2019-2020 MLB Offseason Thread

[FiddySicks]

48 minutes ago, dfwabel said:

Every player was told to wait so that Crane and Astros PR (and possibly a crisis manager or three) would tell them what to say so that they'd all be on one page. That one page was essentially a printer's test pattern of characters.  Did anybody listen?  If I was in Astros PR, I'd look for another job.  If I were a crisis manager, I'd gone to the bar nearest to my gate at Orlando Airport (MCO) and drank until my flight out was boarding.  And if I was Jim Crane, I'd think about not paying said crisis manager(s).

 

That’s the thing, though. “Crisis managers” and whatnot can only do so much if you don’t listen to them and just say what you’re gonna say regardless. That’s how this whole thing came across.

If I had to venture a guess, Crane probably paid them to help him through this, and then said “Actually, I’m rich, and therefore smarter than anyone here. So I’m just going to say what I’m going to say regardless because I’m in charge and must know how to handle this better than any expert”.

[BBTV]

9 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

So the idea that a fan can be emotionally invested in his/her team only if that team is contending is foreign to me.  I would of course prefer that my team win.  But, if it cannot come in first, then coming in second is better than coming in third, and coming in third is better than coming in fourth, and so on.  There is always something to play for, and always something for a fan to root for.

 

This is absurd.  Nobody is gearing up to spend $100 to go to a game in September to root for their team to stay in the 3rd-place race.  Come on man. 

[dfwabel]

1 hour ago, BringBackTheVet said:

 

This is absurd.  Nobody is gearing up to spend $100 to go to a game in September to root for their team to stay in the 3rd-place race.  Come on man. 

 

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

1 hour ago, BringBackTheVet said:

This is absurd.  Nobody is gearing up to spend $100 to go to a game in September to root for their team to stay in the 3rd-place race.  Come on man. 

 

You come on. 

 

Every fan wants his/her team to win. But if you can be satisfied only if your team wins, then you're missing the greater part of the rich experience of being a baseball fan.

 

There are the sights and sounds and smells of the ballpark, and also the artistry of the announcers.

 

And every team has something interesting, whether beloved veterans or promising young players, or else a non-star player whom you're into for no logical reason but nevertheless just love to see him play. 

 

All of that is stll there even if your team doesn't win many titles.

[Red Comet]

5 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

You come on. 

 

Every fan wants his/her team to win. But if you can be satisfied only if your team wins, then you're missing the greater part of the rich experience of being a baseball fan.

 

There are the sights and sounds and smells of the ballpark, and also the artistry of the announcers.

 

And every team has something interesting, whether beloved veterans or promising young players, or else a non-star player whom you're into for no logical reason but nevertheless just love to see him play. 

 

All of that is stll there even if your team doesn't win many titles.

 

And if your team is stuck in the basement for the next 10 years because of incompetent/greedy ownership and/or a small market, then I'm thinking chemical assistance is required to enjoy such a sad team. Like the Royals. It's still fun, but in a MST3K riffing kind of fun.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

9 hours ago, Red Comet said:

Like the Royals. It's still fun, but in a MST3K riffing kind of fun.

 

I'm pretty sure the Royals went to two World Series recently (once beating the Mets), which is more success than most teams have had.

 

Still, I get that incompetent ownership causes frustration and even anger. But this does not erase the simple pleasure of being able to turn on the radio every night and catch your team's game. That relationship, much more than titles, constitutes the core of being a baseball fan.

[BBTV]

7 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

You come on. 

 

Every fan wants his/her team to win. But if you can be satisfied only if your team wins, then you're missing the greater part of the rich experience of being a baseball fan.

 

There are the sights and sounds and smells of the ballpark, and also the artistry of the announcers.

 

And every team has something interesting, whether beloved veterans or promising young players, or else a non-star player whom you're into for no logical reason but nevertheless just love to see him play. 

 

All of that is stll there even if your team doesn't win many titles.

 

I'll give you the sights and sounds of the ballpark, but you only need that a couple of times a season.  I'm satisfied when I know that the team is going all out because the game matters, and I'm watching the scoreboard to see how some other team is doing - because it matters.

 

Other than that, it's just an exhibition game.  Half the time some douchebag that shouldn't be on the roster is playing, because they're 45 games out of first place so let's just get the young guy some experience.  Or maybe there's a young hot shot that you'd like to see, but they're stubborn and playing the suck-ass veteran just because.

 

I don't want to pay for exhibition games, and I feel ripped off and robbed when the team doesn't put forth an honest effort to play meaningful baseball late in the season.

 

Please don't tell me what experiences I'm missing.

[Red Comet]

1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

I'm pretty sure the Royals went to two World Series recently (once beating the Mets), which is more success than most teams have had.

 

Still, I get that incompetent ownership causes frustration and even anger. But this does not erase the simple pleasure of being able to turn on the radio every night and catch your team's game. That relationship, much more than titles, contitutes the core of being a baseball fan.

 

Eh, 2013-15 was an aberration. A nice aberration but one nonetheless. Yeah, they won a World Series but they scrapped the team to save money Marlins-style soon after. 

 

Hey, to each their own on that, but watching/listening to baseball only makes me yearn for football season that much more when the product is a glorified AAA team.

[Sport]

21 minutes ago, Red Comet said:

 

Eh, 2013-15 was an aberration. A nice aberration but one nonetheless. Yeah, they won a World Series but they scrapped the team to save money Marlins-style soon after. 

 

 

I'd love to experience an aberration. 

[SFGiants58]

25 minutes ago, Red Comet said:

 

Eh, 2013-15 was an aberration. A nice aberration but one nonetheless. Yeah, they won a World Series but they scrapped the team to save money Marlins-style soon after. 

 

Hey, to each their own on that, but watching/listening to baseball only makes me yearn for football season that much more when the product is a glorified AAA team.

Same. I’d rather more teams be playing meaningful games into the later part of the season. Less dead markets, fewer teams outright tanking/fire sale-ing, and more of an opportunity to get people involved in the game. The NHL playoffs (maybe 1-6 instead of 1-8) and divisions are perfect, let’s make it work here.
 

Trying to make the playoffs “elite” just shuts out most of the league and sends a message of “why bother trying?”

 

1 minute ago, Sport said:

 

I'd love to experience an aberration. 

Add another seed and you could get it!

[Red Comet]

10 minutes ago, Sport said:

 

I'd love to experience an aberration. 

 

Hey, I'd like to see the Reds become a great team again. It's just a shame Joey Votto and Johnny Cueto didn't have great talent around them. I'd say Dusty Baker having a role in that, but if someone like Ned Yost can bumble his way into a title, about anyone could.

 

11 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

Same. I’d rather more teams be playing meaningful games into the later part of the season. Less dead markets, fewer teams outright tanking/fire sale-ing, and more of an opportunity to get people involved in the game. The NHL playoffs (maybe 1-6 instead of 1-8) and divisions are perfect, let’s make it work here.
 

Trying to make the playoffs “elite” just shuts out most of the league and sends a message of “why bother trying?”

 

Oh, absolutely to all of that. Add a hard salary cap and floor (major league level only) and you'll see a lot more parity.

[Sport]

5 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

Same. I’d rather more teams be playing meaningful games into the later part of the season. Less dead markets, fewer teams outright tanking/fire sale-ing, and more of an opportunity to get people involved in the game. The NHL playoffs (maybe 1-6 instead of 1-8) and divisions are perfect, let’s make it work here.
 

 

Trying to make the playoffs “elite” just shuts out most of the league and sends a message of “why bother trying?”

 

The financial structure of baseball influences that more than the playoff system. It's less "why bother trying?" and more "we're not going to try to until our window is ready because financially the ROI is highest when you can pool resources for a single shot at the big flag ", which the Royals are kind of responsible for and credit to them - mission very much accomplished.

 

If anything, the Royals, Cubs, and Astros (who I argue didn't really need to tank as bad as they did) proved tanking too useful and too many teams started doing it at the same time, which caused our current predicament. That didn't happen because 5 teams make the playoffs instead of 6. More playoff teams doesn't eliminate tanking, but it does make the regular season less important.

 

5 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

Add another seed and you could get it!

 

Not interested. It's not like they would've made the playoffs with the extra seed any time in the last 6 years anyways, they don't play in a division with the Yankees and Red Sox so the path to division titles doesn't feel impossible and It's far more likely that will just result in more first round losses than World Championships for me. Besides, the 14/15 Royals didn't need it for their "aberration". 

 

2 minutes ago, Red Comet said:

 

Hey, I'd like to see the Reds become a great team again. It's just a shame Joey Votto and Johnny Cueto didn't have great talent around them. I'd say Dusty Baker having a role in that, but if someone like Ned Yost can bumble his way into a title, about anyone could.

 

 

The 2012 Reds were legitimately loaded with a solid pitching staff and a great bullpen. Far worse teams have won the World Series. Dusty Baker left Latos in too long in Game 5, but he gets too much blame for that series when they lost Johnny Cueto in the first inning of Game 1 (after not having a starting pitcher injury all season). Although they won that game that was kind of a ticking time bomb for the rest of the playoffs. If it hadn't bitten them against the Giants then it would've bitten them against the ahole Cardinals in the NLCS, which honestly would've been much harder to stomach. 

 

I do believe they're going to be in the discussion this year, which is exciting after sitting things out since the middle of the 2014 season. 

[SFGiants58]

18 minutes ago, Sport said:

 

The financial structure of baseball influences that more than the playoff system. It's less "why bother trying?" and more "we're not going to try to until our window is ready because financially the ROI is highest when you can pool resources for a single shot at the big flag ", which the Royals are kind of responsible for and credit to them - mission very much accomplished.

 

If anything, the Royals, Cubs, and Astros (who I argue didn't really need to tank as bad as they did) proved tanking too useful and too many teams started doing it at the same time, which caused our current predicament. That didn't happen because 5 teams make the playoffs instead of 6. More playoff teams doesn't eliminate tanking, but it does make the regular season less important.

 

Not interested. It's not like they would've made the playoffs with the extra seed any time in the last 6 years anyways, they don't play in a division with the Yankees and Red Sox so the path to division titles doesn't feel impossible and It's far more likely that will just result in more first round losses than World Championships for me. Besides, the 14/15 Royals didn't need it for their "aberration". 

I’m not denying any of the above. But an extra spot will help, even in a small way.

 

[DG_ThenNowForever]

The Mariners have been in full tank the past (two? One?) season, but before that, they've been trying to legitimately field a team every season since 2001. They've wasted Felix Hernandez's entire career, which is sad, but they at least wasted it with dignity.

 

I remember so, so many almost-there Mariners seasons, where they finished just a game or two behind the wild card. Plus they're in a division with the Astros, Angels and As, who all take turns being great, redefining the game, or cheating like crazy.

 

Another playoff spot would go a long way to keeping interest in the franchise. The city is more fun when the Mariners are winning, which has been limited to really hot starts the past two seasons that fizzled out quickly.

[The_Admiral]

52 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

 But an extra spot will help, even in a small way.

 

Again, 162 games. What more did we need to see from the Mets and the Indians last year?

[SFGiants58]

Just now, the admiral said:

 

Again, 162 games. What more did we need to see from the Mets and the Indians last year?

It depends on the year. Sometimes you have a strong field and other times you don’t. 

[jmoe12]

How about you win 90 games and you're in automatically, regardless of how many teams meet the mark. That way your playoff contention is in your hands only, take care of business and you get a shot at the trophy.

[BBTV]

3 hours ago, jmoe12 said:

How about you win 90 games and you're in automatically, regardless of how many teams meet the mark. That way your playoff contention is in your hands only, take care of business and you get a shot at the trophy.

meh, I like scoreboard watching. 

[OnWis97]

As a fan of a small-market team, part of me thinks of expanded playoffs as an equalizer.  The larger the playoffs, the more rounds teams that can spend their way into contention have to get through.  If MLB just went full-NHL (16 teams), then there'd be a randomness that would be of value to a mediocre franchise like the Twins.  The Red Sox and Yankees would probably make the playoffs 14 out of 15 years, but they'd have so many more opportunities to get bumped.

And the rest of the teams?  Most would feel like they have a chance.  There would still be tanking, but probably fewer teams and, more importantly, hopefully for shorter durations.  Geez, just typing this out, I'm practically convincing myself...

 

And I think MLB would be closer to NHL (anyone can win the Cup* due to puck luck and hot goalies) than the NBA (Usually about five teams have a legit shot) due to the rotation of pitchers and the instability of their greatness in a single outing (whereas, baring injury, talent almost always prevails in the NBA).

 

I see the value.  And there's only one downside...the devaluing of the regular season. So, I guess I'm just remaining a stodgy old curmudgeon when I say that a 162-game season needs to mean more than seeding and it needs to weed out the good (as opposed to the great).  Also, moreso than the other North American sports, baseball is steeped in tradition, which includes the tradition of the pennant race and the actual sense of accomplishment of making it to the postseason.  I guess I'm stuck in the "sports" part of it and not embracing the "entertainment" enough? 

 

*Unless the Wild get in.

[The_Admiral]

90 wins and in is a very interesting concept, but logistically, can you afford to wait till the last day of the regular season to know which bracket format you're pulling out of the files? That might be the way to stop teams from trying to lose 110 games a year, who knows.