2012 MLB Season

[Dexter Morgan]

Cleveland is sad sad place. Economically and sports wise.

How does a mediocre baseball team automatically mean a city has a bad economy? The Redsox aren't playing their best this year, Holy crap Boston's economy must be bad too!

Oh no someone just Clevelandjacked this...or whatever the idiotic term is.

I didn't say that.

So what gives you the authority to judge a city's economy? because you see a baseball game with empty seats? Because one of it's river's had a small fire 40 years ago? Because you see a photo on wikipedia of an abandoned factory? You can say what you want about a cities sports teams, but for some reason people like you feel the need to bash the entire city. Just becuase you live in New York or New Jersey you feel like you can look down on the people of Cleveland, Detroit, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, and other smaller cities because they're not as good as yours.

First of all I did not bash Cleveland, I just stated a well known fact. Cleveland as well as many other cities in the midwest are "dying" because manufacturing jobs are disappearing in those areas. When I say a city is "dying" this is what I'm talking about: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/census/2011-03-09-ohio-census_N.htm Add this to the fact they have pro sports teams who haven't won anything since the 70's. What I said had nothing to do with where I'm from, which is clearly not perfect either. So lets review. They have sports teams that haven't won a thing since the 70's and a dying city. To me that's kind of sad, and not in an amusing way. You clearly didn't like what I said, that's obvious.. but it's entirely accurate.

[Funky Bunky]

Roid-driven home runs > Orgy of perfect games. Let's bring back the muscle-bound behemoths and no-necked juicers, gotta be more exciting than these perfect games.

Amen! I loved steroid-era baseball.

Well, since almost half of the No-Hitters and Perfect Games have been against the Rays, I can understand why.

Yeah, but the Rays were a garbage team with a terrible front office during the steroid era, so it's even.

... But they arguably had better uniforms back than too.

[Funky Bunky]

Nevermind.

[vmd9]

Wish we could throw hundreds of millions into our teams but we can't.

[dfwabel]

At least we got Pence I guess. Why do the Dodgers have to win the division now? I guess a silver lining is that the Giants won with Cody Ross as their best hitter a couple years ago.

Well now there's a spot for him in the outfield!

I bet those Melkmen feel even stupider than usual now.

I think those guys were either paid by the team or CSN Bay Area.

That said, there were rumors of Melky failing a test two weeks ago.

SAN FRANCISCO ? Medical school graduates take the Hippocratic oath, which can be distilled into three words: Do no harm.

Journalism school grads take no such oath, but our duty is clear: We?re bound to seek the truth, to be as fair and accurate as possible and to serve the interests of readers.

I thought I was doing that Friday when I chose to ask Melky Cabrera about rumors that I had heard from several different readers who had contacted me via email and my Twitter account over the past few days. I had no idea where these rumors started, but the questions were starting to mushroom about whether Cabrera flunked a drug test and would face a 50-game suspension.

Let?s be clear: There is no evidence that there is any shred of truth to these rumors. Cabrera knew nothing about it. He contacted the union and his agent. They told him the rumors were unfounded as well. If Cabrera had failed a test, he and the union would?ve been the first to know. The rumor, to my knowledge, is a red herring. Cabrera even suggested to me that Dodgers fans could have made it up as a distraction.

I wasn?t 100 percent sure what to do next. On one hand, it?s my duty to serve readers who look to me to provide accurate information about the team I cover. On the other hand, knocking down the rumors would serve to give greater voice to them.

Ultimately, I decided to serve the truth.

Upon reflection, I did more harm than good.

We live in a different media universe and the rules are changing every day. Information is immediate. The level of interaction between fans and journalists is greater than ever. Anyone can self-publish any thought that rumbles through his or her head, true or untrue. It can be a confusing cacophony for any journalist, and it certainly is for me at times.

It?s my job to serve readers. But what if it?s just one tenth of one percent of my readership who are asking these questions? Is it my responsibility to respond to them in a public way?

Asking these questions from a different vantage point: If I were Melky Cabrera, would I appreciate a reporter who knocked down a rumor that was just a whisper in some corners of the Internet? Or would I be royally pissed to see my name mentioned alongside PEDs, no matter the context, by a credentialed, professional journalist?

It?s obvious, isn?t it? Well, it should have been obvious to me. It wasn?t.

In retrospect, I made the wrong decision to address these rumors on my Twitter account and disseminate it to my 30,000-plus followers.

So I feel it?s important that I issue a public apology to Melky Cabrera for giving greater voice to a rumor that, to the best of my knowledge and on his word, has absolutely no basis in fact.

[Dexter Morgan]

Wish we could throw hundreds of millions into our teams but we can't.

Really, that is all you have to say in response to my last post? Did I stump you with the truth? lol

[DarkJourney]

I guess Melky wasn't lucky enough like Ryan Braun to have the "Official Bud Selig Get Out Of Jail Free Card"

[Kramerica Industries]

That just reminds me of the ever-flawed idea that MLB needs a salary cap.

Since the end of the Yankee dynasty in 2000, there have been the following champions:

Cardinals (x2), Red Sox (x2), Dbacks, Angels, Marlins, White Sox, Phillies, Yankees, Giants -- nine different teams in the past 11 years.

In that same timeframe, here's the NFL:

Patriots (x3), Steelers (x2), Giants (x2), Buccaneers, Colts, Saints, Packers -- seven different teams.

NBA (starting 2001-02):

Lakers (x3), Spurs (x3), Heat (x2) Pistons, Celtics, Mavericks -- six different teams.

NHL (starting 2000-01 due to lockout):

Red Wings (x2), Avalanche, Devils, Lightning, Hurricanes, Ducks, Penguins, Blackhawks, Bruins, Kings -- ten different teams.

That is to say, only the massively screwed up NHL has produced a greater diversity in the same time frame of 11 seasons. But yeah, a salary cap is going to fix baseball just like it has fixed the NFL and, especially, the NBA.

[tBBP]

Wish we could throw hundreds of millions into our teams but we can't.

Really, that is all you have to say in response to my last post? Did I stump you with the truth? lol

I really can't believe I'm about to defend our resident Clevetroll but...in the interest of fairness, I must.

First, Dexter...there was NO REASON AT ALL to take any potshot at Cleveland's economy. Rip on the Indians all you want, but leave the rest out?that was just asking for trouble. But since you did bring it up...Cleveland's economy isn't doing NEARLY as bad as you (and a lot of other people) think it is. For it being one of the main cities plagued by the downturn of the steel industry, it's done and is doing mighty well for itself in rebounding and rebuilding itself. (The recent completion of the Steelyard Commons against the backdrop of the old USS Steel mills is but a token of proof in that regard.) I'm in and out of there all the time now, and used to go there quite frequently back in the day...I see it for myself.

Now...back to baseball.

[Seadragon76]

Yes, back to baseball... and excuse me if I go bat- crazy over the Perfect Game thrown by King Felix yesterday.

Better yet, there's still hope! Yeah, they're 9 games out of the Wild Card, but there's hope!

[The_Admiral]

Roid-driven home runs > Orgy of perfect games. Let's bring back the muscle-bound behemoths and no-necked juicers, gotta be more exciting than these perfect games.

Amen! I loved steroid-era baseball.

Nah. I'm a sucker for the art and science of pitching. I mean, I loved Greg Maddux because you'd never expect someone who looks so ordinary to be so extraordinary. He was the Kevin Spacey of athletes. Of course, my preferred style of baseball is the wait-for-the-three-run-homer approach pioneered by Earl Weaver's Baltimore Orioles, but then again that's supposed to go hand in hand with dominant pitching. Monsters playing Home Run Derby all year was no fun.

[pmoehrin]

Yes, back to baseball... and excuse me if I go bat- crazy over the Perfect Game thrown by King Felix yesterday.

Better yet, there's still hope! Yeah, they're 9 games out of the Wild Card, but there's hope!

Provided they win 25 of their next 30, there's still hope. Otherwise I'm not liking their chances too much.

Still this is a team could actually be pretty good if they could get any sort of hitting, which isn't as bad as it was last year (their DH's slugging percentage is higher then his OBP for starters) but that offense still has a long way to go. Guys like Brendan Ryan and Casper Wells just have no business being everyday starters. And I would seriously start to consider somebody other then Justin Smoak as my first baseman of the future. There's not much use in having a switch hitter when he's hitting below .200 from both sides of the plate. May not be the worst idea in the world to move the fences in, because they've been consistenly in bottom half of the AL in offense for the last decade.

Pitching wise they'll be fine as long as they can hold on to King Felix.

[Sport]

The Cardinals caught up with the Pirates last night. Are the Pirates done?

Roid-driven home runs > Orgy of perfect games. Let's bring back the muscle-bound behemoths and no-necked juicers, gotta be more exciting than these perfect games.

Amen! I loved steroid-era baseball.

Nah. I'm a sucker for the art and science of pitching. I mean, I loved Greg Maddux because you'd never expect someone who looks so ordinary to be so extraordinary. He was the Kevin Spacey of athletes. Of course, my preferred style of baseball is the wait-for-the-three-run-homer approach pioneered by Earl Weaver's Baltimore Orioles, but then again that's supposed to go hand in hand with dominant pitching. Monsters playing Home Run Derby all year was no fun.

I agree. Maddux was an artist (and it's even more impressive because he did it in the steroid era) who by all intents and purposes should not have been a professional athlete. Steroid era baseball was bad because home runs were devalued. When guys can miss on pitches, not get all of it, and it still leaves the yard, that's boring. There's no romance in that. When a guy outsmarts you on the mound and then physically executes the perfect pitch in the perfect location with the right amount of velocity, that's beautiful.

Of course, the pitchers in the steroid era were also juiced so maybe it was somewhat of a wash.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'm glad the steroid era is over and baseball players look like normal humans again. That Ken Caminiti huge chest, wide shoulders, massive forearms look is almost extinct. Remember Brian Giles? Even that guy looked that way.

[NJTank]

That just reminds me of the ever-flawed idea that MLB needs a salary cap.

Since the end of the Yankee dynasty in 2000, there have been the following champions:

Cardinals (x2), Red Sox (x2), Dbacks, Angels, Marlins, White Sox, Phillies, Yankees, Giants -- nine different teams in the past 11 years.

In that same timeframe, here's the NFL:

Patriots (x3), Steelers (x2), Giants (x2), Buccaneers, Colts, Saints, Packers -- seven different teams.

NBA (starting 2001-02):

Lakers (x3), Spurs (x3), Heat (x2) Pistons, Celtics, Mavericks -- six different teams.

NHL (starting 2000-01 due to lockout):

Red Wings (x2), Avalanche, Devils, Lightning, Hurricanes, Ducks, Penguins, Blackhawks, Bruins, Kings -- ten different teams.

That is to say, only the massively screwed up NHL has produced a greater diversity in the same time frame of 11 seasons. But yeah, a salary cap is going to fix baseball just like it has fixed the NFL and, especially, the NBA.

Bingo

[STL FANATIC]

The nature of the game of baseball is why it is successful in deciding different champions from year to year. It is a very random game and the best team is anything but a guarantee to win. In 1, 5, and 7 game series, anything can happen. The other sports don't feature the same level of chance.

If MLB doesn't need a salary cap, it's because of the sport, not because the league is necessarily doing something right.

Now, with that said, I still believe a stiffer salary structure is needed. Like I said, the nature of the game in short series is random, so you get different champions. But instead of looking at championships, look at playoff appearances. How many times have the Yankees missed the playoffs in the last 15-20 years?

Money doesn't guarantee championships but it puts you in a pretty great spot to play in the tournament.

[TheOldRoman]

The nature of the game of baseball is why it is successful in deciding different champions from year to year. It is a very random game and the best team is anything but a guarantee to win. In 1, 5, and 7 game series, anything can happen. The other sports don't feature the same level of chance.

If MLB doesn't need a salary cap, it's because of the sport, not because the league is necessarily doing something right.

Now, with that said, I still believe a stiffer salary structure is needed. Like I said, the nature of the game in short series is random, so you get different champions. But instead of looking at championships, look at playoff appearances. How many times have the Yankees missed the playoffs in the last 15-20 years?

Money doesn't guarantee championships but it puts you in a pretty great spot to play in the tournament.

I agree. There have been fewer champions in basketball and football because the teams are more dependent upon individual success. Even with 50-something players on a football team, it comes down to QB play in most cases. Teams which don't have good QBs have almost no shot of winning titles, and teams which get great QB play are going to be there every year. Of course, individual stars have a far greater impact in the NBA than in other sports, and if you don't have at least one superstar you are better off tanking and hoping to find one in the draft. The NHL has more parity because of the impact goalies have in the playoffs. A 1 seed could run into an 8 seed with a goalie playing the series of his life and easily lose. You could have a far better team, but if the other team's goalie is playing out of his mind, it's hard to win.

Baseball has the smallest impact from individual players. Eight guys have to bat before the MVP candidate gets to hit again. 3 or 4 guys have to start before the Cy Young candidate gets to start again. And just by the nature of the sport, pitchers usually don't last the entire game, meaning their bullpen could blow it for them. I don't think anybody thought the Phillies would get tossed in the first round with their rotation last year. However, when both teams pitch well and the games are low scoring, it really does come down to one AB that makes the difference between playing on and golfing. That's why MLB has had more champions, not because the sport is any better run.

You are correct about the richer teams making the playoffs more often, and that is the biggest thing. Sure, the Marlins can catch fire every 9 years or so, win a Wild Card and get hot in the playoffs, but most years are going to be spent fighting an uphill battle due to a huge discrepancy in resources (theoretically, since Loria is a piece of crap and had ample opportunity to turn it around with the new stadium). Unless small market teams pretty much hit on every draft pick and scrap heap signing, they don't have a chance to be perennial playoff teams. Only the Twins have been able to do that in the last decade, and come playoff time, their deficiencies showed. If you can't succeed on every draft pick, you will likely have a 3-4 year window to win before the players start moving on to bigger money elsewhere. That is not right.

There has to be a balance between the extremes of MLB and the NFL. Maybe don't have a salary cap, per se, just come up with a far harsher ceiling that only impacts the handful of teams which spend like drunken sailors. The luxury tax is supposed to do that in theory, but it hasn't stopped the Yankees, Red Sox and Phillies from spending like crazy. Knock those teams down to the financial level of the Orioles, Cardinals, Rockies and Brewers and that will improve everyone's chances of building winning teams.

[Kramerica Industries]

In that case, here are the number of teams that missed the playoffs with nine digit payrolls since 2001. This is a slightly arbitrary endpoint, but it's easy enough.

2011 (12 teams over $100M): Red Sox (#3), Angels (#4), White Sox (#5), Cubs (#6), Mets (#7), Giants (#8), Twins (#9), and Dodgers (#12). The White Sox, Cubs, Mets, and Twins finished with losing records, Minnesota being a 98 loss team.

2010 (8 teams): Red Sox (#2), Cubs (#3), Mets (#5), Tigers (#6), White Sox (#7), and Angels (#8). Cubs, Mets, and Angels were sub-.500, Tigers 81-81. There were also a number of teams in the $90-$99M range, and only two (SF and MIN) made the playoffs.

2009 (9 teams): Mets (#2), Cubs (#3), Tigers (#5), Astros (#7). Mets finished well below .500. All three teams between $90M-$99M also missed.

2008 (10 teams): Yankees (#1), Mets (#2), Tigers (#3), Mariners (#9), and Braves (#10). Tigers and Braves below .500, Mariners lost 101 games. Cardinals (#11) and Blue Jays (#13) also missed, but the Phillies (#12) won the World Series. Tampa Bay (#29) won the American League pennant.

2007 (7 teams): Mets (#3), White Sox (#5), Dodgers (#6), and Mariners (#7). White Sox were well below .500. Tigers, Orioles, Cardinals, and Giants (#8-#12) all missed between $90M-$99M.

2006 (5 teams): Red Sox (#2), Angels (#3), White Sox (#4). Cubs, Braves, and Giants (#6-#8) missed as well, and all below .500.

2005 (3 teams): Mets (#3). Phillies (#4) missed as well.

2004 (4 teams): Mets (#4), sub-.500. Phillies, Cubs (#5-#6) also missed.

2003 (5 teams): Mets (#2), Dodgers (#4), Rangers (#5) missed. Mets and Dodgers sub-.500. Red Sox (#6, at $99.94M) made the playoffs.

2002 (4 teams): Red Sox (#2), Rangers (3), with Texas well below .500. Dodgers and Mets (#5-#6) also missed, Mets below .500.

2001 (3 teams): Dodgers (#3). Note that the Yankees payroll was a "low" $109.79M in 2001, before it began skyrocketing to $125M in 2002, $152M in 2003, $182M in 2004, and infamously topped $200M in 2005. It returned to the $200M plateau in 2008, and didn't dip back under until this season.

By my count, that's 70 teams since 2011 to spend over $100M on their roster for the season. 38 of those teams (54%) missed the playoffs. You kinda said it yourself in the opening paragraph about the very nature of baseball not guaranteeing anything - payroll included. I mean, the #2 payroll team has missed the playoffs in six out of those eleven years. The Mets have only made the playoffs once despite numerous appearances on that list.

I don't mean to discount what your point may be, but I remain unconvinced.

(information courtesy Steve the Ump.)

[The_Admiral]

You adjusting for inflation? The Cubs didn't break nine digits till 2008.

One problem with a salary cap in baseball is that the payroll structure is just so complicated and far-spanning that your brain shuts down if you try to think about it for too long. Do minor leaguers count against the cap? Do signing bonuses? What about player options? There are so many moving parts. Note that the NHL CBA prohibits options, extensions before contract years, cash considerations, and almost all performance incentives. It's really locked down.

[Kramerica Industries]

Unless there's a site out there that I'm completely missing - adjusting for inflation would take a hell of a lot of time, even with my CPI note sheet at my right hand side.

Since you mentioned the Cubs - their 2007 payroll ($99.67M) would be $108.8M in 2011 dollars. Their 2006 payroll ($94.4M) = $106M. 2005 ($87.2M) = $101M. 2004 ($91.1M) = $109M. You have to go back to 2003, when their inflation-adjustment payroll stays below nine digits, at $98.2M.

And, by all means, if a convenience website exists, that would make adjustments much easier. I wasn't about to adjust for over 70 teams when, as is, the numbers still speak for themselves.

*Fake edit* - a site like, well, the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Sigh.

[pmoehrin]

One problem with a salary cap in baseball is that the payroll structure is just so complicated and far-spanning that your brain shuts down if you try to think about it for too long. Do minor leaguers count against the cap? Do signing bonuses? What about player options? There are so many moving parts. Note that the NHL CBA prohibits options, extensions before contract years, cash considerations, and almost all performance incentives. It's really locked down.

Its one of those things where you can get almost infinitely into detail if you wanted to, or you can just get a very solid idea of where teams are.

My own opinion the goal of the salary cap should be to counter the big market teams holding territory rights over their huge markets. The New York metro area might very well be able to support five MLB teams given the population size, the GDP of the area and how popular the sport is. I don't think either the Yankees or the Mets should have the right to reap the benefits of an undersuplied market as it relates to their on field product. (ie. being able to pay more money for players because they present a greater value there then they do in Kansas City) That's really all it is to me. In terms of how fluid the standings are, I really don't care. My only point is your market size and your position in the standings should not have much correlation, and if you look at baseball especially going back to the late 90's and early 2000's, there most certainly was a correlation.

I'm anti salary cap, but I'm even more anti territory rights, and to me a salary cap is the lesser of two evils in terms of providing a fair and balanced playing field for teams.