- This topic has 31 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Could someone please post the link from this ESPN article? Thanks very much.
“The state of Baseball: Inside the biggest questions MLB is facing with the future of the sport at stake”
Great article for discussion.
Nice to hear what others have to say, but at the root of the conflict is money, and none of the respondents said anything substantial about the most sensitive issues of, increasing costs, revenue sharing, the salary cap, or arbitration. The players think they are getting cheated because they’re not getting enough of it. And they think the owners are getting too much of it. No doubt, the players believe that if they will go on strike the owners will eventually cave, or perhaps, another Sonia Sotomayor will come to their rescue. The problem is that there may be a majority of owners who would just as soon tear the whole thing down and start over rather than give in to the demands.
I agree more so with mud than with all the deck chair shuffling the sports media figures like to talk about. It is true I do not like what the product on the field has turned into, but what it all boils down to is money and access to the game for regular working people. My son has 4 boys, kindergarten age up to 16 or 17. He has never been able to take them to games but once every few years due to the overall cost of the whole thing. I cannot justify the cost of just going myself. My wife does not spend that kind of money to entertain herself for a couple hours. I choose not to contribute financially by tuning in.
I am now getting too old to park way over by Purina and hike to the park. Or go up endless ramps and steps to the cheap seats. And then sit there sipping an increasingly warm bottled water that I brought from home.
I like to follow the story line by scanning box scores and sometimes checking gamecast. That’s all they are getting from me however much they tinker with the rules.
Bling…. nice to hear a man-on-the-street’s concerns. I’m thinking that there are a lot of fans feeling the same way. IMO so many the people that are attending the games either got the tickets free from somewhere else or have money to burn…. it costs a small fortune to go as an average Joe. I went to a good number of games when I was younger but now it doesn’t seem worth the $$ or all the trouble. Watching games on tv is much more convenient. I like convenient and not the troubles.
To counter the “access to the game/money” argument, baseball is by far the cheapest pro game to attend. I’m not saying it’s cheap, but you don’t hear other sports leagues worrying about whether they’ll get fans to show up or watch anymore.
So while access is somewhat of an issue, it’s the product that is turning off younger fans. People like action and in today’s strikeout and home run environment, where bunts, steals, base running and fine defensive efforts are increasingly rare, young people will tune out and watch another game. I know that many of the old guard will be turned off by what they consider to be “gimmicks” like banning the shift, moving the mound or the bases, instituting the DH or other measures, they may be the only way to inject enough enthusiasm into the game to keep it from turning into the #4 sports league in 20-30 years.
Instead of trying to shorten the games the wrong way through jury rigging, they should limit the number of times a batter can step out of the box, take away the shift, etc. Try to put more of an emphasis on more continuous action if possible. I guess there’s not much they can do about the overemphasis on the home run and walk. That ship has sailed.
The players and owners both can share in the blame with the state of the game. The players certainly want a big share of the pie and can be resistant to change when it comes to rule changes but the owners will always try to get away with anything they can to make an extra buck. These guys are businessmen and I truly believe most of them care much more about the bottom line than winning games. Having a championship caliber team is just icing on the cake, not the primary objective.
An aspect of the game that bothers me on another level is treating youngsters, pitching prospects, as expendables. They do not get the reps in minor league to learn the art, it is just throw as hard as possible and get it over the plate. Youngsters know this and work toward that in little league. Everybody blows out their elbow and gets surgery at a young age. Some blow up their shoulder. Who cares, there are more waiting to try for the pot of gold.
It would solve the pitching/hitting imbalance, and I think the true outcomes problem, if value could be placed on pitcher durability. I am not sure how. Limiting pitchers on the active roster? Limiting number of pitchers that can appear on active roster in a season? Some meaningful penalty for blowing up a youngster’s arm? It would amount to a massive change in the mindset and way pitchers are developed. But exploiting kids looking for a path to success is not something I am comfortable enabling with my cash.
It’s blowing up a kid’s arm if he’s a pitcher. Teaching curves and spin rate at the little league level. If it’s a batter, it’s all about launch angle and exit velocity. If you strike out 1/3 of the time, that’s okay if you launch 30 or so home runs during the season.
Length of games is a non-issue for me, even though mlb has it under the microscope. Mike Hargrove, the human rain delay, played during the 70’s and 80’s. The batter stalling has been going on since forever. It won’t change, and neither will the pitcher stalling. I’ve accepted it as part of the game. No-one is being forced to watch the games, regardless of their length. What does the next generation think of the games length? That’s for them to decide, not me.
One area I do have an issue with is the current level of celebrating and taunting, and fortunately it’s the minority of players. I’ll take a Rolen HR trot over the now common dance routines we see at 3B and home plate before the players get to the dugout. The “look at me” victory laps on HR trots, and pitchers calling out batters from the mound, are classless. Celebrating in the dugout is better sportsmanship.
I agree cranny. By no means outlaw the shift. Batters need to learn the art of hitting it where they ain’t rather than gearing up for a home run derby. BAs would go up and Ks would go down. There would be much more action in a game. (And fewer dude’s prancing around admiring themselves)
As to stolen bases, I think it is more about game awareness and observation than pure speed or time to the plate or the size of the bases. Yadi used to steal quite a few for a guy with no speed whatsoever, with a stellar success rate. Require players to learn the nuances of the game, do not make it easier for those who don’t, or can’t.
I agree cranny. By no means outlaw the shift. Batters need to learn the art of hitting it where they ain’t rather than gearing up for a home run derby. BAs would go up and Ks would go down. There would be much more action in a game. (And fewer dude’s prancing around admiring themselves)
Transplant today’s pitchers to the 1950s and they’d K at least as many as now, if not significantly more. It’s not a hitting talent problem, it’s a pitching talent killing the hitting talent problem. You can’t “hit em where they ain’t” and expect to score any runs off a guy throwing 95+ with multiple effective breaking pitches. Banning the shift makes some of those grounders to the middle right fielder into singles. Singles lead to more base runners, more runs, and more excitement in the game.
It’s astounding to me that anyone would defend the shift as an actual aesthetic piece of baseball strategy. It’s ugly and defeats even the basic naming conventions of the game. You get a shortstop, 1B, a shallow CF and a shallow RCF.
Teaching a player to “hit em where they ain’t” is easier said than done, with a long established personal hitting swing and the pitchers of today. What was funny, though, was to watch Carp bunt to the left side of the infield one time last season.
He ended up on second base. Why not do that more frequently to punish the shift?How long has it been since you’ve seen a sacrifice bunt, to move a runner over? How long has it been since you’ve seen a squeeze?
I disagree stlcard25. You can’t if you are swinging to maximize exit velocity and optimize launch angle. When is the last time you saw a guy choke up to increase bat control? I am quite sure it is not taught nor would even be allowed in the minors. That being the case, kids will not try to learn bat control in little league.
Players used to use a heavier bat and choke up a bit so they didn’t have to swing so hard to turn the ball around, and could adjust to the pitch thrown, the defense and the game situation. Bat control is an art and a science. If you have one swing and its all or nothing you cannot improve your chance of getting on if a baserunner is needed, or moving a runner over if that’s what needs to happen. The pitches are coming in faster, yes, and batters are doing nothing at all to compensate besides trying to time their home run swing better.
Bader hit 1 home run playing full time as a freshman at U. of Arizona. As a sophomore, he hit 2 home runs. As a junior, his draft year, he hit 17 home runs. What changed? Swing plane? Launch angle? Whatever it was, it got him drafted in the 3rd round. It’s happening all over baseball, at all levels.
The sophisticate metrics are turning it into a boring sport.
Where’s the excitement of the stolen bases? The stand up excitement of the suicide squeeze? Watching guys like Willie go from 1st to third?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.