quote:

Originally posted by mymindsblank:
I used to love MLB, and I mean love.

But somewhere along the way I began to lose interest. It wasn't the strike or steroids, it was that baseball had become an exercise in capitalism and economics. The same rich teams are competitive every year, maybe one lower income team can rise up and surprise everyone (Rockies 2007), but all of the lower income teams basically have become farm teams for the richer teams. I can't tell you how many times I have watched a prospect finally reach his potential on a low income team like the Royals or Rays, only to leave for a huge payday with the BoSox, Yanks, Cubs, Dodgers, or the Mets. Sometimes they are traded for prospects, who go through the same process and eventually return to a rich club after they have proven themselves. All other professional team sports have some sort of a salary cap, why doesn't baseball? Being a Reds fan its difficult to watch a team so deep in tradition and former success wallow around in mediocrity year in and out, just because the city they are located in is a smaller market than most others. Does anyone honestly think that the Royals have a chance to win the World Series in todays baseball landscape?

Does anyone else feel this way?

I'm assuming you've seen my previous baseball posts and so you already know my answer as a Royals fan. In the end though, isn't every business and enterprise in this crazy capitalist world of ours ultimately about the bottom line? . I gave up on caring about baseball and major league sports in general for a while during highschool, not because of the performances of my favorite teams as much as apathy/discontent with sports in general. That lasted until the Royals 2003 season. Their early but ultimately illusory success rejuvenated my interest in baseball as an entertaining spectator sport.

But yeah, my interest has once again dwindled. If I didn't have a generous family member who shares season tickets to Royals games with myself and the rest of my family, I wouldn't give a shit about baseball. Going to the games, especially in Kansas City, is really what I look forward to about the game. Come October, when all the talk is about the same east coast teams, I just tune it out. I suppose that doesn't make me a very good baseball fan, but without building up some sort of emotional connection to a team I don't think I'd be able to keep an interest in it.

Also, to echo Paddy and odyssey, I do think that budget parity wouldn't necessarily mean the small market teams would become turnaround successes. I've mentioned before that a lot of the Royals failures lie with the general manager's stinginess, poor training practices, and a pattern of bad personnel/contract decisions. It seems like since the late 90's the Royals have been trying to cleverly market their lack of direction as a "rebuilding and prospect developing strategy" like the Twins or something. It's as if they expect Royals fans to go "It's okay that they've finished last in their division and lost over 100+ games nearly every season for the last 10 years, because they're in rebuilding mode". I'd really like to see what they are actually fucking building with all of our money. It's probably the Sagrada Familia.

As a side note I think the Red's have a chance to stay in contingency against the Cubs and Brewers. I don't follow the Red's as much as I used to but I hope they have a good year, or at least help St. Louis to have a bad one .

This message has been edited. Last edited by: La La Love Pixies,

quote:

Originally posted by mymindsblank:
Ok maybe I misstated myself. I believe that some sort of salary cap at both ends of the spending spectrum would benefit the sport. The Yankees pay 3 or 4 players the equivalent of the budget of an entire smaller team. And the non-spending owners should be blamed as well. All of the great players gravitate to a small handful of wealthy teams due to the inability of the smaller revenue teams to compete salary wise, unless they put all of their eggs in one basket and keep the top player and surround him with cheap talent and not quite ready AAA players. Of course a Yankees or Red Sox fan would be happy with this, they are the benefactors of this trend. By the beginning of July, 70% of the teams are out of the playoff chase and attendance and revenue dwindle...so they sell off their better players to the contenders, the rich get richer and the poor didn't have a chance to begin with. Lack of competitiveness is killing this sport, a salary cap would be a great place to start in fixing it.

If lack of competitiveness was going to kill the sport, it would have happened a very long time ago. The 1950s were less competitive than the 1960s, yet baseball was more popular then. The 1990s were less competitive than the 1980s, yet baseball was more popular then. And so on. I used to do a lot of reading of baseball history and I think you'd be hard pressed to establish a link. No team today is anywhere near as bad as the worst teams of the past.

I grew up within an hour of NYC, and I was in middle school and high school at the height of the Yankees' recent success. Baseball still wasn't popular. The youth of today just don't like baseball, and none of my experiences have given the slightest hint that having more teams in contention would help that. Even if MLB stops leaking fans it won't matter in 20 years when they aren't getting any new ones. I think we need to come to grips with the fact that baseball is not and probably will never again be THE American sport.

I know that this is something that troubles you personally, but overall there's no evidence to show that this is why baseball has been doing poorly. And, actually, looking at World Series champs over the past 6 or 7 years, it looks pretty egalitarian from where I'm sitting. Only 3 teams have won multiple pennants in this decade, with only the Red Sox winning multiple championships. The last time the latter happened was, believe it or not, the 1900s. And there were only 6 World Series that decade. Moreover, baseball didn't even have a playoff system until well into the sixties - typically at most 3 teams out of 8 would be contenders in each league. If I sound pedantic, I don't mean to be - I don't know how old you are, but the point I'm trying to get across is that there has never been any sort of fantastically more competitive time in baseball, going back to its origins. The reason baseball has declined in popularity simply cannot be attributed to that. If you'd like a salary cap for other reasons, that's fine. That's not what I'm arguing against. But what you've said here just isn't true. If a salary cap is to be justified it needs to be on other grounds, because if anything the game is as competitive today as it's ever been.

And no, the reason I'm against a salary cap personally isn't because I'm a Yankees fan. I watch the playoffs and the World Series every year, regardless of who's involved, if no other duties prevent it. I go to minor league games I have no possible stake in, etc., etc. I also collected cards before I started spending all my money on music. So I would call myself a big fan of baseball in general, who roots for the Yankees because that's what I grew up with. When they were both very bad and very expensive. Besides saying this I have no way of convincing you, so believe what you will. The biggest reason I oppose a salary cap is probably for the players' rights.

quote:

Originally posted by La La Love Pixies:
But yeah, my interest has once again dwindled. If I didn't have a generous family member who shares season tickets to Royals games with myself and the rest of my family, I wouldn't give a shit about baseball. Going to the games, especially in Kansas City, is really what I look forward to about the game. Come October, when all the talk is about the same east coast teams, I just tune it out.

All the talk is about the same teams because they're in the biggest and most devoted markets, but again, saying that they're the only ones always in it just isn't true. In the last 4 years the only team that could reasonably be described as east coast to win the pennant has been the Red Sox. Even before that we have the Cards in 2004, and in 2002 the Angels and the Giants.

I think taking a look at this might be informative for this discussion: http://www.baseball-reference.com/postseason/ The last five years look pretty darn good, certainly no worse than the NFL at least.

quote:

Originally posted by odysseyandoracle:

If lack of competitiveness was going to kill the sport, it would have happened a very long time ago. The 1950s were less competitive than the 1960s, yet baseball was more popular then. The 1990s were less competitive than the 1980s, yet baseball was more popular then.

But we live in a much different sports world than in past decades. More access, more professional sports, more TV coverage, and the internet at full blast. If your fav team sucks year in and year out, why would kids like them. Baseball is slow paced and boring in today's sports world, it's lucky it occurs mostly over the spring and summer when all other sports are in offseason or wrapping up (sorry wnba). Look at the realistic contenders payroll compared to all the other teams. Look at what the salary cap has done for the NFL, unquestionably the US's fav sport, every team really has a chance every few years of being a contender (except the Cardinals ). You didn't respond to my comments on where the best players only play for the richest teams. I've got to go now cuz I'm short on time and long on opinions but I'll be back!

quote:

Originally posted by odysseyandoracle:

quote:

Originally posted by La La Love Pixies:
But yeah, my interest has once again dwindled. If I didn't have a generous family member who shares season tickets to Royals games with myself and the rest of my family, I wouldn't give a shit about baseball. Going to the games, especially in Kansas City, is really what I look forward to about the game. Come October, when all the talk is about the same east coast teams, I just tune it out.

All the talk is about the same teams because they're in the biggest and most devoted markets, but again, saying that they're the only ones always in it just isn't true. In the last 4 years the only team that could reasonably be described as east coast to win the pennant has been the Red Sox. Even before that we have the Cards in 2004, and in 2002 the Angels and the Giants.

I think taking a look at this might be informative for this discussion: http://www.baseball-reference.com/postseason/ The last five years look pretty darn good, certainly no worse than the NFL at least.

True, you make a great argument and know more about baseball then I ever would want to know. I don't mean to say that the mlb has exclusively become the "yankee's/red sox" playground, but from my vantage point in little ole Kansas City it's been a tough and frustrating ride. I just meant to say that for me, on a personal level, as a casual baseball fan, the over saturated hype up of Red Sox-Yankee's games is grating and all the more infuriating as a jealous Royals fan.

I think smaller market teams can be competitive. If you look at the ALCS and NLCS from last year, only the Red Sox were big spenders. Cleavland had one of the smallest payrolls in the AL. And Colorado and Arizona dominated the big spending Phillies and Cubs.

I do like the idea Paddy G brought up about a payroll minimum. If a city can't support a major league team, either move the franchise or drop it.

I'm glad you didn't take offense to the way I phrased myself - looking back at it now I was a little more forceful than necessary. I blame it on the neverending string of philosophy classes...sigh.

quote:

Originally posted by mymindsblank:
You didn't respond to my comments on where the best players only play for the richest teams. I've got to go now cuz I'm short on time and long on opinions but I'll be back!

I think the best players gravitate towards those teams because they win, not because they're the richest. That may sound like a circular argument, but I don't think it is, because the richest teams don't always win. I'll use my early 90s Yankees as another example - I can't imagine anybody wanting to play there as opposed to Cincinnati back then. The major markets are also more attractive places to live for these young and rich guys who have likely never held "real" jobs, and I don't see how that could be accounted for. A-Rod at least claims that he could have gotten more money from another team.

I'd say that the problem isn't so much free agents, because free agents rarely make a team. Almost every free agent the Yankees have signed in the past ten (twenty?) years has turned out to be a major albatross. And I'm generally opposed to anything which would have the effect of either keeping down overall salaries (that extra money is just going to go to the owners, folks) or preventing players from signing wherever they want for however much they can get. A salary cap would definitely do the former and might do the latter.

Here's an idea instead that I just made up - how about some sort of public matching fund that could only be used to help teams keep players they've brought up through the minors themselves? No one would be forced to stay with their original team if they didn't want to - this would just help the poorer teams in cases where they really can't make a competitive offer. Another thing that would help *a lot* is a global draft - the fact that we don't have one is unfair to both poorer teams and American baseball players. The Yankees and the Red Sox especially have benefited immensely from extensive scouting in the Caribbean and the Pacific Rim.

quote:

Originally posted by La La Love Pixies:
True, you make a great argument and know more about baseball then I ever would want to know. I don't mean to say that the mlb has exclusively become the "yankee's/red sox" playground, but from my vantage point in little ole Kansas City it's been a tough and frustrating ride. I just meant to say that for me, on a personal level, as a casual baseball fan, the over saturated hype up of Red Sox-Yankee's games is grating and all the more infuriating as a jealous Royals fan.

Have I ever mentioned how much I hate Fox? I blame this mostly on them.

Yeah, the hype is hard to swallow. I think baseball would be better off commercially if it just played up the conservatism and tradition inherent in it, and stopped trying to turn every single game into a Super Bowl. There're way too many games in the season to possibly sustain an NFL or even NBA level of excitement for each one. Conservatism seems to be good money making these days, and baseball has way more history than any other American sport. Instead of trying to be hip and young, let's be old and square. Just a thought.

quote:

Originally posted by odysseyandoracle:
because the richest teams don't always win.

That's true, but I think it could be argued they have the best chance to win. If you look at the top ten team payrolls, only the Orioles, my White Sox , the Mariners and the Dodgers missed the playoffs, and the M's and Dodgers were close.

quote:

Its been exactly a hundred years since the Cubs last won the world series, so I have a feeling this year will finally by our year

I wish I did have that feeling, but I honestly don't.

quote:

Originally posted by sans_success:

quote:

Its been exactly a hundred years since the Cubs last won the world series, so I have a feeling this year will finally by our year

I wish I did have that feeling, but I honestly don't.

Being a Sox fan, usually the only reason I comment on the Cubs is to mock them. However, I think the decision to make Kerry Wood the closer is a smart one.

The Cubs got themselves a class-act 4th outfielder in Reed Johnson. As a Blue Jays lifer, I was sad to see him go. He is an ultimate hard-nosed ball player. He is great on defense and takes more bean-balls than any player I can recall. Last year, admittedly, he stunk. But he was just coming off major back surgery. The previous year, he batted over .300 and led all AL leadoff hitters in OBP.

It's a shame I won't be seeing Reed anymore, but I have a strong feeling the Cubs faithful will absolutely love his "old school" grit (and high-socks!) and 100% effort every single time.

What about a "soft" salary cap like the NBA? Once you go over the max or under the minimum salary caps, the team would be forced to pay a luxury tax that would match each dollar spent over/under the caps. It would deter teams from spending too much (yankees, mets, bosox) or spending too little (rays, marlins, pirates). I'm not sure if there is revenue sharing in baseball but that might help the smaller teams as well. I don't see how spreading the wealth to make teams more competitive, at least from a monetary perspective, could hurt the game, whether it be a slary cap, revenue sharing, or pre-structured limits on salary (another nba invention).

Anyway, another question? If ESPN didn't televise MLB and subsequently cram it down our throats, would it go the way of the NHL in becoming a niche sport? I realize most games are televised on FoxSports Regional coverage, but it is hard to underestimate the power of ESPN to push what is in their agenda (like the crappy disney movie ads tying in to sportscenter in some awkward segue).

MLB does have a luxury tax.

quote:

Originally posted by PaddyG:

Being a Sox fan, usually the only reason I comment on the Cubs is to mock them. However, I think the decision to make Kerry Wood the closer is a smart one.

Remember when some people were hailing Kerry Wood as the next Nolan Ryan? I guess that didn't pan out.

EricG75,

I have been a long-time user of this site but this is my first post and it was prompted by a comment you made in regards to Brandon Inge. This quote: "whether or not we can convince another team to take baseball's highest paid utility man and crybaby, Brandon Inge, off our hands" is a sentiment echoed by not only you, but other Tigers fans. What exactly has Inge done to incur yours and others' wrath? The guy has been with this team since 1998. Came up as a catcher and was then moved to his current position of 3b. Remained a consummate professional while the carousel of Tigers managers went round and round. Again, he remained quiet and performed his job during the dreaded 119 loss season. And now, after losing his job with the organization he stuck by, the guy requests a trade so that he can perform his job. The trade made to acquire Cabrera was a great move and I don't question that for one second. I do have a problem with those that criticize Inge and characterize him as a "cry-baby," etc. Any long-time Tigers fan should know that this is hardly the case. Personally, Inge has been and will remain one of my favorite Tigers of all-time.

quote:

Originally posted by mymindsblank:

quote:

Originally posted by PaddyG:

Being a Sox fan, usually the only reason I comment on the Cubs is to mock them. However, I think the decision to make Kerry Wood the closer is a smart one.

Remember when some people were hailing Kerry Wood as the next Nolan Ryan? I guess that didn't pan out.

The dude was filthy. And I hear he still is in short bursts, part of the reason they moved him to the pen. As a baseball fan, I really hope he can have a productive career as a closer.

quote:

Originally posted by PaddyG:

The dude was filthy. And I hear he still is in short bursts, part of the reason they moved him to the pen. As a baseball fan, I really hope he can have a productive career as a closer.

Yeah, him and Mark Prior both looked dominant at the beginning of their careers, but injuries derailed whatever momentum they had gathered.

As a Reds fan, who now has Dusty Baker as a coach, I can only hope that Baker takes his time with the Reds pitching prospects so that they don't go that same route. I hate that the Reds traded Josh Hamilton, an instant fan favorite, but at least they received a top notch pitching prospect in Volosquez. If him and Bailey can get it together they might have a decent pitching staff. Not that it matters at Great American Home Run Park.

EDIT: Right after writing this I read that the Reds optioned Bailey to triple A.

quote:

Originally posted by maddarabb:

I have been a long-time user of this site but this is my first post and it was prompted by a comment you made in regards to Brandon Inge. What exactly has Inge done to incur yours and others' wrath?

As you know, the Tigers made a trade that most of us know was a great move, acquiring Miguel Cabrera and signing him to an eight year deal. However, one person wasn't happy with the deal, and that was Brandon Inge, who immediately asked to be traded since he knew he would know longer be able to play 3B every day.

Now, Brandon is a dream utility player. With the exception of Pitcher, I can't think of a position he can't play. In fact, it looks like he's going to be starting the season in CF, since Granderson is on the DL with a broken finger.

We're also in dire need of a backup catcher. Vance Wilson has been on the DL for years and who knows if he'll ever come back. Since Inge used to catch before we got Pudge, Inge would be a great choice for backup catcher and super-utility guy on the other days. He might not play every day, but I bet it'd be close.

But, he's publicly said he has no interest in doing that, which I think has pissed a lot of his fans off. He did catch some games in spring training, but afterwards whined to the press that it affects his hitting too much. Funny, for a guy who bats in the #9 slot and has a .240 career average. I think Tigers fans want to see Inge stay, but he doesn't seem to have the team's needs in mind. He won't be happy unless he's an everyday third baseman, a position he's just okay at.

Also, because he's got about $20 million left on his contract, trading him is going to be a challenge unless Detroit eats a good portion of his contract.

So, there's my Inge rant.

Welcome to the forums!

quote:

Originally posted by odysseyandoracle:
I grew up within an hour of NYC, and I was in middle school and high school at the height of the Yankees' recent success. Baseball still wasn't popular. The youth of today just don't like baseball, and none of my experiences have given the slightest hint that having more teams in contention would help that. Even if MLB stops leaking fans it won't matter in 20 years when they aren't getting any new ones. I think we need to come to grips with the fact that baseball is not and probably will never again be THE American sport.

I agree with a lot what you say here. People just don't care about baseball. Yeah, I live in Texas and there aren't too many fans here but you don't have any idea how many people I know who just hate to watch a baseball game. As fun as I think it is, they just can't stand it.

I was also pretty young during the Yankees’ success and even then (you know, when everyone decided to buy Yankee caps and become Yankee fans?) it was a small movement. And I always loved the Yankees, mainly because my dad loved them and he would always watch the games. But even when I was in high school and the Yankees and Diamondbacks played that memorable World Series, few people cared.

And with the way people in the States adore football, baseball just doesn't stand a chance.

I doubt any of what I just said contributes much but I just wanted to state that.