Gammons on parity

[Moose Milligan]

The bottomline is that several playoff spots are up for grabs until well late in the season. The Yankees, Red Sox, BlueJays, Twins, Tigers, WhiteSox, Angels, A's, Mets, Phillies, Marlins, Cardinals, Astros, Reds, Padres, Giants, Dodgers all had a realistic shot at making the playoffs come August. That's over half the teams.

Hammer, meet nail.

Put it better than I could.

[DrungoHazewood]

When folks talk about parity, they almost always concentrate on how many teams have a shot at the wild card, or how many different teams have won the Series in the past so many years. And in that narrow sense there is a fair amount of parity in baseball.

But that's completely ignoring the other side of the coin.

The Orioles have had nine consecutive losing seasons.

The Pirates haven't had a winning record since 1992.

The Royals haven't been a contender since 1989, and have lost 100+ four of the last five years.

The Rockies have existed for 14 years and have never won more than 83 games. Haven't been to postseason since '95.

The Brewers haven't been in contention since '92.

The Rays have never had a winning season. Ever. Their best record in nine years is 70-92.

The Nats/Expos only contended in a very weak division last year, and haven't topped 83 wins since '97.

The Blue Jays are a fairly well-run team with a good stadium, good fanbase, and a big, corporate owner, and haven't made the postseason since 1993.

Before their perfect storm of young pitchers came together the Tigers went 17 years without a postseason appearance. They're a great story this year, but there are juniors in high school who're seeing their first Tigers playoff games this year.

When the same 25% of the league wakes up on June 1st every year for a decade and wishes it was football season, I don't think you have enough parity. It's not just the O's - a pretty wide swath of the country is turning off to baseball because their team sucks almost every year.

[Fan4Life]

When folks talk about parity, they almost always concentrate on how many teams have a shot at the wild card, or how many different teams have won the Series in the past so many years. And in that narrow sense there is a fair amount of parity in baseball.

But that's completely ignoring the other side of the coin.

The Orioles have had nine consecutive losing seasons.

The Pirates haven't had a winning record since 1992.

The Royals haven't been a contender since 1989, and have lost 100+ four of the last five years.

The Rockies have existed for 14 years and have never won more than 83 games. Haven't been to postseason since '95.

The Brewers haven't been in contention since '92.

The Rays have never had a winning season. Ever. Their best record in nine years is 70-92.

The Nats/Expos only contended in a very weak division last year, and haven't topped 83 wins since '97.

The Blue Jays are a fairly well-run team with a good stadium, good fanbase, and a big, corporate owner, and haven't made the postseason since 1993.

Before their perfect storm of young pitchers came together the Tigers went 17 years without a postseason appearance. They're a great story this year, but there are juniors in high school who're seeing their first Tigers playoff games this year.

When the same 25% of the league wakes up on June 1st every year for a decade and wishes it was football season, I don't think you have enough parity. It's not just the O's - a pretty wide swath of the country is turning off to baseball because their team sucks almost every year.

The way to fix the problem while easy to define probably isn't easy to impliment. Does anyone promote a split season in MLB like the Minor Leagues have which would give all teams, and fans for that matter, reason to have interest after June 1st? Would it change anything?

[jerios55]

Whatever...3 teams in the East can contend with the Yanks(Boston always has and Toronto and us could, if things are done correctly) and really, who cares if you wint he division or not? 8 WC teams have now made the WS.

I am so tired of this "we can't beat NY" mentality...It is a joke.

I don't think we can't beat NY, but I would hardly call parity...

[rolliefingers]

Whatever...3 teams in the East can contend with the Yanks(Boston always has and Toronto and us could, if things are done correctly) and really, who cares if you wint he division or not? 8 WC teams have now made the WS.

I am so tired of this "we can't beat NY" mentality...It is a joke.

Completely agreed. It's about spending the money you have, wisely.

(Not giving 3-year extensions to Mora and Gibbons...)

[rolliefingers]

When folks talk about parity, they almost always concentrate on how many teams have a shot at the wild card, or how many different teams have won the Series in the past so many years. And in that narrow sense there is a fair amount of parity in baseball.

But that's completely ignoring the other side of the coin.

The Orioles have had nine consecutive losing seasons.

The Pirates haven't had a winning record since 1992.

The Royals haven't been a contender since 1989, and have lost 100+ four of the last five years.

The Rockies have existed for 14 years and have never won more than 83 games. Haven't been to postseason since '95.

The Brewers haven't been in contention since '92.

The Rays have never had a winning season. Ever. Their best record in nine years is 70-92.

The Nats/Expos only contended in a very weak division last year, and haven't topped 83 wins since '97.

The Blue Jays are a fairly well-run team with a good stadium, good fanbase, and a big, corporate owner, and haven't made the postseason since 1993.

Before their perfect storm of young pitchers came together the Tigers went 17 years without a postseason appearance. They're a great story this year, but there are juniors in high school who're seeing their first Tigers playoff games this year.

When the same 25% of the league wakes up on June 1st every year for a decade and wishes it was football season, I don't think you have enough parity. It's not just the O's - a pretty wide swath of the country is turning off to baseball because their team sucks almost every year.

And I think that each of those cases can be blamed on terrible mismanagement. TB shouldn't even exist. Montreal should have been moved years ago, or contracted (IMHO). All the other teams are plagued by bad ownership, bad upper management, or both.

The Twins' recent success has convinced me that pretty much any MLB team can win if they put their minds to it. The KCs and PITs of the world just have to be more shrewd and prescient than the MFYs.

[DrungoHazewood]

The way to fix the problem while easy to define probably isn't easy to impliment. Does anyone promote a split season in MLB like the Minor Leagues have which would give all teams, and fans for that matter, reason to have interest after June 1st? Would it change anything?

I look at a split season like expanded playoffs - it gives a lot more teams hope, without actually changing much of anything substantive. For the most part the same teams will still win every year, the same teams will still lose, just more teams will get into the playoffs because of a good half-season run. It'll reward a hot couple months, while doing little or nothing to address the imbalances that create 6-8 nearly hopeless teams, a good number of teams that consider 85 wins a bitter disappointment.

I really don't like the split-season because it rewards teams that don't exist anymore. Look at the '05 Orioles. They would have been in the playoffs under a split season. And they would have been playing in October with a rotation with a faltering Bedard and a missing Ponson, with Bernie Castro playing second base, with Sosa and Raffy sent home in disgrace, with Eric Byrnes hitting .180 starting every day in left. What a disaster that would have been. It would have done nothing (except the revenues from a couple sparsely-attended playoff games following the collapse) to remedy the O's real problems.

[DrungoHazewood]

And I think that each of those cases can be blamed on terrible mismanagement. TB shouldn't even exist. Montreal should have been moved years ago, or contracted (IMHO). All the other teams are plagued by bad ownership, bad upper management, or both.

The Twins' recent success has convinced me that pretty much any MLB team can win if they put their minds to it. The KCs and PITs of the world just have to be more shrewd and prescient than the MFYs.

I agree with a lot of this, but I still think there's a big problem with this argument:

There's nothing a small market team can do if the big market teams they compete with are smart. The Yanks are starting to get their farm system spun back up. If they can spend $200M on payroll and spit out a Cano or a Wang every couple years the Rays might as well just field a $10M team and mail it in. The O's face a huge problem when they're constantly facing two teams, the Yanks and the BoSox, who are not only the richest teams but they're pretty darn smart, too.

How exactly do you get consistently smarter than a team that has 15 all stars and a productive farm system?

For the Orioles, competing directly with NY and Boston (and Toronto), they're essentially in a situation where everyone is already smart, and they're rich.

If you fix the way baseball divides up and spends its revenues you can have a situation where TB can exist, and where KC and Pittsburgh don't need to have a miraculous confluence of events to get them to the playoffs.

[Sports Guy]

When folks talk about parity, they almost always concentrate on how many teams have a shot at the wild card, or how many different teams have won the Series in the past so many years. And in that narrow sense there is a fair amount of parity in baseball.

But that's completely ignoring the other side of the coin.

The Orioles have had nine consecutive losing seasons.

The Pirates haven't had a winning record since 1992.

The Royals haven't been a contender since 1989, and have lost 100+ four of the last five years.

The Rockies have existed for 14 years and have never won more than 83 games. Haven't been to postseason since '95.

The Brewers haven't been in contention since '92.

The Rays have never had a winning season. Ever. Their best record in nine years is 70-92.

The Nats/Expos only contended in a very weak division last year, and haven't topped 83 wins since '97.

The Blue Jays are a fairly well-run team with a good stadium, good fanbase, and a big, corporate owner, and haven't made the postseason since 1993.

Before their perfect storm of young pitchers came together the Tigers went 17 years without a postseason appearance. They're a great story this year, but there are juniors in high school who're seeing their first Tigers playoff games this year.

When the same 25% of the league wakes up on June 1st every year for a decade and wishes it was football season, I don't think you have enough parity. It's not just the O's - a pretty wide swath of the country is turning off to baseball because their team sucks almost every year.

The same thing can be said about alot of sports 2 months into the season.

When 75% of your league still has a chance to be in the playoffs, that is pretty damn good.

BTW, most of those teams are incredibly poorly run...Money is a factor for some but stupid decisions(Derek Bell's contract for Pitt, what was that) are what really hurt them.

[Sports Guy]

I agree with a lot of this, but I still think there's a big problem with this argument:

There's nothing a small market team can do if the big market teams they compete with are smart. The Yanks are starting to get their farm system spun back up. If they can spend $200M on payroll and spit out a Cano or a Wang every couple years the Rays might as well just field a $10M team and mail it in. The O's face a huge problem when they're constantly facing two teams, the Yanks and the BoSox, who are not only the richest teams but they're pretty darn smart, too.

How exactly do you get consistently smarter than a team that has 15 all stars and a productive farm system?

For the Orioles, competing directly with NY and Boston (and Toronto), they're essentially in a situation where everyone is already smart, and they're rich.

If you fix the way baseball divides up and spends its revenues you can have a situation where TB can exist, and where KC and Pittsburgh don't need to have a miraculous confluence of events to get them to the playoffs.

Well the Orioles could be rich and they aren't smart, that is the problem.

No doubt in my mind that you can compete with a 80-100 million dollar payroll in the AL East if you make smart decisions.

[Fan4Life]

I agree with a lot of this, but I still think there's a big problem with this argument:

There's nothing a small market team can do if the big market teams they compete with are smart. The Yanks are starting to get their farm system spun back up. If they can spend $200M on payroll and spit out a Cano or a Wang every couple years the Rays might as well just field a $10M team and mail it in. The O's face a huge problem when they're constantly facing two teams, the Yanks and the BoSox, who are not only the richest teams but they're pretty darn smart, too.

How exactly do you get consistently smarter than a team that has 15 all stars and a productive farm system?

For the Orioles, competing directly with NY and Boston (and Toronto), they're essentially in a situation where everyone is already smart, and they're rich.

If you fix the way baseball divides up and spends its revenues you can have a situation where TB can exist, and where KC and Pittsburgh don't need to have a miraculous confluence of events to get them to the playoffs.

One way to help might be to change the draft rules.. the general idea is the worst teams get to draft first, hopefully getting good or the best player available and over time become a better team and able to compete. But with signees able to turn down an offer from the team that drafted them, and then re-enter the draft the next season throws a wrench in this ideal somewhat. I would like to see a player that gets drafted be required to forfeit 3 years before they can get redrafted. Perhaps some salary minimums need to be put in place. This also affects the NFL, a player like Elway can choose not to play for the Colts thereby subverting the entire process. Makes no sense to me if you really want the bad teams to be able to get better.

[NewMarketSean]

Who cares if the NFL system is "flawed." It's fun and you know your team has a chance to go to the playoffs if you stay healthy and can do a handful of things well.

The MLB may have the best system, but no one cares. Each season is appears that the ratings for the MLB playoffs are down. Interest is down as well too. Football is king. It has totally maxed out in pretty much every market they have so that they are now looking to Europe, Mexico and CHina to expand. So much for a flawed system.

[DrungoHazewood]

No doubt in my mind that you can compete with a 80-100 million dollar payroll in the AL East if you make smart decisions.

That may well be, but I think there is a systemic problem when a team like the Yanks can make poor decisions and still win 95 games a year. There's a problem when they annually make a deal or two that no one else is willing to make because of the money involved.

[Frobby]

Who cares if the NFL system is "flawed." It's fun and you know your team has a chance to go to the playoffs if you stay healthy and can do a handful of things well.

The MLB may have the best system, but no one cares. Each season is appears that the ratings for the MLB playoffs are down. Interest is down as well too. Football is king. It has totally maxed out in pretty much every market they have so that they are now looking to Europe, Mexico and CHina to expand. So much for a flawed system.

Baseball just broke its overall attendance record for the 3rd year in a row, so it is hardly hurting. I would prefer an NFL-like system, though.

[DrungoHazewood]

One way to help might be to change the draft rules.. the general idea is the worst teams get to draft first, hopefully getting good or the best player available and over time become a better team and able to compete. But with signees able to turn down an offer from the team that drafted them, and then re-enter the draft the next season throws a wrench in this ideal somewhat. I would like to see a player that gets drafted be required to forfeit 3 years before they can get redrafted. Perhaps some salary minimums need to be put in place. This also affects the NFL, a player like Elway can choose not to play for the Colts thereby subverting the entire process. Makes no sense to me if you really want the bad teams to be able to get better.

That's somewhat true, but baseball owners set up the draft to control costs. Parity was only a secondary benefit. I'm not sure your idea has a lot of traction.