Jump to content

MLB response to tanking: more playoff teams?


Frobby

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

What I read was one year and yea, not 100 pounds of quality weight.

I dont pay for the washington post, this is all that google will preview:

Quote

Feb 20, 2019 - Zion Williamson says he gained 100 pounds in two years, and he's only slightly exaggerating

Just because its not "quality" mean, you can play the PED card.

Having a ton of money and access to whatever he wants to eat or drink, has to be taken into consideration.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Philip said:

Well if attendance is going down in general, because of things that have nothing to do with baseball, then it’s logical to assume that bad decisions by the organization will increase the speed of the decline. If Manfred makes better decisions, which he has yet to show the ability to do, the decline in attendance might be slower than it is. It just makes sense that if the play on the field is being negatively impacted by  commissioner decisions, and that is true, then they are bad decisions. 

 Specifically, he has basically said it is OK to cheat. When Pete Rose asked for reinstatement on the grounds that, “hey they did it as an entire organization and nothing happened to them.“ He was exactly right. I do not think he should be reinstated, but I do think that all the guys who got away with it should be severely penalized.

I'm kind of curious. What better decisions should Manfred have made?  I guess two are suspending all the Sox and Astros for months or years, and explicitly changing multiple on-field rules to encourage contact and baserunning.  I don't know that you'd get overwhelming support for either of those things.

What else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

I dont pay for the washington post, this is all that google will preview:

Just because its not "quality" mean, you can play the PED card.

Having a ton of money and access to whatever he wants to eat or drink, has to be taken into consideration.

 

I don't know much about his family, he had a ton of money in HS?

Must be nice.

All concede the point on two years but I still find it exceedingly farfetched. 

Of course I think a ton of folks in all sports are cheating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Enjoy Terror said:

If you want to know why baseball is losing fans it's because the MLB doesn't market its best players (at all/effectively) and the sport doesn't appeal to young people who cord cut and have no access to the game. Baseball is behind on moving into the future.

Yep.

This is a guess but I'll bet there are 10+ NBA players, and 10+ NFL players, who more Americans (sports fans or not) would recognize if you put them on a screen and asked them to identify them, than Mike Trout.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Enjoy Terror said:

I don't disagree with that, but we're talking about player marketing. Historical precedent of well marketed baseball players exists, and therefore, this isn't relevant.

What did baseball or individual teams do better or differently with Cal Ripken or Mickey Mantle or George Brett than they are with Mike Trout and Mookie Betts? When I was growing up I knew Cal and Brett because I was a big baseball fan, I don't think it was because of targeted MLB marketing efforts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, atomic said:

I don't ever watch ESPN.

This begs several questions:

1.  If you don't ever watch, why do you care what's on?

2.  If you don't ever watch, why do you bother to gather statistics about what ESPN is broadcasting and formulate an opinion about it?

3.  If you don't ever watch, why would you think ESPN cares about your opinion?

4.  If you don't ever watch, what makes you think any of us care about your opinion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

What did baseball or individual teams do better or differently with Cal Ripken or Mickey Mantle or George Brett than they are with Mike Trout and Mookie Betts? When I was growing up I knew Cal and Brett because I was a big baseball fan, I don't think it was because of targeted MLB marketing efforts.

And yet I'll bet more average Americans, non-fans / casual fans / big fans, recognized Cal or Bonds or Brett or Clemens than would recognize Trout or Betts or Yelich now.   Maybe baseball has become a niche that is ignored by more of the mainstream, like hockey or boxing.   The NFL and NBA are not a niche, people who aren't even sports fans know dozens of players in those leagues, they are part of pop culture / social media culture / youth culture in a way that baseball and hockey players are not.   Clearly there was a time when baseball players WERE a big part of pop culture.  Would the Simpsons even bother to do the baseball episode they did 25 years ago with Strawberry and all those other players, today?   (Of course maybe the Simpsons aren't relevant to pop culture the way they were 25 years ago).

Somehow baseball has dropped from the level of NFL/NBA, which are a big part of pop culture and youth culture, to a niche sport like hockey where the hard core fans know and love the players but casual non-sports fans don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, atomic said:

 

 

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.  

I once announced a baseball game between Duke and UNC on the campus radio station.    I’m sure there were at least five people listening, if you include me, my co-announcer, and the sound engineer back at the station.   

It’s really tough to fill the time between pitches when you know absolutely no trivia about the players or the teams, and can’t talk about what Joe Manager or Joe Outfielder said yesterday.    To make matters worse, it was an extremely lopsided game.   When the score got to UNC 19, Duke 3, I opined, “we’ll, four grand slams and we’re right back in this one!”

The only other thing I remember is that Larry Doby, Jr. was Duke’s best player.   
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Playing 162 games with nearly half of your league making the playoffs is laughable overkill.  You are completely defeating the point of a long regular season.  I can't fathom how anyone thinks this is a good idea.  

Another thing that is frustrating is how SO MANY PEOPLE don't understand the concept of the one game wild card.  Teams who make the wild card are LUCKY to have the chance to advance to the regular post season.  They didn't win their division.  It is as much of a play in game as it is a post season game.  It keeps more teams alive in the post season chase as a bonus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I'm kind of curious. What better decisions should Manfred have made?  I guess two are suspending all the Sox and Astros for months or years, and explicitly changing multiple on-field rules to encourage contact and baserunning.  I don't know that you'd get overwhelming support for either of those things.

What else?

No 2WC, no “three batter minimum” no “banning shifts” no replay, no juiced balls, no pitch clock.

those are all gimmicks that don’t help the game.

regarding the cheating scandal, when you do nothing, almost anything would be better, but the players should be severely penalized, the teams should be severely penalized, Hinch Cora and Beltran should be banned for life.

Hinch’s explanation was so inadequate as to be embarrassing, but the Red Sox statement, and Cora’s, completely ignored the entire situation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't know much about his family, he had a ton of money in HS?

Must be nice.

All concede the point on two years but I still find it exceedingly farfetched. 

Of course I think a ton of folks in all sports are cheating.

So he came from family with money, that doesnt mean he was rolling in it, I suspect, it meant, he didnt have to worry about paying bills, like most college kids do.

But, with 20 million guaranteed and that doesnt count the 75 million, shoe deal.

Its clear, he has more available funds now, then he did in HS.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Just now, Redskins Rick said:

So he came from family with money, that doesnt mean he was rolling in it, I suspect, it meant, he didnt have to worry about paying bills, like most college kids do.

But, with 20 million guaranteed and that doesnt count the 75 million, shoe deal.

Its clear, he has more available funds now, then he did in HS.

 

Huh?

I said I didn't know what his family situation was.  You are the one that said he had a "ton of money" in high school, not me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ExileAngelos said:

Playing 162 games with nearly half of your league making the playoffs is laughable overkill.  You are completely defeating the point of a long regular season.  I can't fathom how anyone thinks this is a good idea.  

Another thing that is frustrating is how SO MANY PEOPLE don't understand the concept of the one game wild card.  Teams who make the wild card are LUCKY to have the chance to advance to the regular post season.  They didn't win their division.  It is as much of a play in game as it is a post season game.  It keeps more teams alive in the post season chase as a bonus.

They are concentrating on the part in which their team has a better chance at making the playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

They are concentrating on the part in which their team has a better chance at making the playoffs.

It is awful.  The sport will lose a lot of appeal for me.  Also just realized the trade deadline will be a non event now.  Everyone is in contention!  Lol what a joke.

Link to comment
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.




  • Posts

    • There’s another accomplishment from 1983 I’d like to match.  
    • I'm more of a Prime Number guy, I'm happy enough with 89. Round numbers are for suckers.   Pretty disheartening they haven't managed to reach that relatively meager goal in 40 years.
    • Still with a chance to do this for the first time since 1982-83. Would be one more nice accomplishment for this organization. 
    • The weird thing about our bullpen is that they rarely blow leads.   They have a 69% save rate, 4th highest in baseball.  They make it scary, but generally, when they have the lead, they get the job done.   Where they are really bad is keeping games close when we’re down a run or two, last night being a classic example of that.   This year’s team has 32 comeback wins, compared to 48 last year.   Why is that?   Part of it is obviously on the offense, but part of it is that the bullpen doesn’t keep us in striking distance when we’re behind.   One way you can tell this is by the W/L records of the starters and the bullpen.  Last year, the starters were 57-40, this year they’re 60-49.   The starter got the decision 12 more times this year than last year, including 9 more losses (with 3 games to play).   That tells you that when the team is losing when the starter is pulled, they keep losing.  Meanwhile, the relievers were 44-21 last year, 28-22 now. They’re not picking up wins because they don’t give the offense a chance to catch up and get the win for the bullpen guy.    
    • I do not disagree with above posts.  Also I am pretty sure that this time last season, the Texas Rangers Hangout was saying the exact same things as the Rangers Pen.  Point being, you never know until you know.  The pen is shaky, but is capable of putting together a solid run from time to time.  
    • Roster Resource thinks it has tonight's lineup and Kjerstad on bench again. He is 7 AB shy of 130 MLB regular season AB with 3 games left, and if he ends up short some prospect list makers may still label him one.    If still with the Orioles, he will be 26 years old by Sarasota. I think the OP has its answer as it has been Cole and Lopez these two nights and the team is preparing for that intensity.
    • I care I bet the over on 88 wins, looked like a lock now not so much, come on O’s, daddy needs some new shoes
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...