Should the Reds go to a 6-man rotation?
2011 has seen an invasion of at least occasional 6-man rotations, with the Rays, White Sox, Yankees, and Royals all trying it at one point or another. D-Rays Bay has a nice article about it, including some past research by Tom Tango and colleagues in The Book. Here's an excerpt:
On 3 days rest (113 starts) pitchers had a .369 wOBA against and the same group of pitchers had a wOBA of .352 on 4 days rest.
There were 4,456 starts where the pitcher had exactly 5 days of rest and the wOBA against was .346. On 4 days of rest the same pitchers had a wOBA against of .350.
There were 645 games where the pitchers had exactly 6 days of rest and the wOBA against was .355. On 5 days of rest the same pitchers had a wOBA against of .346.
Got that? Said again another way, it's:
Going from 3 to 4 days rest drops wOBA .17 points.
Going from 4 to 5 days rest drops wOBA .04 points.
Going from 5 to 6 days rest raises wOBA .09 points.
(a lower wOBA against is better for a pitcher...means a lower OPS against, just measured better)
So you get a large advantage by going from 3 to 4 days rest (that's a typical 5-man rotation, four days off per pitcher), and a very small additional advantage by going to 5 days rest (that'd be a 6-man rotation). And going to 6 days rest you have a drop-off, probably because pitchers are rusty.
Now, the extra advantage of going to five days rest is probably statistically significant, but it's a very small advantage in terms of actual meaning in baseball games. There may be additional benefits, however, in terms of reduced wear and tear at a season level on the top tier of starters, that are not measured here and might be really important. But for most teams, it probably isn't worth it to take starts away from your #1 or #2 starters and give them to your #5 and #6 starter (the #5 gets skipped far less in this scenario than if you do a four-days-rest rotation).
In the Reds' case, however, I think it might be a good idea. The reason is that the Reds' staff is basically a bunch of #3's, #4's, and #5's. And Travis Wood and Edinson Volquez, major league pitchers, are in AAA. So there's really not much of drop-off between the Reds' top starters and the guy who would be the #6.
Just for curiosity's sake, I went through the Reds' 2011 schedule and took a look at what a five day rest rotation (six man rotation, skipping back-end starters when you have off-days) would look like. Here's the distribution I got:
#1 starter: 29 starts
#2 starter: 29 starts
#3 starter: 28 starts
#4 starter: 27 starts
#5 starter: 26 starts
#6 starter: 23 starts
So we're looking at around 3 or 4 fewer starts by each of Cueto, Leake, and I dunno, who's the #3 starter...Willis? And you end up with those guys being more rested, and probably at lower risk of injury. Mike Leake, for example, is just 4 IP shy of his 2010 total, and we all remember how he ran out of gas last year. Maybe this would help keep his innings under control? The cost is that you get more starts by either Travis Wood or Edinson Volquez, who have 2011 MLB xFIPs of 4.47 and 4.10, respectively (i.e. really, are they that much worse?).
At this point, the season is a lost cause anyway, so doesn't it make sense to give Wood and/or Volquez some additional major league starts to see if they can get back on track? And at the same time perhaps reduce the risk of injury to the guys that are getting it done? Thoughts?
124 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
It was a yes or no question.
A dope trailer is no place for a kitty.
by GlennBraggsSwingAndMissBrokenBat on Aug 11, 2011 8:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Go to a 4 man rotation like the old days
"the only place they lost was the scoreboard"
by Ewok on Aug 11, 2011 11:28 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
One drawback I see with this, at least until September
is that doing this takes an arm out of an already taxed bullpen. I think that probably isn’t a very good idea at this point.
But in September I’d be all for this. Alternatively, you could just Phantom DL Arroyo (like this org is clearly fond of doing) and put Wood or Volquez in his spot. That would probably have the same net effect.
It feels so nice to be back to normal
Arroyo would never go on the DL.
He’d rather jeopardize the team than get some needed rest.
"Luna Lovegood is really freaking awesome in every way." -Me
I don't believe that.
Bronson’s a good dude.
A dope trailer is no place for a kitty.
by GlennBraggsSwingAndMissBrokenBat on Aug 11, 2011 8:45 PM EDT up reply actions
but
his streak is important to him. He takes a lot of pride in never missing a start. He’s refused to go on the DL even when he actually was ill/injured. No way will he agree to go on the phantom DL.
All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?
Mayhap so
But I’m sure he doesn’t want to go out there and suck ass.
I’m sure he’s proud of the streak, but getting blown up repeatedly is embarrassing.
A dope trailer is no place for a kitty.
by GlennBraggsSwingAndMissBrokenBat on Aug 11, 2011 9:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Arroyo
doesn’t strike me as the type to be easily embarrassed.
All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?
I was about to disagree
But then I remembered the cornrows.
A dope trailer is no place for a kitty.
by GlennBraggsSwingAndMissBrokenBat on Aug 11, 2011 9:09 PM EDT up reply actions
I think he thinks he can get it together
athletes tend to think that way. Remember in 2005 when Paul Wilson kept pitching with a bum shoulder, but thought he could work through it. Remember in 2006 when Brandon Claussen did the same thing as Wilson the year before. Aaron Harang was really struggling in 2008 and was pitching with a sore arm, but didn’t want to go on the DL.
It will get better.
by Yossarian22 on Aug 11, 2011 10:01 PM EDT up reply actions
yes
People in general and high performers like pro athletes in particular tend to be overly optimistic.
I think that’s what’s behind “Pete Abe’s rule” (that you need to double the time given for recovery when a player is injured). Less than two weeks ago, Cozart was saying he’d be ready to play when his DL stint was over. Instead, his season is over. It’s not that they’re intentionally lying. It’s optimism bias at work.
All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?
You a funny man.
Wear something sexy to my funeral.
by Pops Daniels on Aug 11, 2011 11:49 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
ask Pops about the good dudeness of Bronson
The ends justify the means
by Highlifeman21 on Aug 12, 2011 10:51 PM EDT up reply actions
well, they could send Alonso back to AAA and bring up another arm.
It’s obvious they’re not going to use him for anything of worth anyway.
And hell, if they need a bench bat/PH, use Willis or Leake.
Tequila and pancakes, anyone?
by Kevin Mitchell is Batman on Aug 11, 2011 8:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Very good points about roster issues.
It’s something I largely overlooked. If you have a designated long man, I guess the idea is to use him as your #6 starter. And if you need a long reliever at a time when your long man is taxed out, you tap the guy who had been scheduled to start the next day.
AL teams can probably float the extra pitcher more easily. That’s probably why we’ve only seen it from AL teams this year.
-j
I write at:
RotoGraphs | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds
Days Rest v Accumulated Starts
The improvement with extra days rest seems somewhat insignificant (going from 5-6).
I think the real improvement could be in avoiding the deterioration that would come with accumulating too many innings over the course of the year. So, in my mind, the decision for the Reds would be based on how much our particular pitchers improve or deteriorate as they accumulate innings over the course of the year. So, maybe the analysis should be wOBA over a rolling 30 inning period, over the course of the year. Slap that on a chart, see if the Reds’ pitchers tend to drop off after 150 innings, and we’ll see if the 6th starter brings any benefit in terms of fresh arms in August & September (and October, next year).
but could handing 150 innings to the teams 6th best starter hurt the team and its chances of being competative.
162/6 is 27. In a 5 man rotation the ace can take the ball 33 times if they stay in rotation. So that is taking 6 starts from your best pitcher and handing it to your worst pitcher. So rather than seeing Cueto 33 times, you see Maloney/LeCure/other 6th starter 27 times.
It will get better.
You didn't read the thing, did you?
When you come to the fork in the road, take it.
by poojols on Aug 11, 2011 8:07 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
the jump jumped him.
Tequila and pancakes, anyone?
by Kevin Mitchell is Batman on Aug 11, 2011 8:59 PM EDT up reply actions
It happens to the best of us.
But especially to the worst of us.
Pay no mind, it’s the percocets talking.
A dope trailer is no place for a kitty.
by GlennBraggsSwingAndMissBrokenBat on Aug 11, 2011 9:04 PM EDT up reply actions
why not
we have the arms and we truly need to see if Volky and Wood should be in the rotation next yr or trade bait.
What i don't understand is
most teams struggle to have 5 quality starters. I remember reading an article that claimed that on average teams fifth starters compiled an ERA+ in the 60s or 70s. Wouldn’t a 6 man rotation exacerbate the situation?
It will get better.
Read above
The reason is that the Reds’ staff is basically a bunch of #3’s, #4’s, and #5’s. And Travis Wood and Edinson Volquez, major league pitchers, are in AAA. So there’s really not much of drop-off between the Reds’ top starters and the guy who would be the #6.
The Reds have an unusual amount of parity among their SPs.
I tend to think that Cueto is a serious upgrade over Wood and Volquez
It will get better.
by Yossarian22 on Aug 11, 2011 10:01 PM EDT up reply actions
As is Leake.
Wear something sexy to my funeral.
by Pops Daniels on Aug 11, 2011 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions
That was our thinking going into the season
But if I had to gauge right now
Cueto 1
Leake 3
Bailey 4 or 5
Wood 5 or 6
Volquez 4 or 5
Willis 4
We don’t have a bunch of #3’s.
A dope trailer is no place for a kitty.
by GlennBraggsSwingAndMissBrokenBat on Aug 11, 2011 10:24 PM EDT up reply actions
yep
and right now, i really don’t want to see, Volquez or Wood getting more starts at the expense of Cueto and Leake.
It will get better.
by Yossarian22 on Aug 11, 2011 10:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Chapman?
"the only place they lost was the scoreboard"
by Ewok on Aug 11, 2011 11:29 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
$10 million question.
Wear something sexy to my funeral.
by Pops Daniels on Aug 11, 2011 11:52 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
good judgment
except I’d put Wood as better than Volquez.
Volquez was predictably bad this last couple seasons.
Wood, to use my of (un)quoted aphorism, is the Little Girl with the Little Curl: When he is good, he’s great. But when he is bad, he is awful.
He can rock out some Ace type games. Probably a 10-50-30-10 ACE-GOOD-BAD-OMGRUN start ratio.
A Ongreed the Deserving
-coviner's lawful neutral Paladin / Debutante character
of course Wood is better than Volquez
most of our pitchers, aside from maybe Arroyo, are better than Volquez
The ends justify the means
by Highlifeman21 on Aug 12, 2011 10:53 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm not buying Cueto as a #1
I see him more as a fringy #2 or 3.
ERA is sparkly, and I love how he’s gotten his GB% up so high this year without increasing his walks (though dramatically decreasing his k’s). But he’s not been exceptionally durable, and his xFIP is 3.94, only slightly better than last year, and that’s about what I think we can hope from him moving forward.
-j
I write at:
RotoGraphs | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds
the jump jumped him.
Tequila and pancakes, anyone?
by Kevin Mitchell is Batman on Aug 11, 2011 9:00 PM EDT up reply actions
In Soviet Russia...
.
…
….
…..
……
…….
…….
……
…..
….
…
..
.
A dope trailer is no place for a kitty.
by GlennBraggsSwingAndMissBrokenBat on Aug 11, 2011 9:06 PM EDT up reply actions
My one and only nod to this bullshit.

Wear something sexy to my funeral.
by Pops Daniels on Aug 11, 2011 11:54 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
cuz it ain't got that swing
du wop
du wop
du wop
A Ongreed the Deserving
-coviner's lawful neutral Paladin / Debutante character
eh, looking at each teams worst starter is going to skew the numbers
plus, how do you even determine who a team’s “5th” starter is over a whole season?
I'd keep Wood down in Louisville just for contractual reasons
I believe he’ll accumulate just under one full year of ML service time if he stays in Louisville for the duration, which would be an extra year of team control. But I’m fuzzy on how that stuff is actually calculated.
But I like the idea in general. There’s probably not a huge drop-off to using Matt Maloney as sixth starter, and I agree that we should try to keep the total innings down for Leake and Cueto.
He's already up, you know
They brought him up when they DL’d Lurch.
by Charlie Scrabbles on Aug 11, 2011 8:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Cueto's innings will be kept down anyway
he missed the first month of the season. Also if we are going to think of him as the “ace” we should probably expect him to throw about 200 innings in a season.
Also Leake needs to build up his innings, so let him pitch until he runs out of gas. If he seems fatigued in September shut him down and put Wood, Volquez, or Maloney in his spot.
It will get better.
by Yossarian22 on Aug 11, 2011 10:03 PM EDT up reply actions
No.
Better two have two starters per game, going 4 innings apiece. Less rust, less bullpen use, tougher on the opponents because they have to prepare for two starters.
The main reason people don’t do this is because of the 4 2/3 innings to get a win. The stat’s important for arbitration, so pitchers don’t want to go a guaranteed 4 even if they’re pitching a shutout.
I have thought a lot about something like this
Or even having a pitching staff of nine middle relievers, LOOGY, set-up man, and closer. Nobody faces a batter more than once. Starting pitchers eat up an inordinant amount of payroll for a budget-minded team. This set-up would be far more economical.
When you come to the fork in the road, take it.
by poojols on Aug 11, 2011 8:14 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Yeah, I think the win basically kills this idea
Which is ridiculous, but it is what it is.
I love the idea, though. The Book had a nice ditty on this. Pitchers generally pitch better in relief (fewer innings, they go closer to full tilt). Therefore, getting more pitchers the opportunity to throw as relievers is a good thing for your numbers.
-j
I write at:
RotoGraphs | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds
This will kinda suck some of the fun out of baseball
Starting pitching is exciting in a way. When guys like Halladay take the mound you feel that something special will happen. A shutout, no hitter, perfect game. If you essentially take the duty of pitching “as far as you can” from a starting pitcher; the special pitchers like Halladay, Lee, Hernandez, Verlander, Maddux, Clemens, Nolen Ryan, won’t exist anymore.
It will get better.
by Yossarian22 on Aug 11, 2011 10:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Might suck the fun out for you
I’d be happy to see the Reds win more games.
As long as there are guys like Halladay, etc, they will get their innings. What I’m talking about is more a way to get more out of the back end of your pitching staff.
-j
I write at:
RotoGraphs | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds
You know once this door opens it won't close
teams will see other teams doing it and succeeding. Pitchers won’t be developed to throw 100 pitches, but rather 50 pitches over 3 innings.
It will get better.
::shrug::
The game changes. But it pays to be ahead of the curve.
That said, this’ll never happen. Pitcher wins are still too important. Not as much as in years past, but they’re not going away either.
-j
I write at:
RotoGraphs | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds
i tried that in fantasy one time
Figured I’d win ERA and WHIP, probably not do too badly in Ks, get saves from a closer, and hope to vulture enough wins to stay in the bottom third in W.
Turned out, it was pretty hard to corner the market on the good middle relievers.
"The USA despite its flaws and corruption and overall messiness is still a great and powerful instrument of freedom and hope for the entire world." - Madville
My plan offers nothing if it doesn't offer flexibility
At least four of those middle relievers have options. And you keep about four more just like ‘em at AAA. When one or two get tired, or if there are extra-inning complications, just switch them out. It’s the interchangeable parts school of pitching staff construction.
When you come to the fork in the road, take it.
by poojols on Aug 12, 2011 7:19 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
It's the Henry Ford school of pitching
well, as long as there’s no Jews in the rotation.
"You said 'walks' twice."
"I like walks."
by Cy Schourek on Aug 12, 2011 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
i get this, it makes sense
but i really like starting pitchers the way they are now. I really don’t want to see it go to a 4 and 4 or 3 3 and 3.
Also I am not sure how well that works in practice.
It will get better.
by Yossarian22 on Aug 11, 2011 10:06 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree with Yossi
If the starters could pitch every other day under this arrangement, then I’d consider it. Also, as to pitcher wins. If this ever became common in MLB, they would change the rules for assigning wins, or maybe just get rid of it altogether.
expectations are premeditated resentments - cheshirecat
The problem is the roster spot
I really think MLB should increase the roster size. The 25-man roster dates from before the days when bullpens were so specialized, with closers, setup men, LOOGYs, etc.
If the Reds are going to do this, they’re going to have design the rest of the roster around it. They’d have to dump the Johnny One-Notes, like Renteria. And part-time starters like Rolen.
All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?
by BubbaFan on Aug 11, 2011 7:54 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
I'd expand the rosters to 26 personally
maybe 27 so its one more position player and one more pitcher.
NL gets 27-man rosters, AL keeps the DH
What's your spaghetti policy?
by DannyGraves on Aug 11, 2011 8:48 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, the roster issue is obvious, but something I overlooked
It’s telling that the four teams who have tried this are all AL teams. They have less of a need for both relievers and bench players because they never have to pinch hit for pitchers. Therefore, they can get away with the extra man pitcher and short their bench.
-j
I write at:
RotoGraphs | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds
White Sox did it for awhile this year, I think for a little more than a month
When Peavy came off the DL, they already had Danks, Buehrle, Jackson, Floyd, and Humber and didn’t want to remove any of them from the rotation. Humber was pitching out of his mind then and came out of nowhere this year. So, they went with six. Might be a good real world situation to look at if you’re looking for answers on how it works out. I think it would be a lot easier in the AL though given the DH, that way you wouldn’t have to worry about taking the pitcher out too early.
this of course was mentioned in the beginning of the article
I went straight to the quote box and read from there
I'm intrigued, but also repelled
If this is the future, we’ll see fewer and fewer 20-game winners and never another 300 game winner.
I know you modern dorktrics with your fancy nerdtrics don’t care about pitching wins, but I like the stuff on the back of the baseball card.
A dope trailer is no place for a kitty.
by GlennBraggsSwingAndMissBrokenBat on Aug 11, 2011 8:44 PM EDT reply actions
Who still collects baseball cards?
Nerd.
by Charlie Scrabbles on Aug 11, 2011 8:55 PM EDT up reply actions
I actually bought my first pack in 18 years at the beginning of this year
I do still occasionally look at my old ones, which I used to call “retirement fund”. Now I call them “goddamn worthless”.
Still, there was a time that there was nothing more important to me.
This is my favorite card of all time.
A dope trailer is no place for a kitty.
by GlennBraggsSwingAndMissBrokenBat on Aug 11, 2011 9:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Errr..

A dope trailer is no place for a kitty.
by GlennBraggsSwingAndMissBrokenBat on Aug 11, 2011 9:01 PM EDT up reply actions
That is fucking art, man.
A dope trailer is no place for a kitty.
by GlennBraggsSwingAndMissBrokenBat on Aug 11, 2011 9:06 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree with GBSaMBB
That vintage of Topps was primo.
by Charlie Scrabbles on Aug 11, 2011 10:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Blah on 86 and 89...give me 1983

"There's only one god, and his name is Death. And what do we say to Death? Not today!" --- Syrio Forel, Game of Thrones
by cesarhernandez on Aug 11, 2011 11:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Those are great too
I’m not crazy about the pink outline, but I love the headshot bubble. I half expect Concepcion to turn towards the camera, smile, and introduce himself.
cards
My gf bought me two packs of ’90 Fleer at a flea market (she knew the year was somehow important to me). I pulled Jeff Reed, Scott Scudder and Ken Griffey Jr.
I care more about winning ballgames than 20-game winners, yes.
:)
I write at:
RotoGraphs | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds
Philistine!
A dope trailer is no place for a kitty.
by GlennBraggsSwingAndMissBrokenBat on Aug 11, 2011 9:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Berkman with the go-ahead single
Gives the Cards their first lead since Sunday.
I’m hoping for a Brewers sweep.
All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?
Leake threw 138 innings last year and is on pace for about 170 this year.
I say let him finish the year.
Let a man come in and do the Popcorn.
yep
let his performance dictate when he is done. it isn’t like the Reds need to conserve him for an important stretch run.
It will get better.
by Yossarian22 on Aug 11, 2011 10:40 PM EDT up reply actions
Nein: Remove Arroyo, put in Chappy
In other news, I forgot how much NFL players enjoy acting like dicks.
(Damn, is it possible to word that well?)
Whatever.
That photo of Leake is totally effing awesome!
You can’t see his eyes, but he has totally effing awesome gentle eyes.
by Don, the Rebel without a Blog on Aug 11, 2011 11:52 PM EDT reply actions
I'd like to go into a rotation....
with the two Nestea girls on the SB nation wall paper. whose running the SB nation advertising.. Madville ??
Nobody listens to Andrew
by nlt-andrew68 on Aug 12, 2011 12:18 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
I thought nudity (or darn near nudity) was verboten
I guess I was wrong.
A Ongreed the Deserving
-coviner's lawful neutral Paladin / Debutante character
Best commercial ever
You can all thank me later
"Luna Lovegood is really freaking awesome in every way." -Me
I was at a bar tonight that had a picture on the wall of an old advertisment of a wife pouring a beer into a glass while her husband was holding it
I wanted to steal it based on the fact that it was so sexist it was hilarious
seems like a bad idea imho
leake and cueto would get fewer starts then, and you’d just be giving another start to some marginal (at this point in their careers anyways) guy—like Wood, Bailey, or Volquez. Hell, if anything, were the Reds still close to a playoff spot, they’d be wiser to be skipping starts on guys and trying to get Cueto, Leake, and maybe Willis out there as often as possible, using off days to do so.
I'm going to scoop the reposter a bit
and link this Doc article/interview on Votto and staying in Cincinnati. As always, I appreciate Votto’s forthrightness and intelligence. When we finally lose him, I’m convinced it won’t be very ugly because he has never made promises. That being said, I think someone should point out to him that Cincinnati was on a list of 21 targets the Nazis had in mind for their Amerika Bomber program. This is proof that this town is just as important as Boston and New York and therefore deserves a bigger payroll. Definitely a good argument
I take issue with this.
No one is clamoring for an NFL-style socialism. That might encourage the sort of subsidized mediocrity we’ve endured at Paul Brown Stadium. But there ought to be a way Baseball can spread enough wealth so trading a player like Votto is an option, not a mandate.
I bet Green Bay fans love “NFL-style socialism”. Otherwise that time would be the KC Royals of the NFL, because its small market could not compete with New York, Chicago, etc.
It will get better.
by Yossarian22 on Aug 12, 2011 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions
I take issue with this.
Football and baseball economics are apples and oranges, mostly because football teams play one-tenth the number of games. Green Bay could never support a baseball team because you need tens of thousands of people to show up 81 times a year on different days of the week. Green Bay, which is a reasonable drive from Milwaukee and Madison, is obviously capable of supporting a football team, which needs to fill a stadium for only eight Sundays a year. It’s much easier to build a regional market as a football team. Green Bay doesn’t need to worry about turning into the Royals of the NFL, and it has nothing to do with socialism.
but attendance is only part of it
TV contracts, radio contracts, advertising are other parts of the pie. A small market won’t receive the same broadcasting revenue as a large market.
It will get better.
by Yossarian22 on Aug 12, 2011 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions
yes
And the fact that football shares TV revenue is a big reason for the relative parity there.
All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?
Obviously TV revenues are a factor
But again, the shorter schedule is one reason why it makes much more sense for the NFL to have a national TV deal. That’s impossible for baseball.
Even if NFL teams were on their own with TV deals, the Packers would do just fine. There is no universe in which they become the Royals of football.
I don't think the Packers would be fine
Even with the current deal, the strains of big market vs. small market are becoming unmanageable. (As I’ve argued before, that’s the real reason for the almost-strike this year.)
The NFL sort of lucked out, in that they agreed to share TV revenue before there was any. I don’t think anyone saw what a big deal it would turn out to be.
It’s way too late for that in baseball, with some clubs owning their own TV networks and all.
All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?
They wouldn't have the same contract as the Giants, but yes, they would be fine
They have a state of about 6 million that backs them through thick and thin. Their TV deal would not be as large as Dallas’ or New York’s, but it wouldn’t put them at an insurmountable disadvantage either. That some small market teams struggle financially, even with the national TV deal, speaks more to their mismanagement than anything else.
In general and more to Justin’s point, comparing the two sports doesn’t make much sense to me. Football has an inherent advantage over baseball in that it’s much easier to attract casual fans because you only have to follow a few games. So you see some NFL teams attracting a large regional and national followings, even if they’re from the small markets like Green Bay or Pittsburgh. Local market size is much more critical in baseball, which is why LA has two baseball teams and zero football teams.
agree that football has more national interest
But it still isn’t saving them from the small market vs. big market problem. The percent of revenue that is shared has been dropping steadily for years, as big-market teams find ways around the revenue-sharing agreement. (Everything from Jerry Jones suing to make his own advertising deals to naming rights to luxury box sales.) Now you have some owners (and even fans) pushing for a baseball-type agreement.
All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?
Bad Analogy Week lives on!
Votto sees lots of pitches he wouldn’t feed his dog
"You said 'walks' twice."
"I like walks."
by Cy Schourek on Aug 12, 2011 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions
wow, I haven't read anything from pdoc in a pretty long time
in general I just skip over anything written by him, but that was actually a pretty interesting article.
I'll agree with you there
as you said in the reposter, its pdoc complaining about the economics of baseball yet again, I had forgotten he did that a lot in the past (probably because I never read anything he writes). Still credit where credit is due, he went and asked Votto and got some great quotes. And even if his intent with the article is silly and rehashed, Votto leaving is a very real topic and regardless of your opinion on the matter the Cincinnati market will be the reason they don’t end up retaining him.
should read regardless of anyones opinion on the matter
I tend to agree with others on the baseball economics being what they are stuff, and the phrase “blame baseball” is pretty absurd.
The Cincy market is not why they won't resign him
but rather because Bob doesn’t know how to finance his baseball team.
by Charlie Scrabbles on Aug 12, 2011 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions
How do you know whether he knows how to finance the team?
Since MLB teams refuse to open their books and all.
At any rate, I think that if the Reds were located in LA (for example), they’d have no problem signing Votto for as long as they wanted him. Which is to say, the market is exactly the reason they won’t retain him, as pack-fan said.
expectations are premeditated resentments - cheshirecat
I disagree
It’s late, so I don’t want to argue the point though. So there.
/crosses arms
by Charlie Scrabbles on Aug 13, 2011 12:57 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
it wasn't that late....
The ends justify the means
by Highlifeman21 on Aug 13, 2011 4:50 AM EDT up reply actions
If nothing else, Doc is not afraid to ask the tough questions
I linked him on Monday in the article about Dusty’s job security. I agreed with most of what Doc had to say there.


































