Why MLB is to blame for teams like our Reds losing.

by Zach K on May 28, 2007 3:30 PM EDT Comment 38 comments

6 losses later, Cries of another "5 year plan" or "Firesale" come up while i just hold my ears. How many 5 year plans does a die hard fan have to go through? I have seen former Reds like Brett Boone, Mike Cameron, Reggie Sanders, Paul Konerko and many others go on to have 2 to 3 great years, be huge factors on playoff and World Series teams while my beloved Reds have been nothing more than an 80 win team since 1999. I try to pump myself up when the Yankees, Cubs, Red Sox are on Fox and ESPN's national telivised games every week but I always end up angry and upset before the first inning is over.

Hasn't the MLB figured it out yet?

Why is the NFL the most sucsessful leauge in the planet?

Oh yeah that salary cap thing!

Every fan can go into the season believing that team has a chance, Every team no matter how bad has atleast one superstar.

When then NFL Draft has higher ratings than the whole MLB Post Season, one would think they would figure it out.

These are tough times for being a reds fan in the Nati'. Another 5 year plan no matter who is a GM won't make a difference though. The Young Guys get good, they want to get paid good, so they say goodbye to the reds.

So Major Leauge Baseball, Please let all of America enjoy your game.

0 recs | Comment 38 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

MLB would probably love it.

My understanding is that it's the player's union that would never allow it. Correct me if I'm wrong on that one.

"Think lucky!" - Jerry Narron's philosophy on baseball

by Ash on May 28, 2007 3:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

You are correct

but it is the MLB's fault for letting them become so powerful

"Well Marty, he strikes out on the same pitches but a little differently now."-Bob Boone when asked why Dunn was hitting lead-off

by Zach K on May 28, 2007 3:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Absolutely right

Not only is the player's union the strongest union in sports, I'd argue it's one of the strongest in the country. And it's not just this issue that's affected, it goes further than that. For example, why is a former owner the commissioner? Because the owners will not tolerate a commissioner that isn't biased towards them. Even neutrality isn't acceptable, and this is all designed to offset the power of the union.

Personally, I think it would be to the long-run advantage of all parties to level the playing field. And there's certainly a lot of nonsensical crap coming from both sides. I guess it's a little naive in today's world to expect a measure of conciliation from either side, but I would like to see a lot more "for the good of the game" decisions being made right now. Instead we get indignant posturing between the millionaires and the billionaires.

Maybe when World Series ratings degenerate to mirror those of "Saved By the Bell" reruns, the powers that be will reevaluate their positions.

Until then, I believe I'll have another Budweiser.

by ctnyc on May 28, 2007 10:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Somebody need a position reevaluated?

The Reds are 6-20 since we danced around the Maypole at 13-13. If Jerry is not fired before Houston I will kill my Red Reporter self in Tuesday's game thread.

by Alan on May 28, 2007 11:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

RR Eulogy

Alan loved the Reds. He loved pictures of cats, bare-chested men, and enormous women. He died for the Reds' front office sins. He will be missed.

Alan, does this meet with your approval?

"Think lucky!" - Jerry Narron's philosophy on baseball

by Ash on May 28, 2007 11:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nice.

Funny.

Thank ya.

But you forgot "big burritos."

(What's also funny is that last week when I told my wife that I had politely declined a certain Red Reporter's offer to send me some naughty email pictures of Jessica Alba, my wife said, "Now they'll all think you're gay.")

G'night.

The Reds are 6-20 since we danced around the Maypole at 13-13. If Jerry is not fired before Houston I will kill my Red Reporter self in Tuesday's game thread.

by Alan on May 29, 2007 12:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Speaking of five year plans...

They never seem to work.

"That which is repeated will happen a third time."

by Paul Householder on May 28, 2007 3:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

ratings

The first day of this year's NFL draft got a 4.1 rating share (down from last year). I don't know about "the whole MLB postseason" but game 2 of the World Series last year pulled an 11.6.

by Red Menace on May 28, 2007 3:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Why is the NFL the most successful league?

because they've got the whole country buying into the false idea that every team has a chance.

Last year, 6 NFL teams finished with a winning percentage worse than the Reds, who have the worst record in baseball. It just looks more competetive because they only play a 16 game regular season. Extend the season by 146 games and you'd hear the same crowing about the NFL.

MLB has great labor peace right now, and I'd hate to see it broken by the owners forcing a salary cap. Spending doesn't have such a great correlation with winning. See this years Yankees, and the Cubs, perennially.

by Blue on May 28, 2007 4:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

NFL games are shorter, more

action filled, and there's only like 16 gaames plus pre and post seasson. Most importantly the games are usually on a Sun. afternoon which allows for an important American Rite called: TAILGATING! Why compare apples to cumquats?

Farewell coach Narron and Bucky too!

by Madville on May 28, 2007 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Parity

The NFL salary cap started before the 1994 season. We won't count '94 though, because there was no World Series. Since 1995 then, there have been 9 different Super Bowl champions. There have been 8 different World Series champions.

I'm failing to see the huge gulf in parity when it comes to winning championships.

Obviously your point is about being in contention for the playoffs, but in that same timespan, 12 of 16 NL teams have been in the playoffs along with 11 of 14 AL teams (the teams missing out are Brewers, Pirates, Phillies, Expos/Nats, Blue Jays, D-Rays, and Royals).

Obviously that's not as good as football, because in that same span every team has made the playoffs save for the expansion Texans. However, baseball is not an exercise in determinism.

by teb7 on May 28, 2007 4:23 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Sorry but I can't agree...

A salary cap would not solve the Reds problems.

Here are some facts:
*Cleveland 1995-2001 (8 straight seasons in 1st or 2nd place)
*Minnesota (5 out of the last 6 years in 1st or 2nd)
*Oakland (8 straight years in 1st or 2nd)
*A different world series winner for the last 7 seasons.

You don't want NFL-style parody in baseball. You want a Reds dynasty - just like every other fan wants of their team.

But the above stats show that the baseball world HAS created parody, just in a different style than the NFL. This has been accomplished by letting the big market teams risk it by paying top price for proven All-Stars. And it has allowed small and medium market teams to develop young talent and and then rotate them out when they can't be afforded anymore.

Even if we had a salary cap or Steinbrenner's checkbook, I wouldn't want the Reds to be a free agent all-star team. Let the Yankees overspend for Damon and I'll call up Votto and watch him develop into a star.

Today's baseball world doesn't allow for smaller markets to create a Big Red Machine that keeps together the Starting 8 for a decade, but it allows SMART management to create young and exciting teams that put together a mix of youth and experience.

The teams above prove that if you are smart, you can sign your young stars through a majority of their peak years, and then phase them out and bring in young talent. (Krivsky is trying to do the same thing with long-term contracts for our young stars).

You may point out that the above teams have not won a World Series. This is true, but they have winning ballclubs. Living in the Bay Area, it has been great to know that I can flip on the channel any day and watch the A's battling for first place. They don't need a salary cap and neither do the Reds.

by jambolyajones on May 28, 2007 4:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Parity, you mean

I'm not convinced that salary caps are the magical bullet that many say they are. I think the state of MLB is rather good. That being said, there's lots of things I would do before salary caps:

Raise the mound
Cut excess teams
Shorten the season
Cut interleague play

MLB has just as much parity (if not more) than the NFL. And the MLB and the NFL (as has already been pointed out) are completely different in almost every respect: season length, playoffs, number of games, style of play, tradition, etc.

No sir, salary caps are not the magic bullet, and would probably cause more problems than they solved.

"Players have two things to do. Play and keep their mouths shut." -Sparky Anderson

by boohiss on May 28, 2007 4:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

hmmm

I like raise the mound. Puts emphasis back on pitching and Defense
Who are the "excess" teams?
How short? Go back to 154 maybe?
You could eliminate it as far as I am concerned

by Caleb on May 28, 2007 4:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Excess teams

Well that's the real question isn't it. Probably you look at all the data from around '94 until now and gauge which teams have the lowest fan interest and/or lack of success. I would guess that percentage of seats sold combined with winning percentage would give a good idea of which teams are safe to cut (or demote to AAA for that matter).

My guess is that it would be around 2-4 from this pool:

Devil Rays
Orioles
Royals
Marlins (maybe)
Rockies
Arizona

Which includes the scenario of just a flat-out expansion repeal.

If the mound is raised, teams might not have to be cut, since there would be more "good enough" pitching to go around. 154 games would be fine, or maybe even a few less. Shorten it until game significance stops increasing and revenue starts decreasing.

And yeah, I meant "eliminate" interleague play by "cutting" it completely.

"Players have two things to do. Play and keep their mouths shut." -Sparky Anderson

by boohiss on May 28, 2007 6:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

mound raising

Raising the mounds wouldn't increase the amount of major league capable pitchers. It would just change the environment.

by Red Menace on May 28, 2007 9:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

more on mound raising

Would it not make it harder for the batters and easier for the pitcher? Thus, you lower the bar for pitchers, increasing the amount of good pitching.

I think probably cutting excess teams would be a better move, but I think raising the mound would be an easier move to make.

"Players have two things to do. Play and keep their mouths shut." -Sparky Anderson

by boohiss on May 28, 2007 9:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

it's all relative

Let's say the average pitcher has a 4.50 ERA. The mounds are raised and now he has a 3.50 ERA. All the replacement level AAA pitchers used to be at 5.50-6.50, but now they're putting up 4.50s. But those 4.50 ERAs aren't the same as the average pitcher's before the mounds were raised. If there were say, 200 Major League quality pitchers before the change, there are still 200 major league quality pitchers. We just have to adjust our standards. Now Johan has a microscopic Gibson-in-68 ERA, scoring is down, and a 4.50 ERA isn't good.

I'm just pulling all these numbers out of my ass, but there's my point.

by Red Menace on May 28, 2007 10:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Besides

I think it's debatable it had that much effect when they lowered it to begin with. If Gibson was truly the reason, like everyone likes to say, is it possible the biggest difference between his pitching before and after was simply another year on an aging arm towards the end of it's career. No doubt it helps the batter, but not so much that Milton would be an ace.

If they moved the mound back up ten feet, then you'd have a dramatic effect on a pitcher's success.

But how would low scores help the game? If every member of the Tomo-Ohka All Stars could throw a no-hitter at will, the average person would be even more bored with the game than they already are.

Save Junior!!

by sukr on May 29, 2007 8:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Did you...

..just mention Bob Gibson and Eric Milton in the same paragraph?

That's like comparing apples with herpes.

The Reds are 6-20 since we danced around the Maypole at 13-13. If Jerry is not fired before Houston I will kill my Red Reporter self in Tuesday's game thread.

by Alan on May 29, 2007 8:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Check the new sig!

I would agree it's an issue if they were mentioned in the same sentence, like you just did. :))

Save Alan!!

by sukr on May 29, 2007 8:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks, sukr.

I apreciate the sentiment but I've already popped my first 10/660 of Vicodon and I'm now into my second Joy Division album...

A change of speed, a change of style.
A change of scene, with no regrets,
A chance to watch, admire the distance,
Still occupied, though you forget.
Different colours, different shades,
Over each mistakes were made.
I took the blame.
Directionless so plain to see,
A loaded gun wont set you free.
So you say.

If C Trent can't tell me what I want to hear by 4 or 430 I'm cracking open the Bushmills.

It will all start to feel as strangely wonderful as a Kyle Lohse complete game.

The Reds are 6-20 since we danced around the Maypole at 13-13. If Jerry is not fired before Houston I will kill my Red Reporter self in Tuesday's game thread.

by Alan on May 29, 2007 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

So, you're listening to Joy Division

But you're not going to hang yourself? Come on!

by Brendanukkah on May 29, 2007 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Heh.

Sick... but funny.

Seriously Alan, you've built this up to a point that, I'm sure the general consensus is expecting something dramatic. Something akin to a final performance of Digital. My money is on a ban-incurring diatribe, or more likely, a long string of offensive images (I'm rooting for porn), per your m.o.. But no way you can go quietly.

A "scotsman" diary? "Now hear this: Delete my account! I've had enough of the negativity! I'm committing Reporter Soduku!"
:))

Save Alan!!

by sukr on May 29, 2007 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I never meant to offend anyone.

Shock? ..perhaps.

Titilate? ..maybe.

But offend? I was always hoping to leave that to Jerry and the bullpen.

The Reds are 6-20 since we danced around the Maypole at 13-13. If Jerry is not fired before Houston I will kill my Red Reporter self in Tuesday's game thread.

by Alan on May 29, 2007 11:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I chose poor wording

I meant not that you do offend, just that I wouldn't be surprised if you were to combine your usual with something offensive, for shock value, while "McLeaning" yourself.

And no, I'm not clicking the shrimp link, lest I be befouled by a Daedalus prank :)

Save Alan!!

by sukr on May 29, 2007 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'll vouch for it

No pictures, just a definition or two and descriptions of crime scenes in Scandanavia. Nothing gross or NSFW-ish.

Seriously though, I can totally see Justin Timberlake going out this exact same way.

by Brendanukkah on May 29, 2007 11:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

All I ever wanted...

..was to drop a few jaws. (That, and 80 wins.)

The Reds are 6-20 since we danced around the Maypole at 13-13. If Jerry is not fired before Houston I will kill my Red Reporter self in Tuesday's game thread.

by Alan on May 29, 2007 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hah!

I was turned on for a second till I realized it looks like Jerry Narron's sister. Giggidy, giggidy!

And Brendan, according to my sources, the number of people that cash in that way is surprising. Big enough numbers that make me want to try it, but the mortality rate keeps me on the straight and narrow. :))

Save Alan!!

by sukr on May 29, 2007 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thought about it.

But I wouldn't want ya'll to associate me with a dopey rock star who just wasn't able to reposition the chair with his foot after he tossed his shrimp on the barby.

The Reds are 6-20 since we danced around the Maypole at 13-13. If Jerry is not fired before Houston I will kill my Red Reporter self in Tuesday's game thread.

by Alan on May 29, 2007 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

We also would have associated you

with "loosening up" Kylie Minogue. And that ain't bad.

Interestingly, in the Sydney Hard Rock Cafe, there's a mural on the ceiling of dead rock stars. Elvis is there, Jimi, Kurt Cobain, and... yup, next to the three of them is Michael Hutchence. He's more important than John Lennon, and you thought he was a dope!

by Brendanukkah on May 29, 2007 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think Kylie Minogue must be 45 years old.

But she's still bringin' sexy back.

I used to be a big INXS fan. I do not know what I was thinking. Over time (beginning around '94) I would open up their discs and peruse the lyric sheet and think, "Yep. I'll take $4 Used Kids credit for this one too."

I still love me some Shabooh Shoobah now and again.

The Reds are 6-20 since we danced around the Maypole at 13-13. If Jerry is not fired before Houston I will kill my Red Reporter self in Tuesday's game thread.

by Alan on May 29, 2007 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good Argument

I have to disagree though

I know the Yankees haven't won a world series since 00, but you can watch a guy like Joey Votto delvop in a star and get attached to him...then after the contract year a Big Market Team takes him

The Yankees have a hall of famer at almost every postion in there line up {though i know they still are losing}, Why do the Big Market Teams get to have a Big Red Machine like line up and KC, CIN and otehrs don't

I only used the NFL comparison because it really has become Americas Game and the salary cap is really fun

New England won 3 super bowls durring the time you are talking about as well BUT they play {St.louis, Carolina and Phildelphia}

Why do ESPN and FOX rarely show small maket teams? It's always about the Yankees or Red Sox. Those are the big TV Contracts as well that bring in the real money in for the teams. While FOX, CBS, NBC and ESPN show every team evenly that had a winning record or sold out there stadium for a game.

I'm not saying this is all of the Reds problems but I know it would even out the playing field

"Well Marty, he strikes out on the same pitches but a little differently now."-Bob Boone when asked why Dunn was hitting lead-off

by Zach K on May 28, 2007 5:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

TV contracts

The revenues from the national TV contracts (ESPN and Fox) are split evenly among the 30 teams. It doesn't matter that the Yankees and Red Sox are shown more often. Their advantage comes in part from their local TV contracts (YES and NESN) which are unshared.

by Red Menace on May 28, 2007 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

A bit of expansion on the TV networks point

That's where the big money is for the Red Sox and Yankees. In terms of revenue vs. spent money for the team, the Yankees lose money year in and year out. The Red Sox aren't quite as drastic, but I believe their situation is similar. But unlike a team such as the Reds, the Red Sox and Yankees don't turn to a Fox Sports affiliate, but rather they own their own TV stations. I'm not sure on the numbers for YES, but I know NESN pulls in somewhere in the neighborhood of $300 million in profit every year. There's huge money in establishing a station, and while the Reds may not have the popularity of the Yankees or Sox, adding a TV station would add to the fanbase, allow every game to be televised, and ultimately result in some substantial revenues being made. The Yankees and Red Sox are large market teams, but they make money and have good teams because they're run by very smart people. The Reds and Devil Rays don't make money and don't win games because they're run by dumb people. Don't blame the Yankees for being a big market team, blame the Reds for being run by idiots. Hopefully Castellini is on the way to changing that, but he has a way to go.

by Geki on May 29, 2007 12:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

hasn't baseball always been

the haves and the have nots? In the American League it seemed like anytime KC or Cleveland got any one decent the Yanks got him for virtually nothing. Or maybe that is just what I remember and remember reading. I think the real key for the smaller market teams is spend wisely. That and spend more on player scouting and development

by Caleb on May 28, 2007 5:25 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

MLB did not force the Reds to hire Krivsky

Krivsky basically inherited a team 14 months ago that went into the 2006 all star break a playoff team. Today the Reds have the worst record in baseball. They are not as bad as their record, but they are a 70-75 win club. In 14 months Krivisky has turned an average club into a crappy team while increasing the payroll $15 million and trading off half a dozen promising young players for declining spare parts.

Place the blame where it belongs. MLB is not responsible for the nightmare of the Reds 2007 season. It is the jackass GM we have whispering with his inner circle and hiding himself from realty in a group think denial bubble.

Rock Chalk Talk for pretty good KU baseball coverage

by James Quinn on May 28, 2007 6:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs