There's now less than three weeks remaining in the 2025 regular season, if you can believe it. The postseason picture is coming into focus, while other teams have already begun preparations for what they hope will be a busy offseason to come.
So let's take stock, both of where we are and where we're headed. In this week's Moonshot, we asked FanSided's MLB staff to hold court on everything from the playoffs to free agency. Which head-to-head matchup do we most want to see in October? Where will Kyle Schwarber wind up this winter? And what's with the lack of no-hitters this year? You've got questions, we've (hopefully) got answers.
Well, we believe in exit velocity, bat flips, launch angles, stealing home, the hanging curveball, Big League Chew, sausage races, and that unwritten rules of any kind are self-indulgent, overrated crap. We believe Greg Maddux was an actual wizard. We believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment protecting Minor League baseball and that pitch framing is both an art and a science. We believe in the sweet spot, making WARP not war, letting your closer chase a two-inning save, and we believe love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good, too.
This week's panel:
We still somehow haven't gotten a single no-hitter in the Majors this season. What gives? And will we finally see one over the final few weeks?
Eric Cole: I think it is just a combination of big-league hitters being better overall than they ever have combined with the fact that no-hitters just have never been common. Once you are dealing with a statistical rarity like a no-hitter, there is going to be weirdness sometimes. I do think it is possible that we get one by the end of the year, though, because some of the “white flag” lineups we are absolutely going to see in the season’s final weeks are prime opportunities for magic to happen.
Adam Weinrib: If we do get one, it’s going to be an (eyeroll) combined no-hitter, otherwise known as the Lafufu of No-Nos. This feels like a regression of oddities; seeing two get cooked in the ninth by homers (Gavin Williams, Yoshinobu Yamamoto) feels more like the universe conspiring rather than a fault on the pitchers’ parts. That said, it’s statistically likelier that a 2025 pitcher asked to go 125+ pitches will falter/fail to locate more often than a 1990 pitcher. They just aren’t built for it anymore.
Zach Rotman: I think hitters are better and smarter than they have ever been. Scouting reports are as valuable as they’ve ever been, as are in-game reps against pitchers. There’s a reason many starters pay a penalty when they face hitters for a third time. Knowing what to expect while being better-equipped to do damage with what you’re expecting creates a delicious recipe for hitters to do what they do best.
Robert Murray: It’s a lot of what is said above: Hitters are better than ever. They are more informed than ever with analytics. Starting pitchers aren’t throwing deep into games. While velocity is king, locating pitches consistently is still difficult for many of these arms. And yes, throwing a no-hitter is really, really hard. I’m surprised one hasn’t happened yet! Maybe we’re saving them for the postseason?
Chris Landers: There's certainly no small amount of just random regression going on here — anecdotally, we've had more no-nos broken up in the ninth inning this year than any I can remember — but I also think it's worth mentioning how broader trends might be conspiring to make a no-hitter more difficult to achieve. Starters are hardly ever going to be allowed, or able, to go nine innings, leaving the door open to relievers who may or may not have their best stuff that day. And hitters are far better prepared to capitalize on the second or third time seeing the same arm in a given start. It feels counterintuitive, given the decline in batting average and the quality of the median MLB pitcher's stuff right now, but this is an increasingly dying breed.
What head-to-head matchup do you most want to see this postseason?
Eric Cole: Yankees-Red Sox, and it isn’t particularly close honestly. It is the longest rivalry in baseball and still one of the most bitter. These are also two flawed clubs, so seeing which one would emerge on top would be a lot of fun. On a different note, I really want to see a Brewers-Tigers World Series as it would mean that Milwaukee finally won a playoff series and Detroit is a fun team to watch.
Adam Weinrib: To tack onto Eric’s point, there’s nothing I’d like to see less than that! In the entire world. I would rather see warlords delivering me a signed and sealed declaration that states I will never achieve my hopes and dreams than a Yankees-Red Sox playoff series.
I declared prior to the season that I really wanted to see how the “Best Team Money Could Buy” Dodgers would handle being intimidated on the road in Philadelphia, and even though the Dodgers haven’t been quite so infallible this year, I’d still be interested in seeing that.
Zach Rotman: I’m a Mets fan and absolutely will be biased: Give me another crack at the Dodgers. The last go-around didn’t go well, and this season hasn’t exactly gone as planned for New York (or Los Angeles), but the Juan Soto component makes this very interesting. Can he get them over the hump? That’s why he was brought to town, after all.
Robert Murray: Dodgers and Phillies. Arguably the two most talented teams in the National League squaring off against each other? Shohei Ohtani and Co. against Bryce Harper and Co.? In two of the best environments in baseball? My goodness. Sign me up. I’d be glued to every pitch and every storyline of that entire series.
Chris Landers: I cannot stress enough the extent to which a Yankees-Red Sox Wild Card series would be deleterious to my mental health, to the point where I should be able to petition Rob Manfred to prevent it from happening. Instead, I'll say Dodgers-Brewers. Really, the narratives write themselves: Milwaukee is the anti-Dodgers, a small-market team that's put together a group of no-name pests who somehow find themselves with the best record in baseball with just weeks to go in the regular season. Add in the Brewers' recent playoff failures, and I would kill to see them try to finally get over the hump against the team that everyone was crowning just a few months ago.
The postseason field is largely set, but the Mets and Mariners are doing their damnedest to cough up their spots. Which fan base should be more worried right now?
Eric Cole: Mets, easily. Seattle is starting to play better and, more importantly, actually hit. New York meanwhile has some very motivated and talented teams vying for their spot, and the Mets cannot seem to ever get out of their own way. Having Juan Soto helps a lot, but that pitching staff, given their injuries, is a genuine cause for concern even if they limp into the playoffs.
Adam Weinrib: I’d still fear the Texas Rangers if I were the Seattle Mariners; even without Nathan Eovaldi, they still have the metrics of a far superior team. But maybe it’s the Astros who should be more fearful of them? Who said that?
That said, it’s impossible to ignore the Mets’ P-T-SD schedule this week (Philly, Texas, San Diego), so given the amount of cosmic bruises that franchise seems to be handed annually, you gotta believe it’ll happen again.
Zach Rotman: This one’s really tough. I think the Mets’ roster should be more afraid of letting go of the playoff spot because of how poorly they’ve played really for three months now, but I believe far more in the Texas Rangers than any other team in the mix in either league. I think the Rangers have what it takes to overtake Seattle more than the Giants and Reds do in the NL. If I had to pick one, it’d be the Mets because of how poorly they’ve played, but the real answer is both, for different reasons.
Robert Murray: The Mariners. I’m not overly concerned about the Mets: Their young pitching has stepped up, they have Juan Soto and other star players and they are playoff tested. The Mariners, meanwhile … not so much. I love their roster! I love the Mariners. I love how aggressive they were at the deadline. But if I’m Seatetle, I see how the Rangers are surging back. I see how the Guardians are in the rearview mirror. I see both of those teams and think, “Uh oh.”
Chris Landers: I want to say the Mets based just on how poorly they're playing right now (and how unreliable their rotation looks), but I have a hard time believing in either the Reds or Giants being good enough to take a Wild Card spot from them. So instead I'll look to the AL, where either the Mariners or the Astros could find themselves sitting at home come October. Seattle is finally starting to look like the team we expected post-trade deadline, but Texas is scorching hot, with a three-game set in Houston coming up that could prove pivotal.
Give us your most contrarian awards take: Which frontrunner doesn’t deserve the hardware? Who’s not getting enough attention?
Eric Cole: I’ll say Ohtani. I fully admit he is a generational talent the likes of which we will likely never again in my lifetime. That said, I have found his 2025 season, outside of the homers, to be kind of whatever (I freely admit that this is subjective) especially since he hasn’t had much of a pitching workload. Trea Turner has been worth more fWAR, Kyle Schwarber has hit more homers and has been carrying the Phillies to legit contention and Juan Soto’s all-around game has been the only reason New York has hung around. Give it to one of those guys. It isn’t like Ohtani isn’t going to win multiple MVPs the rest of his career anyways.
Adam Weinrib: When Aaron Judge was en route to 62 home runs, I lightly raged that the historic uniqueness of his season should be the determining factor, and that if Shohei Ohtani won the honor just for doing his thing again somewhat silently on the dreary Angels (I know, he pitches and hits, it is crazy, I know), we were in danger of seeing the MVP become the WAR Award with the human element entirely removed. Now, to be consistent … I’ve got to say that Cal Raleigh’s accomplishments are more historic than what was once a chase for .400, but has turned out to mostly be just another great season from Judge. Raleigh should win.
Zach Rotman: I’ll say Cade Horton. He’s had an outstanding rookie year, don’t get me wrong, and has suddenly become the Chicago Cubs’ most reliable starter down the stretch. With that being said, he’s completed six innings just four times in this dominant 12-start stretch, a number that’s really hard to ignore. Yes, I know that the reason for that is that the Cubs are limiting his innings, but that’s not exactly something Horton should be praised for. A guy like Isaac Collins, who is a middle-of-the-order bat for the best team in baseball, or Drake Baldwin, who has been the favorite to win the award for most of the year, should probably win it.
Robert Murray: I’ll say Shohei Ohtani. He’s dominant and perhaps the best player in baseball history. He’s hit 48 homers while posting a 3.75 ERA in 12 outings. But if I’m looking at the MVP award in the National League, I’m giving it to Kyle Schwarber. He’s been sensational in Philly, hitting 50 homers with 123 RBI. If it goes to Ohtani, and it very likely will, he’s deserving. But I’d give it to Schwarber.
Chris Landers: I'm with Zach here. It feels like everyone has already decided that Cade Horton is a shoo-in to win NL Rookie of the Year honors, but I'm here to stump for Drake Baldwin. His playing time has been yanked around thanks to Atlanta's bizarre obsession with Marcell Ozuna amid a lost season, but he's done nothing but hit the cover off the ball while more than holding his own behind the plate since he broke camp with the team. It's wildly impressive for a rookie to become a plus two-way catcher given all the responsibilities that entails, and if it weren't for some bad batted-ball luck and some more plate appearances, this wouldn't even be a discussion.
In his column last weekend, USA Today’s Bob Nightengale sounded awfully sure that the Phillies wouldn’t let Kyle Schwarber get away in free agency. Time to make your own prediction: Where will Schwarber end up next season?
Eric Cole: If I am the Boston Red Sox or the Cincinnati Reds, I would make a real play for Schwarber this offseason. However, he is pretty much a DH-only guy and Boston may have other needs they want to address with the glut of position players they are already dealing with. As for the Reds, they refuse to spend money even if it is in their best interest to do so. I’ll go out on a limb and say the Rangers end up with him. Texas is notorious for being surprise players in free agency and pairing Schwarber with Corey Seager as left-handed bats in that lineup could be really fun.
Adam Weinrib: The Red Sox, Cubs and Reds have to make this interesting, but I smell a mega-contract for Alex Bregman in Boston, and I also smell those other two teams wimping out. Just like the Sox and Breggy, I think the Phillies and Schwarber find middle ground here after some mild flirtation.
Zach Rotman: I’ll believe he leaves the Phillies if/when we see it. He’s too important to their team both on and off the field for them to let him go. With that being said, their reluctance to get a deal done by now suggests that the field has a better chance than I once thought. I’m starting to think that the Red Sox loom as a very real threat. They have the need and the money. Will Craig Breslow be willing to spend that money on a 32-year-old DH, though? That remains to be seen, but the Red Sox have just about everything Kyle from Waltham could want. That fit makes too much sense.
Robert Murray: My guess is that the Phillies pay up and keep Schwarber. He’s too valuable, too loved inside that organization, and John Middleton and Dave Dombrowski have a history of paying key players like Schwarber. If he does leave … give me the Boston Red Sox. He’s loved in Boston, and seeing him back in Fenway on a three- or four-year contract would be super fun.
Chris Landers: I don't know, man. I hear all the arguments about why a reunion in Philly makes the most sense for all parties involved. But then I think about how wishy-washy John Middleton has been in recent years, and how weirdly distant the Phillies have been about getting a deal done when they had the chance, and I start to wonder whether they've already decided that they have no interest in paying a premium for a DH through his mid-30s. Which would be a mistake, to be clear, but given how many other teams will have money to spend this winter, why not send him back to Chicago after the Cubs miss out on Kyle Tucker?