The German philosopher Immanuel Kant once asked: “What the hell is happening to us?”
It is an admittedly modern translation from German, in which Critique of Pure Reason was originally written. A more traditional translator might have written instead: “What do we know and how do we know it? How do we know that we know? Is it even possible to know anything?”
What follows is an interpretation of Kant that will surely infuriate every philosopher reading this right now. I ask them not to shout at me, because I may know nothing about philosophy, but I’m pretty sure they don’t either.
My layman’s understanding of Critique of Pure Reason is that Kant argues that all human knowledge depends on human experience. That is, we cannot prove the existence of absolute truths independent of human experience because we have no other way of arriving at the truth than through human experience. This is, of course, a source of great consternation for people. We want to know things. Knowing means we can predict, predicting means we can control, and controlling means we can achieve something.
As we’ve settled into the modern world, we’ve realized how much we don’t know. Our cosmological models, which were so successful in making predictions for decades, have begun to show cracks. Quantum computing, which has been postulated for years, is still beyond our reach. The most perplexing question of all, however, is how to tell when a damn baseball team is going to be good or not.
Maybe Kant was right. Maybe knowledge is impossible.
We have models that can tell us if a baseball player is good. Certain statistics have better predictive value year-over-year than others. Baseball Reference’s version of WAR is supposed to tell us how a player has performed. Fangraphs’ version of WAR is supposed to be a representation of how a player should have Performance. When the dust settles, we can look at a team’s stats and ask whether or not they played well. Whether they underperformed. What their true talent level is. What their future talent level is likely to be. Whether reality matched perception.
Despite all the preseason predictions and poring over statistics during the season, the Mariners ended up with one concrete record. The other statistics are just a facade. As Mariners fans, we assume the team will underperform, miss the playoffs, and leave us sad. For years, reality has matched perception. This year seems to be no different.
Tonight seemed to be no different.
Tonight’s game was supposed to be the crown jewel of this week’s series against the mediocre Tigers. George Kirby faced off against Tarik Skubal in a matchup of two of the best pitchers in all of baseball. Runs, we thought, would surely play a big role.
The very first batter of the game, Tigers right fielder Wenceel Pérez, hit Kirby for a home run, putting the Tigers ahead 1-0. So much for a premium game. Kirby limited the damage to just one run, but it took him 28 pitches to get out of the first inning. Another 19 to get out of the second. 20 to get out of the third, but not without allowing another run. There was another home run in the fourth inning, making it a 3-0 deficit, and another 18 pitches.
Meanwhile, Tarik Skubal was as successful as advertised. Or maybe it was the hapless Mariners. In any case, Skubal struck out the first ten Mariners he saw before Randy Arozarena broke the streak with an infield single and Cal Raleigh gave the Mariners a little hope with a two-run blast to cut the lead to 3-2.
Kirby delivered an 11-pitch effort in the fifth inning, but it was too little, too late. His total pitch count was 96 after five innings and he was replaced by the Mariners’ erratic bullpen. The trio of JT Chargois, Collin Snider and Austin Voth put together three clean innings.
The Mariners failed to make anything of it.
Skubal went seven innings without further incident. In the eighth inning, the Mariners faced reliever Jason Foley, who is nothing like Tarik Skubal. Josh Rojas and Victor Robles were easily replaced, but Randy Arozarena hit a double down the line.
With Andrés Muñoz warming up and Cal Raleigh at bat, the Mariners had a real chance to separate reality from perception. Cal Raleigh hit a hanging slider that he hit right down the middle at 104 miles per hour at a nearly ideal launch angle of 33 degrees.
It wasn’t enough.
With the threat removed and the team retreating, Scott Servais decided not to start Muñoz in the ninth inning. Instead, Jonathan Hernández, who is usually used in lower-leverage situations, came in. Was this decision a reference to Scott’s perceived overuse of Muñoz? A sign of confidence in Hernández? A simple lack of confidence in his hitters in the ninth inning?
Whatever the reason, Hernández collapsed on the mound, walking the first two batters and allowing a total of three runs. The hitters in the ninth inning finally vindicated Scott’s decision not to put Muñoz through a stressful inning: Justin Turner managed a walk, but Jorge Polanco and Dylan Moore combined for three outs to end the game.
With this loss and the Astros’ win, the Mariners are back a full game off the top of the AL West standings. There are still 47 games to play, but one wonders if the Mariners’ recent joie de vivre is just because they got to play the White Sox.
Are the Mariners good and now underperforming? Are they bad and were overperforming earlier this year? Does it matter? Will the next 47 games change our perception of what it means to be a Mariners fan?
Are there absolute truths outside of perception? Or do the Mariners cease to exist if we no longer perceive them?
Maybe that’s as good a reason as any to turn off the TV every now and then.
