2012 was the first year I followed most of the MLB season. At the time the sports landscape on the internet wasn't the content machine it is today, I know it wasn't because at the time I thought I struck gold when I found a daily podcast on YouTube that talked about baseball.
That concept here in 2026 is no longer new or novel, in fact there's a bunch of podcasts on YouTube talking about sports for hours on end almost every day that end up with maybe 37 views max.
But at the time, in 2012, the way I remember it there wasn't really much out there outside of blogs like SB Nation or Bleacher Report. Twitter and YouTube weren't even close to being what they are today. Sports talk radio still filled the audio niche but Japan wasn't exactly in WFAN territory, so I couldn't listen to those.
Instead I found a podcast called Getting Blanked, brought to the masses by theScore (aka Score Media and Gaming), a Canada based digital media company that was starting out around then. It was hosted by Drew Fairservice, Dustin Parkes and Andrew Stoeten.
Fairservice is a nomadic baseball writer who's written for outlets like The Athletic and Fangraphs. Parkes and Stoeten ran the Toronto Blue Jays fanblog "Drunk Jays Fans" which became part of theScore's umbrella and have since gone on to write for other outlets. With a few rotating guests every once in a while they'd talk about baseball (not just the Jays) and it was fun to follow along a season with people paid to watch games so I didn't have to.
I consider myself lucky with this podcast because it was blending a lot of topics in baseball at the time when baseball discourse was about to turn into what it is today and gave me insight into the oncoming Sabermetric revolution in baseball.
This podcast was the first time I heard of stats like Wins Above Replacement, On-base Plus Slugging Plus, Weighted Average, Outs Above Average, Defensive Runs Saved, etc...
The show had several segments where they used those numbers to go into the latest going-ons in baseball at the time. Like if Ian Kinsler not being a prototypical lead-off hitter is a good thing (he'd set the stage for modern day lead-off hitters like Kyle Schwarber and Shohei Ohtani), or how the Washington Nationals could've used Stephen Strasburg coming off of Tommy John Surgery like the Atlanta Braves eased Kris Medlen back, or if Omar Infante is a good hitter.
Nowadays these numbers are ubiquitous and have replaced a lot of the traditional stats, but at the time they were perceived as just numbers that nerds used to make the Tampa Bay Rays look better on paper than how they played.
Even so, just learning about them and hearing them brought up did me a huge favor. I can't imagine trying to get into baseball now and going through baseball fandom not really understanding what the numbers are.
At the same time I do feel like there are too many numbers. Numbers people use at their leisure to backup whatever narrative they want to claim. Numbers that can disagree with themselves if you're not smart enough to understand them.
For one thing WAR has the Baseball Reference version and the Fangraphs version. While both can be fairly close, usually people only cite the number that supports their argument.
For another thing, one of the most famous things about these metrics is that we still can't put a number of defense. There's a bunch of methods both traditional and advanced that measures defense and they're all terrible.
Additionally, I've also gone through my baseball fandom feeling a sense of "I know what these are, but I also do not care". To be clear this also goes to traditional stats like batting average and ERA. It's not that I'm ignorant to them, it's just that if you were as prospect centered as I was a few years ago then you know these numbers don't mean much of anything when the name of the game is development.
A simple ERA+ or OPS+ where 100 is the average and anything above is great and below is bad is good enough for me.
Anyway that brings me back to the podcast/modern podcasts.
While Getting Blanked and Drunk Jays Fans no longer exist on the web as they did in 2012 (the three have since moved on to other things), the way sports podcasts would come to sort've be a blend of those podcasts and the traditional sports talk radio speak has been interesting to see come together.
For the most part it's been for the better because you have really smart players, fans, writers and insiders talking about the sport in ways that are a lot better than yammering morons from Long Island who remember the dinosaurs complaining about Juan Soto walking too much.
At the same time it's been weird just because baseball is still going through the old vs new school debate. While the new metrics are here to stay and nobody is going to argue for only caveman analysis (aka Colorado Rockies thinking), "analytics" is often the buzzword used when people just want a scapegoat for why their team lost last night. What that specifically means is usually unclear. I'm pretty sure people saying it just want a vague catch-all term for stuff they don't like, which western society as a whole has been trying to do since it decided people can't use the r-word or f-slur anymore.
We recently saw a small repeat of the debate with the Aaron Judge vs Cal Raleigh AL MVP debate. Judge had the numbers to be MVP, Raleigh had the more interesting story (catcher, switching hitting accolades, all that jazz).
Regardless of which way you leaned it was basically Trout vs Miggy all over again but a lot less heated since people have since come to value the MVP less than a World Series Championship. Which reduced both seasons to abject failures.
Also any discourse online here in the mid-2020's is shit since it's all bots and engagement farmers over genuine people with genuine thoughts so I assume people were just tuned out in general (I sure was).
So yeah, in essence the 2012 AL MVP Debate never left us.
I was young and new to baseball enough that I was very in-tuned with WARmongers who spent large chunks of their lives writing about why Mike Trout's statistically historic season was worthy of MVP or how old geezers thought Miguel Cabrera's Triple Crown and intangibles makes it a no brainer. I didn't take part in it but I did read a lot of what people had to say on forums and in the comments sections. In retrospect I don't know what's more pathetic, the people who spent hours writing novels about men in pajama pants (those days were pre-Chat GPT, actual humans had to write them!) or me who read every last word.
So much productivity and time went straight down the toilet during those debates that regardless of who won, we all lost.
As always thanks for stopping by and take care.













