Astros & Marlins Ruining MLB

[bpilktree]

0-21. I guess teams were saying the Orioles were ruining baseball then. When the Red Sox and the Yanks were winning championships they had teams like the Orioles and Rays playing awful baseball and allowing them to win the wild card. There is always going to be bad teams no matter what you do. I guess they could spend money like the Blue Jays that looks like it is working well. They maybe out of it by mid May.

[Why Not?]

There have always been terrible teams in baseball. So far, that hasn't ruined the sport.

[Can_of_corn]

0-21. I guess teams were saying the Orioles were ruining baseball then. When the Red Sox and the Yanks were winning championships they had teams like the Orioles and Rays playing awful baseball and allowing them to win the wild card. There is always going to be bad teams no matter what you do. I guess they could spend money like the Blue Jays that looks like it is working well. They maybe out of it by mid May.

I think the biggest difference is that the '88 O's had a decent payroll in comparison to other teams.

Miami 44,691,900

Houston 27,251,338

Keep in mind the Miami number includes what they are paying for players no longer on the field.

A total payroll under 30 million should have the MLBPA screaming mad.

[Moose Milligan]

Don't really care about the Marlins and their owner and what he does. I care more about the people who allow him to get away with what he does. No way that the city of Miami shouldn't have financed that thing, especially when, IIRC, the Marlins didn't open up their books to the city.

There's always going to be some scrub teams. For awhile it was Tampa, then it was the Nats. A team with awful ownership and another team with hardly any payroll aren't going to ruin baseball.

[waroriole]

Real question: If the Norfolk Tides were a ML team, and Giancarlo Stanton played for them, would they be better or worse than the Miami Marlins?

No exaggeration, I think the Tides are at least 5 games better.

[Loophole]

I can see being angry at the M's, and a lot of people have already expressed that (namely M's fans).

But Houston got to where they are fair and square... they're just a crappy, rebuilding team that didn't want to waste money on a lost season. In a few years they'll probably be fine, as they seem to actually have a clear, sustainable plan for the future, one that doesn't involve breaking all of their fans' hopes and dreams in half like so many twigs. Teams like Houston happen every few years. A decade ago it was Detroit. It might've been the O's some years. It's all part of the natural circle of baseball life. Embrace it, Simba.

[Lester Freamon]

Jeffrey Loria is a joke, no doubt. However, I think the Astros' new front office is very smart and can get that team back into contention. Don't know how long it'll take for Houston but I think they'll get there.

And again, as horrible as Loria is, the Marlins FO has shown the ability in the past to build very competitive teams. Although, I'm not a fan - at all - of the way Loria goes about his business.

And, like Why Not? said, there are bottom feeders every year, there has to be, right?

[Morgan423]

It is a wonderful time when other owners are ranking higher than Angelos as the worst in MLB. Angelos five years ago was ranked the worst owner in North American Sport. And that is including NHL, NBA, NFL and MLB.

Angelos always struck me as more oblivious than evil (a slight bit of evil mixed in with a large glob of cluelessness). Loria, on the other hand, looks like a supervillian in comparison.

[notyourbuddy]

Houston has been a competitive franchise for the last decade its just their annual plan of trading away prospects for middle aged mediocre players finally caught up to them. It left their farm system barren and their MLB roster in shambles. I think they deserve a pass for a few years to properly rebuild.

Marlins on the other hand.... *facepalm*

[skanar]

Houston has been a competitive franchise for the last decade its just their annual plan of trading away prospects for middle aged mediocre players finally caught up to them. It left their farm system barren and their MLB roster in shambles. I think they deserve a pass for a few years to properly rebuild.

Marlins on the other hand.... *facepalm*

This, exactly. Astros were poorly managed and are currently reaping what they sowed. They built their farm, and now they need to suck to pick up good draft picks, and sign the occasional mid-level FA to sell at the deadline if he gets hot. Think '08 or '09 Orioles. Nothing especially wrong with that. Maybe they should be giving some more AAAA/Rule 5/busted top prospect types a chance.

Marlins are a totally different story.

[Blizzard1090]

The Astros are one thing..I think in a few years they will be better.

Loria though...is and always will be a complete scumbag.

[glenn__davis]

This Astros team is going to be really interesting to follow. I said when the move to the AL West was finalized that they would have a good chance at breaking the record for the worst team (by W/L obviously) in a 162 game season.

They are currently 8-24, good for a .250, which puts them right about on pace.

[Can_of_corn]

This Astros team is going to be really interesting to follow. I said when the move to the AL West was finalized that they would have a good chance at breaking the record for the worst team (by W/L obviously) in a 162 game season.

They are currently 8-24, good for a .250, which puts them right about on pace.

You also get the feeling, when watching them, that you might see a no hitter.

I hope Tillman gets a start against them this year.

[DrungoHazewood]

Real question: If the Norfolk Tides were a ML team, and Giancarlo Stanton played for them, would they be better or worse than the Miami Marlins?

No exaggeration, I think the Tides are at least 5 games better.

This Astros team is going to be really interesting to follow. I said when the move to the AL West was finalized that they would have a good chance at breaking the record for the worst team (by W/L obviously) in a 162 game season.

They are currently 8-24, good for a .250, which puts them right about on pace.

A lot of teams have been playing .250 ball for five or six weeks. Odds are that they're better than that. PECOTA and other projections had them as a 60 or 65 win team.

An average AAA team is probably a 30 or 35 win team in the majors. The Tides are 21-10, but they're using some '12 Oriole Magic as they've only outscored their opponents by 5 runs. I suppose it's possible they could be a 45 or even 50-win team with Stanton.

But, in general, this speculation about AAA teams being better than some bad major league team are way off. The worst team in the majors usually wins 55-60, and the best AAA team rarely gets to the level you could project 50 wins in the majors.

I think the biggest difference is that the '88 O's had a decent payroll in comparison to other teams.

Miami 44,691,900

Houston 27,251,338

Keep in mind the Miami number includes what they are paying for players no longer on the field.

A total payroll under 30 million should have the MLBPA screaming mad.

My issue is with the way MLB has incentivized revenue sharing. I don't have any problem with low payrolls, but teams shouldn't be profiting from slashing payroll without regard to quality of team. Revenue sharing should be based on market size and some measure of what I'll call "trying hard". Not on payroll.

But I don't want to tell a team that wins 90 games on a $40M payroll that they'll be punished.

[Can_of_corn]

A lot of teams have been playing .250 ball for five or six weeks. Odds are that they're better than that. PECOTA and other projections had them as a 60 or 65 win team.

An average AAA team is probably a 30 or 35 win team in the majors. The Tides are 21-10, but they're using some '12 Oriole Magic as they've only outscored their opponents by 5 runs. I suppose it's possible they could be a 45 or even 50-win team with Stanton.

But, in general, this speculation about AAA teams being better than some bad major league team are way off. The worst team in the majors usually wins 55-60, and the best AAA team rarely gets to the level you could project 50 wins in the majors.

My issue is with the way MLB has incentivized revenue sharing. I don't have any problem with low payrolls, but teams shouldn't be profiting from slashing payroll without regard to quality of team. Revenue sharing should be based on market size and some measure of what I'll call "trying hard". Not on payroll.

But I don't want to tell a team that wins 90 games on a $40M payroll that they'll be punished.

It wouldn't bother me as a fan but from a MLBPA view they should also be punished. No team needs to have payroll that low to be profitable.