Amazon prime, plus have cable/satellite the includes my RSN and ESPN subscription plus the old school broadcasters (NBC), etc.

Baseball is next, and if they decide to do the same (carving into the de facto MLB minimum game guarantee for RSNs that has been between 145 and 150 games) you will see the same dispersion of games across more outlets and platforms. It will ruin the hardcore fans that frequent this forum.

Side note: I worked for most of my career as an executive for an RSN group, so had insight into the inner workings of game selections, etc.

The glimmer of hope in all this: Manfred is actively trying to pull back all regionals rights under the MLB tent in an effort to make access easier via a singular streaming partner and eliminating territorial restrictions for all teams broadcasts.

Taylor Trammell can put up those numbers.

Would likely be a minor league deal with a spring training invite.

Dana can't get anything done. Talks big about moves he want to make into the microphone for anyone who will listen.

Dana is generally a fraud who talks big and does little to back it up. He should be updating his resume.

tylhair said:

---

Dana can't get anything done. Talks big about moves he want to make into the microphone for anyone who will listen.

---

I wouldn't trade Paredes at this point either... teams are pretty well locked into their infields at the outset of spring training. Wait until the season starts and someone is bound to have an injury at 3B or 1B and his value (or Walker's) will go up. Why sell low now? Paredes is a valuable asset (above average hitter and cost-controlled) and shouldn't be ditched just to do so.

EastCoastAgNc said:

---

Dana is generally a fraud who talks big and does little to back it up. He should be updating his resume.

---

If Dana is standing put because a trade worsens our team, he's doing his damn job

Quit hoping for a splashy trade that results in us losing our second best hitter. It makes no sense

https://instagr.am/p/DU6DH_KgMh1

AggiEE said:

---

EastCoastAgNc said:

---

Dana is generally a fraud who talks big and does little to back it up. He should be updating his resume.

---

If Dana is standing put because a trade worsens our team, he's doing his damn job

Quit hoping for a splashy trade that results in us losing our second best hitter. It makes no sense

---

This is not about the parades trade.

"We're gonna sign all our young guys to extensions" - how'd that turn out?
"We're not done" - after the sanchez trade. Outcome is were basically looking at the outfield equivalent of Robel Garcia.

His drafting has been poor. His trades have been poor. Free agent signings aide from Carantini have been unimpressive in their results. He's not been good.

And in response to the inevitable question of "well what do you expect him to say", I would prefer silence. Better to have everyone think you're stupid than open your mouth and remove all doubt.

Iambob said:

---

Those are horrible numbers

---

What? "Slashing" .199 isn't good?

EastCoastAgNc said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

EastCoastAgNc said:

---

Dana is generally a fraud who talks big and does little to back it up. He should be updating his resume.

---

If Dana is standing put because a trade worsens our team, he's doing his damn job

Quit hoping for a splashy trade that results in us losing our second best hitter. It makes no sense

---

This is not about the parades trade.

"We're gonna sign all our young guys to extensions" - how'd that turn out?
"We're not done" - after the sanchez trade. Outcome is were basically looking at the outfield equivalent of Robel Garcia.

His drafting has been poor. His trades have been poor. Free agent signings aide from Carantini have been unimpressive in their results. He's not been good.

And in response to the inevitable question of "well what do you expect him to say", I would prefer silence. Better to have everyone think you're stupid than open your mouth and remove all doubt.

---

His trades have not necessarily been poor. Kikuchi was great.

Sanchez was still a good move, just didn't work out.

Tucker trade was an excellent return

Burrows trade will very likely turn out to be a great one.

Draft picks are too early to judge

Dana says a lot of stuff to the media, honestly I just don't take a lot of it seriously. I don't believe he's being very upfront about his true intentions and it comes across as inconsistent. However, he could very well feel like he wants to sign extensions or wants to trade for a LH bat…but some of this stuff is outside his control. Players have to want to sign extensions. Crane has to sign off. A lefty bat that he wants may not be available for what he's willing to give up, etc…

I thought the Tucker trade was phenomenal. Luhnow had some stinkers, too.

I've said before - this goes for Dana and really any GM in any sport.

Don't take them seriously when they talk to the media. There's no reason for them to show their hands to the public.

The #Angels will not televise any of their Cactus League games, the club announced. But they will be on Angels radio.

— Rhett Bollinger (@RhettBollinger) February 18, 2026

LOL... Man the angels suck

Sanchez was an excellent addition that filled a big need IMO. He just didn't perform up to his standards.

BCEDAg said:

---

texasaggie2015 said:

---

Sanchez was an excellent addition that filled a big need IMO. He just didn't perform up to his standards.

---

I agree that Sanchez filled a need at the time of the trade but his horrible performance resulted in a trade that didn't work out in our favor. So bad we ended up trading him even though we still need a left handed bat.

---

What is more important when judging an executive? Results or sound process?

That is the great irony in sports. You make hires based on process, but you fire for results. While many people float around in coaching and front office ranks because of the good ole boy mentality, it is also because of recognition that good people constantly get fired because their team had a bad season or a trade or draft pick didn't deliver.

The process was the same, but the outcome in game full of uncertain outcomes is what matters at the end.

The appeal of hiring Dana Brown was to bring in someone with an expertise in talent evaluation and farm system development. The first part is universal, but the means for doing the latter is very different for a team with no quality draft picks.

I think Dana has chosen to seek (on the prospect end) high-ceiling/low-floor guys with the hopes of hitting a lotto ticket or two in terms of finding next generation impact players. You could alternatively take safe guys who have a ceiling of being a bench player, but your roster will erode out eventually following that model.

I think the Tucker trade was brilliant and Burrows could end up being so as well. I have understood most of the thinking on high draft picks. The pitching lab (which goes beyond him) has continued to excel at finding diamonds in the rough and turning them into valuable pitching.

The Paredes situation is not wholly of his doing. I suspect the trade was Correa was Crane-driven, which means Dana didn't plan for this logjam. Signing Walker was his decision, but it is hard to criticize it - I thought it was a good deal at the time. Same with the Sanchez trade.

Sometimes you might the right moves with sound process but still lose the bet.

Well said. But I especially like this line.

"That is the great irony in sports. You make hires based on process, but you fire for results. "

When it comes to results, is it purely a record-based evaluation or do you consider all of the factors that contributed to the results?

For instance, considering the number of injuries we had last season, it's easy to argue that we actually overachieved. We won a lot of games with a AAAA lineup and no-name pitchers. The GM and Manager did a pretty good job of managing the roster and keeping the ship headed in the right direction. If not for Yordan's second injury, we're a playoff team.

I know people get fired all the time for things out of their control, but it's hard to put blame on Brown and Espada when they actually did a good job with what they had.

And I know Espada gets a lot of hate, but the guy has dealt with an unbelievable amount of adversity the past two seasons, yet surged to the playoffs in year one and had the team in it until the final weekend last year. I'd love to see what he could do in a season with just an average amount of adversity to deal with.

SpaceCityAg05 said:

---

Signing Walker was his decision, but it is hard to criticize it - I thought it was a good deal at the time.

---

It's crazy that 2 big FA signings of first basemen have been so bad.

Abreu averaged a 140.6 OPS+ his last 3 seasons in Chicago and then promptly drops to an 87 OPS+ his first season here. His BA those 3 seasons with the Sox was .294 and suddenly he craters to .237 too.

Similarly, Walker's last 3 season in Arizona were a 122+ OPS and he craters to 97.

It's insane and inexplicable unless they suddenly got old all at once.

TarponChaser said:

---

SpaceCityAg05 said:

---

Signing Walker was his decision, but it is hard to criticize it - I thought it was a good deal at the time.

---

It's crazy that 2 big FA signings of first basemen have been so bad.

Abreu averaged a 140.6 OPS+ his last 3 seasons in Chicago and then promptly drops to an 87 OPS+ his first season here. His BA those 3 seasons with the Sox was .294 and suddenly he craters to .237 too.

Similarly, Walker's last 3 season in Arizona were a 122+ OPS and he craters to 97.

It's insane and inexplicable unless they suddenly got old all at once.

---

It's the risk of signing guys nearing 35 because you want to avoid signing younger guys to long term deals for double per year.

To be fair to Walker, I'm not 100% sure who he is yet. We'll know by the end of May who he is in my opinion.