Jump to content
Frobby

MLB response to tanking: more playoff teams?

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, eddie83 said:

What is your point? You are comparing events to a 162 game sport. It is a foolish comparison and ESPN also spends countless hours promoting those programs. 

I watch very little of ESPN except for live sports. They over saturate the network with NFL and NBA talk because of the high dollar money deals with those sports.  

Come on it is the 4th through 7th round of the NFL draft.  We aren't talking big names here.  This is the third day of the NFL draft.  So it is not a one day event.  The point is that MLB regular season games don't draw much.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, TommyPickles said:

My point was more that the game has changed a lot in the recent era, lets say since 2012.

-Changed playoff format

-Added Manager challenges

-Limited player visits to mound

-Adding timers to stadiums to limit time between innings 

-Changed size of roster (from 25-26)

-Changed the trade deadline 

-Changed bullpen pitcher rules (you must face three batters)

-Requiring batters to remain in the batter's box during their ABs

-Expanding netting in all MLB stadiums

 

This along with a host of proposed changes including:

 

-Expanding the League to 32 teams

-Reformatting divisions

-Adding a robotic strike zone

-Changing the rules for extra innings

-Adding pitch clocks to all MLB games

-Adding a DH to the NL

-Further changing the playoff format

 

I was just saying things have changed a lot in the past 8 years or so.  Again, I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, but I stand by my original comment that its been "a roller coaster."

 

Sure, things have changed.  But all the basic playing rules are the same as in 1904. 90 feet, three strikes, four balls, three outs, nine innings.  Far, far, far more has changed as a result of changing strategies and use patterns than as a result of changes to rules.  

Baseball went from 0.06 homers/team/game to 1.39 and that had almost nothing to do with the rules.  We've seen 2.7 strikeouts per game and 8.8 under basically the same rules.  Teams used like 1.5 pitchers per game in 1915, and now use five or more, and no rules change drove any of that.  The rules weren't substantially different when the 1905 A's used 19 players all year, and when the 2019 Orioles used 58.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Frobby said:

That’s hilarious, and kind of pathetic.   
 

“Day one of the Major League Baseball Draft had 304,000 viewers on MLB Network Monday, down 5% from last year, when viewership was the highest since at least 2012 (320K), but up 15% from 2017 (265K). As one would expect, the MLB Draft attracted a fraction of the audience of this year’s NFL Draft, which averaged 6.1 million viewers over three days, and last year’s NBA Draft (3.07M). It also trailed last year’s NHL Draft (368K).”

https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2019/06/indycar-ratings-nbc-uefa-univision-mlb-draft/

 

Every sports fan knows who Joe Burrow, Tua and Zion are. How many know who Adley Rutschman is? 

College football provides the NFL with free advertising. The top players are all known before they ever take a snap. 

The NBA isn’t like the old days where players stayed longer but every so often a Zion comes along who was on ESPN a million times. 

Baseball even if it is on the MLBN needs to start showcasing college baseball more. Games start this weekend. Show games from teams with high prospects. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, atomic said:

Come on it is the 4th through 7th round of the NFL draft.  We aren't talking big names here.  This is the third day of the NFL draft.  So it is not a one day event.  The point is that MLB regular season games don't draw much.  

How many hours does ESPN devote to those rounds of the draft compared to MLB? 

NFL is event TV, baseball is a daily companion. It doesn’t mean baseball isn’t popular. It justs makes money in a different manner. I’m not watching Cubs-Brewers at 7pm on a Wednesday on ESPN when the Orioles are on at the same time. You can’t compare a 16 game sport to a 162 game sport.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, eddie83 said:

Every sports fan knows who Joe Burrow, Tua and Zion are. How many know who Adley Rutschman is? 

College football provides the NFL with free advertising. The top players are all known before they ever take a snap. 

The NBA isn’t like the old days where players stayed longer but every so often a Zion comes along who was on ESPN a million times. 

Baseball even if it is on the MLBN needs to start showcasing college baseball more. Games start this weekend. Show games from teams with high prospects. 

tumblr_nf3e3yrTds1srzrtyo2_250.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the end of the day they can add more playoff teams without harming division winners. Protect the division winners. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, atomic said:

I didn't watch any Sunday night baseball on ESPN.  I did watch the NFL draft.   Well the first night. I didn't watch rounds 4 through 7. 

I probably wouldn't watch the NFL draft if there were four or five Virginia Tech players projected for the first round. The only reason I watched the whole Super Bowl was that my kids were into it.  I'd watch Unterhaching-Waldhof Mannheim before I'd watch a Redskins-Steelers game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, atomic said:

It hard to get interested in the MLB draft when a lot of players in the first round won't be in the majors for years if it all.

Look at the 2014 draft.  The 1st, 2nd and 5th player drafted are still not in the big leagues.   

I agree.    The last couple of years, I’ve tried to switch over to the draft about when I expect the Orioles to make their pick.   But honestly, I think watching any draft is boring.    I’d be perfectly happy just hearing who we picked after the fact.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, eddie83 said:

Every sports fan knows who Joe Burrow, Tua and Zion are. How many know who Adley Rutschman is? 

College football provides the NFL with free advertising. The top players are all known before they ever take a snap. 

The NBA isn’t like the old days where players stayed longer but every so often a Zion comes along who was on ESPN a million times. 

Baseball even if it is on the MLBN needs to start showcasing college baseball more. Games start this weekend. Show games from teams with high prospects. 

Who is Tua?  I literally have no idea.  

College baseball is on TV as much as is warranted for something that would draw a few hundred or a few thousand viewers a game.  At most colleges baseball isn't even a revenue sport, because if you charged for tickets 88 people would come to an average game.

In 1950 college football was way more popular than pro football.  In 1950 college baseball was about as popular as it is today, which is not at all.  You're not going to change that by putting it on TV or streaming more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, StottyByNature said:

The commissioner isn't going rogue here.  He would never do this without at least the tacit consent of the owners.  He was hired for a reason.

Not this reason.

The way to increase revenue is to increase interest, And what he’s doing is not. He has not instituted a single change that increases interest, and his treatment of that cheating scandal is completely shameful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I agree.    The last couple of years, I’ve tried to switch over to the draft about when I expect the Orioles to make their pick.   But honestly, I think watching any draft is boring.    I’d be perfectly happy just hearing who we picked after the fact.   

I can see a future where baseball is more like the other sports, and it's not a 2, 3, 4-year plan for even good prospects to make the majors.  Much of what drives that is service time and contracts.  Many guys in AA could play in the majors in reduced roles, but nobody wants to start their clocks.  Baseball would probably be at least somewhat more popular if young players were allowed to try to make an impact earlier, instead of riding the bus to Davenport.

Al Kaline was in the majors at 18.  Robin Yount, too.  Today they'd be lucky to get an at bat before they turned 20.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

12 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Who is Tua?  I literally have no idea.  

College baseball is on TV as much as is warranted for something that would draw a few hundred or a few thousand viewers a game.  At most colleges baseball isn't even a revenue sport, because if you charged for tickets 88 people would come to an average game.

In 1950 college football was way more popular than pro football.  In 1950 college baseball was about as popular as it is today, which is not at all.  You're not going to change that by putting it on TV or streaming more.

When I was in college, I had a friend who asked me to give her a ride to our college baseball team's game as her boyfriend was on the team.  We stayed an inning and a half as it was totally boring and we even knew some of the players on the team.  20 fans in the stands and not much going on.   We saw her boyfriend bat once and then hit the road.  

Now going to the same college basketball game was exciting.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Philip said:

Not this reason.

The way to increase revenue is to increase interest, And what he’s doing is not. He has not instituted a single change that increases interest, and his treatment of that cheating scandal is completely shameful.

The way to increase revenue is by creating something like MLBAM and then selling a hunk of it to Disney for huge bank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Philip said:

Not this reason.

The way to increase revenue is to increase interest, And what he’s doing is not. He has not instituted a single change that increases interest, and his treatment of that cheating scandal is completely shameful.

At least not your interest.  It's an open question as to whether he's increased interest among others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DrungoHazewood said:

At least not your interest.  It's an open question as to whether he's increased interest among others.

You could look at attendance and TV ratings and then adjust them by societal trends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2020 Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2020 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






  • Posts

    • If you only listen to one of these two, listen to the one above. This is pretty decent tho.  
    • How does anyone get a psychological boost from being left in long enough to get hit around?  He was up 6-0, in line for a win, coming off 42 pitches just three days prior, it was April 1st.  And literally the last two batters he faced were liner to short, and liner to first.  They took him out because he could go to the showers knowing that he pitched six very strong innings and was in line for the win.  That was the psychological boost, not leaving him out there gassed to give up a bunch of hits and runs.
    • Yep..really like Hays and what he can potentially bring to us. That being said, this is pretty much his last chance if he wants to be a starter in Baltimore.
    • Right now Hays is my favorite player on the team.   I like his enthusiasm and all-out style of play.    It has its downside viz. exposure to injuries, but it’s fun to watch players who play like their hair is on fire.    In terms of what he can be offensively, I think Jones is a pretty good upper limit and aspiration, unless and until Hays is able to refine his plate discipline in a way that Jones was never able to do.   To be fair, Hays has a 6.8% walk rate compared to Jones’ career 4.5%.    But, I think to be as good or better than Jones offensively, Hays will need to get his walk rate in the 8-9% range at least, and get his outside of the zone swing percentage under 35% (he’s at 37.7% for his career, Jones was 41.5%, league average is 30.6%). Hays should have good power but I think he’s a little short of Jones in that department.   
    • My expectation is for Hays and Santander to remain healthy and avoid the DL (or whatever it's called). That should go a long way to having a successful season for each of them. With that said, I'd be thrilled if Santander hit .250 with 30 homers and 100 RBI, with Hays hitting .270, 25 homers and 80 RBI. But is that what I expect from them? Probably not. I think my lowest expectation would be for Santander to hit .240, 20 homers and 85 RBI, and Hays to hit .250, 15 homers and 70 RBI. Anything less than that would be disappointing to me... or if they spent a considerable amount of time injured.
    • Per Baseball Savant, Santander’s hard hit % was in the 38th percentile, so below average.   https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/savant-player/anthony-santander-623993?stats=statcast-r-hitting-mlb I think SG is fundamentally right that people should not put too much stock in stats accrued over 37 games.    At the same time, like you I see Santander as a player who is still improving.   
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...